or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › The Watch Appreciation Thread (Reviews and Photos of Men's Timepieces by Rolex, Patek Philippe, Breitling, JLC etc...)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Watch Appreciation Thread (Reviews and Photos of Men's Timepieces by Rolex, Patek Philippe, Breitling, JLC etc...) - Page 2492  

post #37366 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by in stitches View Post

Funny you should post that, as I was about to ask if you would consider micro-rotor autos to be in the same category as full rotor autos, when considering the prettiest auto movement. I am unsure, personally.
What someone considers pretty is up to them. I like micro-rotors from a design point because they are integrated INTO the movement's layout rather than floating on top of it. And, especially in an ultra-thin, the engineer has to deal with this bulky heavy thing spinning around in the middle of all these thin delicate things. Plus, you can see much more of the machinery at once. Whether you think a particular micro-rotor execution is successful or not is another matter, but I find the class more interesting to look it. Same with bumper movements, just for the neat factor, although they are completely outdated and no one makes them.
Not to say there is anything wrong with full rotors sitting on top, either (I believe they are more efficient, although I would love for someone who knows one way or the other to comment). I just find that the quirkiness of micro rotors is more likely to make me smile.
post #37367 of 48312
I just meant I was not sure if comparing micro rotors too full on rotors is apples to apples when deciding what might be the prettiest automatic movement of them all or not.

I was not considering whether or not in general micro rotors or full on rotors are prettier or better option than the other. That is obviously up to personal preference.

As to which one it is more efficient, I once read a long article in Watch Time Magazine where they interviewed various different representatives from various different high enf watch companies on the matter, and there was no consensus.

Fwiw, in general, I also enjoyed the quirkiness and the integration of the micro rotor over the full on rotor. However, it seems that they are rarely built in to the "lower end" luxury watches.
post #37368 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by in stitches View Post

I just meant I was not sure if comparing micro rotors too full on rotors is apples to apples when deciding what might be the prettiest automatic movement of them all or not.

I was not considering whether or not in general micro rotors or full on rotors are prettier or better option than the other. That is obviously up to personal preference.

As to which one it is more efficient, I once read a long article in Watch Time Magazine where they interviewed various different representatives from various different high enf watch companies on the matter, and there was no consensus.

Fwiw, in general, I also enjoyed the quirkiness and the integration of the micro rotor over the full on rotor. However, it seems that they are rarely built in to the "lower end" luxury watches.

I would think the comparison is unfair or at least not apples to apples.

post #37369 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by yls2012 View Post

I agree that the Port's movement is fantastic, but I think impressive is a better descriptor than beautiful.  It's huge, and fills up the caseback unlike any other automatic movement that I can think of.  In that way, I think it's true to the Portuguese's origins as big watches with big, pocket-watch movements.  The effect of having a case sandwiched by expansive crystals covering the movement and the dial is unique. 

Not sure what comparisons you're drawing between the IWC and the PP, AP, and the JLC.  I find the movements in the PP and AP more beautiful and more ornate, but arguably less impressive than the IWC.  I agree with you on the JLC's movement--a bit dull looking. 

Mafoofan--curious what your views are on the newish Port. chronograph with in-house movement. 

Quote:
Originally Posted by mafoofan View Post

A few other contemporary automatics to compare:
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
Patek 324


Audemars Piguet 3120


Jaeger LeCoultre 899

Noob question here: I like watches, some would say a lot, but am a bit lost here with all the different adjectives used to describe these movements. They're nice enough, but not sure how I could view one prettier/impressive/more important/game changing over another. Can anyone explain or share some links so I can at least have a sense of what is being discussed here (or are these all just subjective views)?
post #37370 of 48312
Hi All,

I am currently looking for a new watch and was wondering if the forum might have recommendations for good entry level budget watches.

I am looking for a watch that costs no more than £300, preferably one that is a classic style and can be worn for all occasions, smart casual, smart with a suit or even just casual with jeans and t-shirt.

In terms of style I love the white face and style of watches such as the IWC Portguguese Chronograph.

The budget watches I have found in a similar style are:

Nomos Glashutte Tangente: http://www.nomos-glashuette.com/the-watches/tangente/tangente-33/
Stock S001B: http://stockwatches.com.au/shop/s001b/
Uniform Wares 203: https://uniformwares.com/shop/203-series-pvd-gun-grey-tan-leather
Mona HMS Icone: http://www.monawatches.com/hms-hms-icone.html

Any thoughts on the watches above?

Any recommended alternatives?

Thanks, Ben
post #37371 of 48312
AFAIK the Nomos Tangente is at least £1,120 in the UK so outside your budget. Great watch though.
post #37372 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheTukker View Post


Noob question here: I like watches, some would say a lot, but am a bit lost here with all the different adjectives used to describe these movements. They're nice enough, but not sure how I could view one prettier/impressive/more important/game changing over another. Can anyone explain or share some links so I can at least have a sense of what is being discussed here (or are these all just subjective views)?
Beware, there is a Foo on the prowl and you will likely get a lecture not just on the technical aspects of aesthetic and functional finishing, but also on the superiority of objective aesthetics in comparing movements. That is dangerous ground.
post #37373 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheTukker View Post



Noob question here: I like watches, some would say a lot, but am a bit lost here with all the different adjectives used to describe these movements. They're nice enough, but not sure how I could view one prettier/impressive/more important/game changing over another. Can anyone explain or share some links so I can at least have a sense of what is being discussed here (or are these all just subjective views)?

 

I'm the same when it comes to the aesthetics of a movement. I don't completey understand what makes one high-end movement more attractive than another visually; however, I am also not an engineer. They all look highly decorated and complex to me. Obviously, i can tell the difference between a Rolex movement and a Patek movement, simply because Rolex chooses not to decorate theirs.

 

There are only a few parts that I can really make out in any watch. I know the thing ontop of an automatic is a rotor and the "spinny thing" is a balance wheel. :laugh:

post #37374 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheTukker View Post


Noob question here: I like watches, some would say a lot, but am a bit lost here with all the different adjectives used to describe these movements. They're nice enough, but not sure how I could view one prettier/impressive/more important/game changing over another. Can anyone explain or share some links so I can at least have a sense of what is being discussed here (or are these all just subjective views)?

Sure, here are key things to observe when it comes to finishing:

1. Bridges (the "plates" that provide the structural support for the movement) can be decorated with different sorts of finish, most commonly Geneva stripes or perlage. Very often, top plates are finished with Geneva stripes and the base plate underneath is finished with perlage, so the perlage peaks through the gaps between the top plates. Further, the edges of a bridge may be bevelled (anglage) and screws may be recessed, with the recessed edges brightly polished. On cheaper movements, bridges are often left with a rough finish.

Geneva stripes (may be straight lines as depicted or otherwise concentric circles)


Perlage


Anglage


2. The finishing of gear and wheel surfaces may be voluted (spiral patterned), star patterned (fine rays extending out from the center), or moire patterned (concentric lines). The edges of teeth may be chamfered and polished.

Voluted


Star patterned


Moire patterned


Chamfered teeth


3. Rubies may be set directly in holes drilled into bridges and plates or encased by gold chatons that are screwed into to the plate first. Chatons are rare these days and broadly deemed purely decorative. Patek does not use chatons; Lange does.

Directly set rubies


Gold chatons (with decorative blued screws)


In truly excellent movements, less visible and unseen parts will be as equally well finished as the parts that are visible. This includes the side of the movement underneath the watch's dial.

All of the above speaks to types of finish, and not so much finish quality. The neater, more regular, and more precise, the better. It's entirely up to you how much to value ornateness versus quality. That said, it is easier to spot ornateness at first.
post #37375 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by DLJr View Post

I would think the comparison is unfair or at least not apples to apples.

I am reasonably sure that that is my sentiment as well.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheTukker View Post

Noob question here: I like watches, some would say a lot, but am a bit lost here with all the different adjectives used to describe these movements. They're nice enough, but not sure how I could view one prettier/impressive/more important/game changing over another. Can anyone explain or share some links so I can at least have a sense of what is being discussed here (or are these all just subjective views)?

To a degree, it is subjective, but there are certainly movements that are prettier than others. Finishings, beveled edges, amount of different finishes and whether or not they look busy or complimentary, shape of rotor, material of rotor, solid or cut out, screw polishing/bluing, exposed gears, gems, layout of movement, swans necks, engravings.....

All these things factor in, and while some things most definitely fall in the category of beauty is in the eye of the beholder, some movements simply are more beautiful that others.

Foo, superb photo essay.
post #37376 of 48312
Agreed, THE FOO has given a very nice overview....."Finishing 101".


Re: micro-rotor movements....in the world of thinness....dat Piaget 1208P! worship2.gif

Such gorgeous.


I'm rocking a pedestrian modified Unitas today:


post #37377 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by dopey View Post

What someone considers pretty is up to them. I like micro-rotors from a design point because they are integrated INTO the movement's layout rather than floating on top of it. And, especially in an ultra-thin, the engineer has to deal with this bulky heavy thing spinning around in the middle of all these thin delicate things. Plus, you can see much more of the machinery at once. Whether you think a particular micro-rotor execution is successful or not is another matter, but I find the class more interesting to look it. Same with bumper movements, just for the neat factor, although they are completely outdated and no one makes them.
Not to say there is anything wrong with full rotors sitting on top, either (I believe they are more efficient, although I would love for someone who knows one way or the other to comment). I just find that the quirkiness of micro rotors is more likely to make me smile.

A couple things.

Watchmaking, like tailoring, is steeped in tradition. There are objective goods and bads within that context. Yes, there is room for personal preference, but there are still things you must know or understand if you want to appreciate fine watchmaking for what makes it "fine."

Second, micro rotor movements actually require stronger, fuller plates to maintain structural integrity. Yes, it's easier to build a thinner automatic with a micro rotor, but you are not intrinsically more likely to see more of the movement's workings. That said, micro rotors are exclusive to high-end watchmaking. Manufactures at that level will go through greater pains to make a movement pretty. In contrast, almost all automatics across all prices are central rotor movements. Thus, the vast majority are not very nice to look at. Workhorse movements, like ETAs and Rolexes, are built for ease of manufacture, reliability, and serviceability, not beauty. In contrast, look at the IWC 5001 caliber I posted earlier. It is prime example of what is aesthetically possible with a central rotor. No micro rotor movement will allow you to see so much beyond the its bridges and plates.
post #37378 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith T View Post

I'm rocking a pedestrian modified Unitas today:


That pedestrian Unitas is a prettier movement than anything Panerai makes in-house. It's just a pretty movement, period. Irony.
post #37379 of 48312
post #37380 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by RogerP View Post
 

Thanks gents.  Wrist pics as requested.

 

Hosting provided by FotoTime Initial impression is that it won't be an issue getting this under the cuff of most of my dress shirts.

Wow, a chunkier case than I would have expected, but I love the case shape.  I love round watches, but its nice to see another watch on SF that isn't round for a change.  

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by mafoofan View Post


 Compare to contemporary automatic movements from JLC, which are distinctly more workmanlike in design and generally not very nice to look at.
 

I hadn't really considered it, but perhaps that explains whey I've never really been in love with JLC's contemporary automatics.   

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by dopey View Post

Where are the Piaget ultra thin automatics?

Love their movements!  

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
This thread is locked  
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › The Watch Appreciation Thread (Reviews and Photos of Men's Timepieces by Rolex, Patek Philippe, Breitling, JLC etc...)