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 2709  

post #40621 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Axelman 17 View Post

I have been flirting with the idea of purchasing a 1675 Pepsi GMT for a while now. My biggest hesitation is that I am not knowledgeable when it comes to vintage watches.

I came across the below 1675 being sold by Analog Shift, which seems to be a fairly reputable vintage watch seller, sort of in the vein of Hodinkee. I exchanged a few emails with A/S and they informed me that the watch was fully serviced and cash was "professionally refinished" by ABC Watch Works about a year ago. Apparently it has never been overly polished by I cant really tell from the pics. Any thoughts? No boxes or papers though I dont think that is a dealbreaker for me. Would love to get the input of folks here.

http://www.analogshift.com/products/rolex-gmt-master-ref-1675-pepsi-bezel

 

I know James. He's good peeps.

post #40622 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Axelman 17 View Post

I have been flirting with the idea of purchasing a 1675 Pepsi GMT for a while now. My biggest hesitation is that I am not knowledgeable when it comes to vintage watches.

I came across the below 1675 being sold by Analog Shift, which seems to be a fairly reputable vintage watch seller, sort of in the vein of Hodinkee. I exchanged a few emails with A/S and they informed me that the watch was fully serviced and cash was "professionally refinished" by ABC Watch Works about a year ago. Apparently it has never been overly polished by I cant really tell from the pics. Any thoughts? No boxes or papers though I dont think that is a dealbreaker for me. Would love to get the input of folks here.

http://www.analogshift.com/products/rolex-gmt-master-ref-1675-pepsi-bezel

Only you know what you want and what is acceptable.  As for ABC watch works, I don't know anything about them so I can't say if them working on a watch is generally or good thing or a bad thing.  Giving them the benefit of the doubt, one must remember that we don't know the condition in which the watch was given to them before they started working on it.  Accurate details can be tough to tell from photos. I could be wrong but when I look at the photo of the side of the watch showing the crown, it looks like the lower lug was dented or maybe clipped when polishing.  That could just be the photo isn't good, but again when I look at the photo showing the back of the watch and bracelet, again it looks like the lower lug backs are clipped/more rounded/dented?  The top lugs look more crisp and closer to original to me.  But again, it could be their photographer isn't great.  It can be tough finding the right vintage watch, but 1675s were made for many years and not in small batches.  So I would do some homework and find one that you are really comfortable with in terms of condition.  

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by aleksandr View Post

Other than the fact that you know in your head the watchmaker cut corners, is there anything else fundamentally wrong with using a small movement in a large case? I detect a bias in TWAT towards smaller watches but that can't be the whole story.

I too am not a fan of the date at 430 (though it looks just right on the Overseas for some reason) and can live without a date on watches in general (more often than not the date is wrong anyhow) but I love the lacquered white dial. Overlapping subdials and all.

As for date placement I don't mind a date at 4:30, I think it works fine on a VC Overseas, a RO chronograph, or a Cartier Santos Galbee XL.  My issue is I don't like it cutting into the tachymeter and it just adds clutter to a busy dial on a chronograph.

 

As for generally not being a fan of using a smaller watch movement in a big case, it has absolutely nothing to do with a bias toward smaller watches.  For me it has to do with its effect on the dial particularly when its not a time only watch.  On a time only watch (without a date) unless the watch has a display back with a ring to fill the space, there is not usually a tell tale sign the movement was from a smaller watch.  However, once you get into watches with other functions the placement on the dial of those functions is often thrown off, and to me looks like a manufacturer trying to cut corners and get away with continuing to use a movement that is far too small for the case.  Sure sometimes they add larger hour marker to try to fill empty space on a dial, but usually the placement of a date window and subdials makes it quite clear that the movement was never intended for that size watch case.  In most watches it bothers me when I can see that the placement of the other functions has shifted to the center of the dial due to the use of a small movement.  

 

I don't mind a larger watch provided the movement is the appropriate size for the case, or if they are going to use a smaller movement, its not obvious that the movement was never intended for this size case.  Only you can decide if it matters to you. 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by in stitches View Post

I say no. If you have a great movement, and stylistically want to use a larger case, as long as the ring protects it I dont really care. Not every brand needs to develop an entirely new movement every time they make a watch a little bigger. I mean. They could. But would you be ok with the inherently huge price bump required to cover the cost of developing a new movement just so there is no need for a ring between the case and movement?

Once you get to watches that have various functions, it is no longer merely the issue of a ring between the movement and case.  The dial layout is often compromised and less attractive.  Sure companies will switch to larger hour markers to reduce the empty space on the dial...but having all other functions/subdials shifted to the center of the dial is an unfortunate result in most situations.  If the only issue was a ring, I could probably live with that, but seeing everything shift to the center usually bothers me.

post #40623 of 48312

The small movement in a bigger dial isn't a mortal sin but is a material factor for me.  For a simple watch the dial might not show any signs of a tiny movement.  If there are subdials and they're all tightly packed in the center of the dial that makes it worse.  

 

The Zenith in question does do a good job with the layout considering the size of the movement, in that it doesn't immediately catch your eye as being smushed.  

post #40624 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by no frills View Post

Cloudy day so I brought my own sliver of sunshine.

3dece71f3fd2d1dfc05f241566b99161.jpg
That's a beaut, Frilly. Sadly, I have an older version with the less than coveted outsourced dial and the unfortunate Tiffany stamp. Oh well, live and learn......
post #40625 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dino944 View Post

Once you get to watches that have various functions, it is no longer merely the issue of a ring between the movement and case.  The dial layout is often compromised and less attractive.  Sure companies will switch to larger hour markers to reduce the empty space on the dial...but having all other functions/subdials shifted to the center of the dial is an unfortunate result in most situations.  If the only issue was a ring, I could probably live with that, but seeing everything shift to the center usually bothers me.

No argument here about that. I only meant presupposing the dial looks fine.
post #40626 of 48312
Small movements in big cases bother me because it seems like a break-down in integrated design. Rather, the manufacturer looks like it is treating its products like a parts assembly - case from bin A, movement from bin B dial from bin C, etc. It also bothers me that the case doesn't represent what is inside - it is like getting a giant gift box with a tiny present. The case exists to house the movement, not to house air, spacers and a movement. If manufacturers are going to insist on big cases and little movements, they should at least make a little door in the back so you can access the extra room in the case and keep extra paperclips or diamonds, or even spare change.

I prefer small cases, say 34-36mm for time only, but would be glad to wear 38-40mm time only watch if the movement were made bigger and the extra size was used for increased accuracy and robustness (the bigger the movement, the more accuracy you get from the same tolerances).
post #40627 of 48312

I bought a watch to match my gloves...j/k. 116610LV for a big anniversary. It will likely be my only Rolex. If my wife sees additional watches come in, I may not make it to the next milestone.

 

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)

 

 

post #40628 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by dopey View Post

Small movements in big cases bother me because it seems like a break-down in integrated design. Rather, the manufacturer looks like it is treating its products like a parts assembly - case from bin A, movement from bin B dial from bin C, etc. It also bothers me that the case doesn't represent what is inside - it is like getting a giant gift box with a tiny present. The case exists to house the movement, not to house air, spacers and a movement. If manufacturers are going to insist on big cases and little movements, they should at least make a little door in the back so you can access the extra room in the case and keep extra paperclips or diamonds, or even spare change.

:rotflmao:  Thanks for the laughs !  I think I'd like the extra space to hold cufflinks.

 

While I understand the manufacturers' desire to keep costs down and continue to use proven, smaller movements in larger cases, I think your description is quite fitting that case case doesn't represent what is inside.  Loved the analogy of the giant gift box with a tiny present!  :fistbump:

post #40629 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shouldaville View Post
 

I bought a watch to match my gloves...j/k. 116610LV for a big anniversary. It will likely be my only Rolex. If my wife sees additional watches come in, I may not make it to the next milestone.

 

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)

 

 

Happy Anniversary and congrats on your new Sub.  Looks great with those gloves! 

post #40630 of 48312
Incredible Hulk biggrin.gif



I'm on the different comic-verse though.

NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Batman!
cX2mXex.png
cUkOcB3.png
post #40631 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dino944 View Post
 

Happy Anniversary and congrats on your new Sub.  Looks great with those gloves! 

Thanks Dino. A lot of great info and inspiration on here...makes it difficult choosing just one.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by RFX45 View Post

Incredible Hulk biggrin.gif



I'm on the different comic-verse though.
  Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Batman!
cX2mXex.png
cUkOcB3.png

 

Love the BLNR RFX. I was considering it as well until a friend bought it before me (not that we can't have the same watches).

post #40632 of 48312

The reason I dislike an oversized case with a little movement is this: assuming we no longer need watches to tell the time (mostly), we are buying them as works of art and/or engineering achievement.  We pay a premium for that, and we know it, well beyond the device's functional use.  So anything that smacks of a mechanical short cut, cost-trimming, or just poor aesthetic proportion, blows the whole value proposition to shit.

post #40633 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tried and True View Post


That's a beaut, Frilly. Sadly, I have an older version with the less than coveted outsourced dial and the unfortunate Tiffany stamp. Oh well, live and learn......

As the young ones say - show us a pic on your wrist, or it didn't happen. wink.gif
post #40634 of 48312

Frilly lives in the Yellow Submarine, the Yellow Submarine, the Yellow Submarine...

post #40635 of 48312
Congrats, Shouldaville. Excellent choice.

Those pics are amazing, RFX.
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...)