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 2765  

post #41461 of 48312

Seems to me that one of the attractions of the GMT is the ready availability of those old bezels in all colours. eBay is full of them; I guess like  the man said, a lot of people are thinking they have to "upgrade" to ceramic these days.  But those old tinny "Cokes" touch my heart, among others.  Get two or three of those things used and cheap, and it's like having extra watches.  Win.

post #41462 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith T View Post

And the one that I chose to call my own.....


Jaeger-LeCoultre Grande Reverso Ultra Thin

Just catching up after a few days in the middle of nowhere. Congrats on a great new watch Keith, that's a real beauty. Is it red gold? A (steel) Reverso was my first proper watch and I never tire of it - truly a classic and you will have endless pleasure flipping it during boring meetings. Wishing you much enjoyment.

cheers.gif
post #41463 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by mimo View Post

Seems to me that one of the attractions of the GMT is the ready availability of those old bezels in all colours. eBay is full of them; I guess like  the man said, a lot of people are thinking they have to "upgrade" to ceramic these days.  But those old tinny "Cokes" touch my heart, among others.  Get two or three of those things used and cheap, and it's like having extra watches.  Win.

Forgive my ignorance, but is it easy to swap them over yourself?
post #41464 of 48312

So I understand.  I think I remember Belligero saying that they just pop in and out.  Carefully, of course, but as they're metal I'm sure they're flexible enough to tolerate quite a few changes without ill effect.

post #41465 of 48312
Dweller and dessert in the desert.


Foie gras burgers.
post #41466 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by mimo View Post

Seems to me that one of the attractions of the GMT is the ready availability of those old bezels in all colours. eBay is full of them; I guess like  the man said, a lot of people are thinking they have to "upgrade" to ceramic these days.  But those old tinny "Cokes" touch my heart, among others.  Get two or three of those things used and cheap, and it's like having extra watches.  Win.

Here here! There's a lot to like with the older models in my opinion. At their core, Rolex have always crafted celebrated tool watches. A light, compact, all-metal construction that can be easily cleaned up or customized for a few bucks just seems true to that vein. In addition, I feel as if BLNR fever has caused a great sell-off of a discontinued line that will quite soon be regarded as collectors items from, as one writer put it, "When the GMT was still a tool watch." For now, one can have one in great shape for roughly half the cost an AD will ask for a ceramic. So why not?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dachshund View Post

Forgive my ignorance, but is it easy to swap them over yourself?

There are guides out there. Doing this seems straightforward enough. However, from my research, it seems that there are enough cases of bezels subsequently disappearing from the wrist that I'd just have my local watchmaker swap them out properly. As for acquiring a new insert. The prevailing wisdom seems to be to send it to an unofficial service center that holds a Rolex parts account and also returns your original parts to you. Request a bezel insert change and keep the original.
post #41467 of 48312

Because I've grown fond of you guys, I would like to share with you this picture of a weasel riding on a woodpecker.

 

 

You are welcome.

post #41468 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by dukerules View Post

A little vintage today.
 

A very nice piece!

post #41469 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by mimo View Post

Because I've grown fond of you guys, I would like to share with you this picture of a weasel riding on a woodpecker.




You are welcome.
s

That's kind of you, but are you sure that isn't a stoat?
post #41470 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by BostonHedonist View Post
 

As for pens. Nothing fancy, but I enjoy my Visconti.

 

Not fancy? Aren't Visconti pens like the best pens available? lol

post #41471 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dachshund View Post

Just catching up after a few days in the middle of nowhere. Congrats on a great new watch Keith, that's a real beauty. Is it red gold? A (steel) Reverso was my first proper watch and I never tire of it - truly a classic and you will have endless pleasure flipping it during boring meetings. Wishing you much enjoyment.

cheers.gif

Yes it is, and thanks for the well wishes, Dachsund.


RE: Rolex GMTs, and bezel swaps, etc...I've never owned one, but have always found that a faded Pepsi looks quite drool-worthy...especially with creamy hands and dial markers.

I've also seen a custom job somewhere around the interwebz that was basically just an all blue bezel, and I thought that looked really sweet too. Kinda different.
post #41472 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dachshund View Post

Just catching up after a few days in the middle of nowhere. Congrats on a great new watch Keith, that's a real beauty. Is it red gold? A (steel) Reverso was my first proper watch and I never tire of it - truly a classic and you will have endless pleasure flipping it during boring meetings. Wishing you much enjoyment.

cheers.gif

+1, Congrats Keith, looks amazing!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dachshund View Post

Forgive my ignorance, but is it easy to swap them over yourself?

I had lunch with a watch enthusiast who told me he had just learned how to swap the bezel inserts on his GMT and that with the assistance of a certain tool it was relatively straight forward. You might try doing a search over at the rolex forums, I'm sure it is covered in detail somewhere there.
post #41473 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by mimo View Post
 

 I guess like  the man said, a lot of people are thinking they have to "upgrade" to ceramic these days.  

Quote:
Originally Posted by BostonHedonist View Post


Here here! There's a lot to like with the older models in my opinion. At their core, Rolex have always crafted celebrated tool watches. A light, compact, all-metal construction that can be easily cleaned up or customized for a few bucks just seems true to that vein. In addition, I feel as if BLNR fever has caused a great sell-off of a discontinued line that will quite soon be regarded as collectors items 
 

Gents, there is definitely a lot to like about the older style GMTs.  Its a classic model that much like the Sub has been around for 60+ years.  However, I'm not sure its accurate to say that the ceramic models have caused a great sell off of 16710s or other previous GMTs. 

 

In the truly vintage market GMTs like 1675s are selling more often and for more money but it has nothing to do with ceramic models.  People see prices for other vintage models like 6263 Daytonas, 1665 SDs, and 1655 Ex2s have really taken off and the 1675 and 16750 are sort of catching up in terms of interest and now pricing. Also when pricing gets crazy on some watches, people look for other collectible models that are a bit less costly so they can get into a nice vintage piece.

 

 

With relatively modern GMTs - There have always been tons of GMTs available for sale both new and used.  In fact, GMTs traditionally were not anywhere nearly as popular as Submariners. Several years ago (when one could still find a number of ADs that would discount steel Rolex watches) I was looking at getting either an all steel GMT or a steel Sub Date.  Even though the MSRPs were identical at the time, the AD would not give me as much of a discount on the Sub.  He said basically said... "Even though they are the same price, I have more customers who want Subs, so I tend to have fewer available because they just fly out the door quicker.  GMTs are great but they don't sell as quickly, so I tend to end up with more stock of them building up.  So if a person doesn't have to have a Sub, I'll give a slightly better discount on the GMT to move them."  There quite simply has never been a shortage of GMT 16700s/16710s even when they were new, and so they were often a bit of a bargain compared to Subs. I've followed the Rolex market for many years and you could always find lots of GMTs in the used market...people would buy them, keep them a few years, and trade/sell them toward other pieces.    

 

BostonHedonist- I'm also not sure I would say that Rolex focused on making a watch that was "Light, compact, ...or for customization."   When you consider the size of watches when GMTs and Subs were released in the 1950s these were big heavy watches.  In the late 70s and 80s when ultra slim was "In"...these watches were considered large and heavy.  Even in the 1980s AP and Patek had reduced their Jumbo RO and Nautilus models down to a more modest 36mm.  Rolex stayed large and bulkie at 40mm.  In addition, Rolex generally disliked the idea of people customizing their watches ...and in the US they refuse to service watches with modified bezels, dials, bracelets etc...unless the owner agrees to having those parts removed and replaced with OEM parts.

 

By today's standards the old Rolex watches with hollow bracelets seem light compared to the modern versions, but Rolex had to go that route.  By the late 1990s, Rolex was taking a lot of flack for selling watches with hollow clam shell end links, hollow center link bracelets, and stamped steel clasps at a time when others in the market place were selling watches with solid bracelets, solid end links and machined clasps for the same prices or less.  

 

I have owned and still own old style Rolex models on hollow bracelets with stamped steel clasps, and I have newer models with machined clasps and solid bracelets.  I think there is a charm to the old ones and I enjoy wearing them.  I have worn some older models with hollow bracelets and stamped clasps as daily wearers for many years, and I can attest to the fact that they can handle anything you can dish out, but I can see a reason for certain changes being made.   In summary, I really like the new and the old GMTs, and I have lightly been pondering the idea of picking up some form of Pepsi...just to keep the BLNR company ;).   Picking up a vintage GMT would truly bring me full circle since a GMT was my first "Good watch" purchase. 

 

Again congrats and looking forward to seeing some wrist shots soon. 

post #41474 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by TradThrifter View Post
 

 

Not fancy? Aren't Visconti pens like the best pens available? lol

 

I wouldn't say the very best, but it's a premium brand among many others. I haven't handle one of theirs, but some models are definitively on my wish list!

post #41475 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dino944 View Post
  Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)

Gents, there is definitely a lot to like about the older style GMTs.  Its a classic model that much like the Sub has been around for 60+ years.  However, I'm not sure its accurate to say that the ceramic models have caused a great sell off of 16710s or other previous GMTs. 

 

In the truly vintage market GMTs like 1675s are selling more often and for more money but it has nothing to do with ceramic models.  People see prices for other vintage models like 6263 Daytonas, 1665 SDs, and 1655 Ex2s have really taken off and the 1675 and 16750 are sort of catching up in terms of interest and now pricing. Also when pricing gets crazy on some watches, people look for other collectible models that are a bit less costly so they can get into a nice vintage piece.

 

 

With relatively modern GMTs - There have always been tons of GMTs available for sale both new and used.  In fact, GMTs traditionally were not anywhere nearly as popular as Submariners. Several years ago (when one could still find a number of ADs that would discount steel Rolex watches) I was looking at getting either an all steel GMT or a steel Sub Date.  Even though the MSRPs were identical at the time, the AD would not give me as much of a discount on the Sub.  He said basically said... "Even though they are the same price, I have more customers who want Subs, so I tend to have fewer available because they just fly out the door quicker.  GMTs are great but they don't sell as quickly, so I tend to end up with more stock of them building up.  So if a person doesn't have to have a Sub, I'll give a slightly better discount on the GMT to move them."  There quite simply has never been a shortage of GMT 16700s/16710s even when they were new, and so they were often a bit of a bargain compared to Subs. I've followed the Rolex market for many years and you could always find lots of GMTs in the used market...people would buy them, keep them a few years, and trade/sell them toward other pieces.    

 

BostonHedonist- I'm also not sure I would say that Rolex focused on making a watch that was "Light, compact, ...or for customization."   When you consider the size of watches when GMTs and Subs were released in the 1950s these were big heavy watches.  In the late 70s and 80s when ultra slim was "In"...these watches were considered large and heavy.  Even in the 1980s AP and Patek had reduced their Jumbo RO and Nautilus models down to a more modest 36mm.  Rolex stayed large and bulkie at 40mm.  In addition, Rolex generally disliked the idea of people customizing their watches ...and in the US they refuse to service watches with modified bezels, dials, bracelets etc...unless the owner agrees to having those parts removed and replaced with OEM parts.

 

By today's standards the old Rolex watches with hollow bracelets seem light compared to the modern versions, but Rolex had to go that route.  By the late 1990s, Rolex was taking a lot of flack for selling watches with hollow clam shell end links, hollow center link bracelets, and stamped steel clasps at a time when others in the market place were selling watches with solid bracelets, solid end links and machined clasps for the same prices or less.  

 

I have owned and still own old style Rolex models on hollow bracelets with stamped steel clasps, and I have newer models with machined clasps and solid bracelets.  I think there is a charm to the old ones and I enjoy wearing them.  I have worn some older models with hollow bracelets and stamped clasps as daily wearers for many years, and I can attest to the fact that they can handle anything you can dish out, but I can see a reason for certain changes being made.   In summary, I really like the new and the old GMTs, and I have lightly been pondering the idea of picking up some form of Pepsi...just to keep the BLNR company ;).   Picking up a vintage GMT would truly bring me full circle since a GMT was my first "Good watch" purchase. 

 

Again congrats and looking forward to seeing some wrist shots soon. 

 

 

:teach:Oh to have your level of knowledge on such subjects!

 

 

It does make sense, what you say, of the high popularity of the sub. Wasn't it the first model Rolex made? Didn't mean to suggest that Rolex' prerogative was to make the watches light-weight, customizable and compact. However, that's what the older GMTs seem to be, comparatively speaking.

 

I was quite tempted by the Omega 231.10.44.52.06.001

 


But I don't really want my travel watch to be so big and in-your-face.

 

I do hope Rolex manage release a stainless 116710 with a "Coke" bezel. If that were to happen, I would be most tempted.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by TradThrifter View Post
 

 

Not fancy? Aren't Visconti pens like the best pens available? lol

 

The guy at the pen shop claims Cartier pens are top-tier for people who fly a lot...

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...)