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 2805  

post #42061 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by bkotsko View Post
 

An aside to the regularly scheduled programming here...

Now there's a handsome timepiece... but I find my eye drifting down it, nodding to myself approvingly, until I get to the date. I would really love that watch if it didn't have the date. Each to his own, of course, but to me that detracts from what is otherwise a mighty fine timepiece.

post #42062 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dino944 View Post
  Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)

As mentioned, I wouldn't buy a YM, but its the first one that I don't completely dislike.  As stated before, I've never seen a point to owning a more blingy derivative of the Sub with less water resistance.  

 

I suppose my statement was a bit stronger than intended.  To me it seemed the OP's statement made it sound like until the cal 8500 etc was released, Rolex did nothing with its movements, which is not accurate.  Rolex has always been a company of evolutionary changes (one only needs to look at Submariners of the last 60+ years to see that), and yes they are often not the first in their field to do something.  While there is something to said for being first, there is also something to be said for companies or people that can take a good idea, and improve upon it so that its better than the original. 

 

Regarding Omega (and say Brietling), in the last 10+ years both made huge changes  by creating in house movements (15 years ago, both were still largely dependent on outsourced movements).  In a world where so many people were and are focused on whether a brand uses in house movements (I don't mind outsourced movements as long has they are very high quality), they had a lot of catching up to do.  However, I also think that when one is forced to come up with something completely new, rather than improving and evolving, sometimes a company reaches new standards sooner.  

 

In the end competition is good for most brands, and its good for us in terms of variety, improvements in design, and hopefully pricing.  Cheers!

 

 

Oh yeah for sure, I'm not saying you wanted to purchase one, just trying to explain my immediate aversion to it. That image was literally the first thing that popped in my head when I saw the picture of the YM. Not really a selling point for me haha.

 

And yeah, I agree with everything else and figured your original statement wasn't really meant to be that cut and dry. Regardless of the inspiration of the movements, they were by far my favorite part of the Tudor and Rolex releases. The watches aesthetically were largely a miss for me, but that's obviously highly subjective, but I'm very excited about the power reserve. A Rolex will (al)most definitely be my next purchase, and nothing at basel changed that, just got me a bit more amped about the future.

 

:cheers:

post #42063 of 48312
Reverso for me today...

post #42064 of 48312
Are all new models announced? It would be interesting to see if there's a new Speake-Marin.
post #42065 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dachshund View Post

Now there's a handsome timepiece... but I find my eye drifting down it, nodding to myself approvingly, until I get to the date. I would really love that watch if it didn't have the date. Each to his own, of course, but to me that detracts from what is otherwise a mighty fine timepiece.
Would also be better in a case sized for the movement (or with a movement sized for the case - it can't be that hard to spread the subdials out if you are willing to thicken the movement with an extra layer.).
post #42066 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by tifosi View Post

A Rolex Explorer 1 would be perfection in that collection. IMHO you find a better bracelet than the all brushed SS Oyster. 

I've been carefully considering all the suggestions (including the great list of Mimo's http://www.styleforum.net/t/36253/the-watch-appreciation-thread/41715#post_7743660) and I think I'm tending towards getting an Explorer I.

I like the new 39mm size but the 3/6/9 numbers are a bit shiny. Preferred a vintage (1972) model I tried on in Burlington Arcade (crappy pic below) and I think the smaller size is OK on my wrist - what do people think?

May hold out for a 1971 model (my birth year).



Edit to add - the vintage Rolexes all seem to have new bracelets - is this common?
Edited by Winot - 3/19/15 at 7:49am
post #42067 of 48312

I like the new 39mm size but the 3/6/9 numbers are a bit shiny. Preferred a vintage (1972) model I tried on in Burlington Arcade (crappy pic below) and I think the smaller size is OK on my wrist - what do people think?
 

 

I prefer (and bought) the newer 39mm size but that 36mm looks great on you. 

post #42068 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winot View Post


I've been carefully considering all the suggestions (including the great list of Mimo's http://www.styleforum.net/t/36253/the-watch-appreciation-thread/41715#post_7743660) and I think I'm tending towards getting an Explorer I.

I like the new 39mm size but the 3/6/9 numbers are a bit shiny. Preferred a vintage (1972) model I tried on in Burlington Arcade (crappy pic below) and I think the smaller size is OK on my wrist - what do people think?

May hold out for a 1971 model (my birth year).



Edit to add - the vintage Rolexes all seem to have new bracelets - is this common?

That size looks good on you, and it's a very fine watch, but if you're at the place I think you're at on Burlington Arcade they are, IMO, way overpriced. This will not be a rare watch and you should look around at some other reputable dealers to compare prices. It's nice having your birth year though (I have similar in an Oyster Date), so if you can't source that vintage elsewhere (although bear in mind that Rolex dating has a margin of error) then maybe the additional cost is worth it for you.

post #42069 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dachshund View Post

That size looks good on you, and it's a very fine watch, but if you're at the place I think you're at on Burlington Arcade they are, IMO, way overpriced. This will not be a rare watch and you should look around at some other reputable dealers to compare prices. It's nice having your birth year though (I have similar in an Oyster Date), so if you can't source that vintage elsewhere (although bear in mind that Rolex dating has a margin of error) then maybe the additional cost is worth it for you.

Thanks - I thought that was probably the case - they are quoting something like £7K and they don't at the moment have a 1971.

Any suggestions for other London dealers?
post #42070 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by DLJr View Post
 

 

When I see the new YM, I just see this (black on black will just never work for me unless I become a crime fighting billionaire):

 

 

I don't see this being an issue... :D

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by BostonHedonist View Post
 

Snoopy subdial. Seems like a collector's item in the making.

 

I am unsure of whether or not these "LEs" are collector's items, really, or whether I will like the watch itself when I see it in the metal.  We shall see.  But, I must say it is the first Moonwatch that's prompted me to get off my a** and actually look into stuff more.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by rnguy001 View Post

Do it Frills!

 

We shall see, won't we, brother?

post #42071 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by no frills View Post
 

 

I don't see this being an issue... :D

 

In fairness, you are much closer to a crime fighting billionaire than I am. I need to get healthy first so I can start training again at the league of assassins, err, um, I mean gym.

post #42072 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by no frills View Post

...


I am unsure of whether or not these "LEs" are collector's items, really, or whether I will like the watch itself when I see it in the metal.  We shall see.  But, I must say it is the first Moonwatch that's prompted me to get off my a** and actually look into stuff more.

...
Not sure if you know this, but this is actually the second version of a "limited edition" Snoopy Award commemorative moonwatch. The first one was made in much. much larger numbers and was nonetheless, as of a few years ago, pretty hard to find on the secondary market. Collectors snapped them up and seemed to keep them. I
post #42073 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by BostonHedonist View Post
 

Snoopy subdial. Seems like a collector's item in the making.

I wouldn't count on it.  They did Snoopy Editions about 10 years ago that dealers got stuck with them. Where I live they sat in dealer showcases forever.

 

 Although, it seems with the re-launch of a Snoopy edition , some opportunistic owners of the old model are marking them up with big asking prices/OBO.  

Back in the day you could buy them all day long for about $2,500. 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dachshund View Post
 

Re Snoopy Speedy - I love the lumed bezel. I appreciate the Snoopy history (thanks, dopey). But I don't warm to the idea of a cartoon character on my watch.

 

The lumed bezel is cool, and I appreciate the history of the beagle, but I don't want cartoon characters on my watches.  Sadly, I feel like I'm looking at a high end "Hello Kitty" watch. 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Winot View Post


I've been carefully considering all the suggestions (including the great list of Mimo's http://www.styleforum.net/t/36253/the-watch-appreciation-thread/41715#post_7743660) and I think I'm tending towards getting an Explorer I.

Edit to add - the vintage Rolexes all seem to have new bracelets - is this common?

I like the 36mm version on you, and I greatly prefer its dial to that of the 39mm version (I'm not really in love with the sold shiny 3,6,9 of the current model).  As for a newer bracelet, depending on age, its not uncommon for the bracelets on older Rolex watches to have been replaced.  Some of the really old "Rivet" Oyster bracelets and early Jubilee bracelets don't always hold up well if they were worn by people with very active lifestyles.  So often times people replaced them with later more solid bracelets.  Good luck with whatever you choose!

post #42074 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winot View Post

I've been carefully considering all the suggestions (including the great list of Mimo's http://www.styleforum.net/t/36253/the-watch-appreciation-thread/41715#post_7743660) and I think I'm tending towards getting an Explorer I.

I like the new 39mm size but the 3/6/9 numbers are a bit shiny. Preferred a vintage (1972) model I tried on in Burlington Arcade (crappy pic below) and I think the smaller size is OK on my wrist - what do people think?

May hold out for a 1971 model (my birth year).



Is that a 1016? The best Explorer, IMHO.
post #42075 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by DLJr View Post

The watches aesthetically were largely a miss for me, but that's obviously highly subjective, but I'm very excited about the power reserve. A Rolex will (al)most definitely be my next purchase, and nothing at basel changed that, just got me a bit more amped about the future.

 

:cheers:

To be honest there wasn't much at SIHH or Basel, that really grabbed my attention this year.  However, I was interested to see the details on the new movements from Rolex and Tudor.  Wishing you lots of luck and fun with your next purchase whatever it may be.  :cheers:

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...)