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 2889  

post #43321 of 48312
Frills - I like where your head's at. IH and DSSD were made for each other. Love em
post #43322 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dachshund View Post

I was running through a bit of a thought experiment this morning. If I could only have one watch, what would it be and, more interestingly, would it be one of the watches that I actually have or currently desire to have?

So in my mind I keep coming back to a Rolex Explorer. Which is a watch I neither own (I do have an ExII) or desire in the short-medium term. Sure, I'd like one, but it's not high on the list, presumably because I am not limited to one and I have other watches with niche roles that, to me, fulfil those roles better than the Explorer. But if I could only have one, it would be my choice and I would love it.

And if I could only keep one of my current watches? Tough choice, but it would be my simple vintage steel Rolex Date.

Very interesting scenario.  Sorry, a bit late to the discussion but I was away enjoying beautiful weather and my other hobby.  

 

I can see how an Explorer could fit the bill.  However, I don't think, if one can help it, that one watch for everything should be a watch that one has little desire to own.  Sure one watch for everything will most likely be a compromise in at least one situation or more, but I don't think the compromise should be in one's overall desire to own the piece.  

 

I owned an Explorer 114270 for 10 years.  Classic design, I liked that it was easy to read at a glance, it was classic Rolex, but had a more more history and was a bit sportier than a Datejust.  I also thought it was sort of understated in its 36mm size and could be worn around clients or during interviews and fly under the radar.  I love how this watch looks in photos, especially when Frills or other regulars here post pix of theirs.  However, I found I rarely wore it.  It just wasn't my go to watch.  So over the course of 10 years maybe I wore it for what would total to 2 months of wear.  

 

I love watches from a variety of brands, and I have several watches that have significance in terms of them marking a specific event in my life.  However, if I had live with only one watch, it would be my RO 15202.  I wanted a RO for many years and it was a grail watch for me for some time.  When I acquired it I wasn't sure if it would be a weekend watch jeans and sweater watch, a business casual watch, a sporty watch to wear with a suit, or if it would merely become a regular part of the rotation (receiving the same attention as other watches).  However, it quickly became my go to watch for almost everything, jeans and casual weekend wear, business casual days, suit days at work, suit days for evening events or weddings...basically it became the watch that get's about 90% of my wrist time.  I think the amount of wrist time it gets is a combination of its versatile size, its unique history, its beauty (at least in my eyes), its movement, and that it was a grail for me.  At least for my current work and lifestyle, if I had to live with only one of my watches for everything it would be my RO.   Admittedly, its rare for me to have to attend black tie events so that isn't really a concern...and I do have dress watches, if I choose to break that rule of etiquette. 

 

Perhaps, for those of us who enjoy watches and and find style/etiquette important, one watch for everything could be very difficult and not truly fit every need.  Maybe the issue to consider which two watches would best cover all of your needs?  Maybe not as much of a challenge as trying find one watch for everything, but it could be twice as much fun and result in you always having a watch that is appropriate for every situation.  Cheers! 

post #43323 of 48312
I find it hard entertain a one-watch scenario, simply due to the fact that I feel naked without one and am sometimes engaged in activities that put a watch at risk. At minimum I would need at least one good watch and one tough beater.

If, the one-watch life were forced upon me, I would say the last man standing would be the one who kept the best time, wasn't overly complicated and could take a knock like a champ. Maybe a good Seiko or a simple DJ.

But everyone's lifestyle is different. Were I more advanced in years and less active, I would probably favor whichever watch had made me smile the most and given me the least fuss through decades passed. Only time will tell how that all shapes up.
post #43324 of 48312

Any chance someone could identify the wrist watch on the photo? Is it some entry level Hublot, or just a lookalike?

post #43325 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by iggystikfas View Post
 

Anyone ever purchased stuff from Bob's Watches (http://www.bobswatches.com/) ? What was the overall experience like?

 

The Black Briar Index gave it a grade AA, I am rather tempted to give the Rolex submariner a go.

 

http://goo.gl/Uo3BMN

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by BostonHedonist View Post


Talk on the street is its a fair and decent seller who sells for straight maket value. Never dealt with him myself. I always look for opinions on WUS


And also. Holy Naughty Nautilus!

 

Thanks mate for the reply.

post #43326 of 48312
Guys, can I get some opinions on this one? Considering a new watch, have found I much prefer steel bracelet over the leather band (I guess I'm too swarthy for strap)

IWC IW323902 - comments on make, movement, style? This is the model I'm considering:



post #43327 of 48312

Meh.  I like several other 'peer' watches more than that IWC.  Dial is a little flat for me, also I don't like the crown guard or solid caseback.  I believe the movement is an ETA built to IWC specs.  So while I'm sure its solid you lose some of the ease of service of a regular ETA without some of the upsides of a real in-house, namely it being unique or being able to see a well finished movement. 

 

Not that its a bad watch - if you like it then don't worry about it - just not for me.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by The_Foxx View Post

Guys, can I get some opinions on this one? Considering a new watch, have found I much prefer steel bracelet over the leather band (I guess I'm too swarthy for strap)

IWC IW323902 - comments on make, movement, style? This is the model I'm considering:
 
post #43328 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Foxx View Post

Guys, can I get some opinions on this one?

It's one of very few current production IWCs that I don't dislike, though I would probably look for a Inge 3227 in good condition instead.



As for the comment above, I strongly prefer solid casebacks for these kinds of watches.
post #43329 of 48312
+1 to Kaplan's advice. If you have the time and inclination, you might want to seek out a 3227-01 Ingy.

Most IWC fans regard that particular model as something of a modern classic.

But I do believe it's a millimeter or two larger than the current version, if that makes a difference.
post #43330 of 48312
I agree with Kaplan and Keith.  I really like the Ing design, (but unless one is going for the original Jumbo SL version which is highly collectible and rare), the the only one I would consider is the 3227-01 with in house movement.  Its larger than the current model and some say its a bit heavy, but that would be the model to get IMHO.  The version you are considering has a rather ordinary  movement and that would bother me. However that may not bother some people.  
post #43331 of 48312
^+1. I haven't tried one the 3227 yet so I am curious about what others say about them wearing large and heavy. I did try on the 40mm recently as well. Bracelet is awesome.

post #43332 of 48312
I would love to own a 3227 at some point. One of my fav. IWC.
post #43333 of 48312

Wife wanted a rose gold dress watch with no diamonds.... Very few brands are making women's dress watches without diamonds so ended up picking up this guy, this weekend, Patek 3820R - pre-owned.  Will post a wrist shot once I get a better one.

17121001[3].jpg

 

32mm so too small for me, otherwise I'd be 'borrowing' it quite often!

post #43334 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by tigerpac View Post
 

Wife wanted a rose gold dress watch with no diamonds.... Very few brands are making women's dress watches without diamonds so ended up picking up this guy, this weekend, Patek 3820R - pre-owned.  Will post a wrist shot once I get a better one.

 

32mm so too small for me, otherwise I'd be 'borrowing' it quite often!

Wow, that's a beauty!  Interesting as it seems to mix details often found on other brands such as VC's tear drop lugs and Breguet hands & numerals.  If they had made that in a larger men's size I would have pulled the trigger on that one.  Congrats again to you...or perhaps I should say to your wife.  I hope she gets many years of enjoyment from that lovely Patek.  :cheers:

post #43335 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by tigerpac View Post

Wife wanted a rose gold dress watch with no diamonds.... Very few brands are making women's dress watches without diamonds so ended up picking up this guy, this weekend, Patek 3820R - pre-owned.  Will post a wrist shot once I get a better one.
17121001[3].jpg


32mm so too small for me, otherwise I'd be 'borrowing' it quite often!

Beautiful and elegant watch!
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...)