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 3114  

post #46696 of 48312
NATO straps are overplayed. So are cheesy movie tie-ins and product placements.
post #46697 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by papa kot View Post

NATO straps are overplayed. So are cheesy movie tie-ins and product placements.

Maybe so, but they tend to work rather well with vintage watches when the original steel band is a bit played out and since this is the only watch I wear one with it works real well for me.

post #46698 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by mimo View Post
 

Now awaiting the "First Watch to Breastfeed on the Moon" special edition.

 

(@Dino944 )

:rotflmao:     Great idea...make sure you get a commission on that one once its released...you know its just a matter of time  before they release that one at Basel!

 

:cheers:Congrats to DLjr on the new addition to the family!  Sorry for the late response to good news (I've been away traveling).  

post #46699 of 48312
Anyone have any leads on where to purchase the discontinued Oakley small vault watch cases?

I picked one up today privately (and then ordered a large for my Pam) but would like to buy more.
post #46700 of 48312

I'm seriously considering a 42mm Radiomir & have been interested in the 512 since it was introduced several yrs ago. However Panerai has just announced the 620 which is an automatic (vs the 512 being a hand-wind). The 620 has the '9', the 512 doesn't, the 620 also has 'AUTOMATIC' written on the dial. Which do you prefer?

620: 



512: 

post #46701 of 48312
Both are obviously awesome, but I prefer the auto.
post #46702 of 48312
To be nineless would be divineless.
post #46703 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by dddrees View Post

Maybe so, but they tend to work rather well with vintage watches when the original steel band is a bit played out and since this is the only watch I wear one with it works real well for me.


With a red Sub you can pretty much wear whatever you want :-) I stand corrected, the vintage variety gets a pass.
post #46704 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kid Nickels View Post

Both are obviously awesome, but I prefer the auto.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tried and True View Post

To be nineless would be divineless.

 

On the contrary, I tend to prefer hand wound watches (whenever possible). Also, while I like the presence of the 9 on the 620, I feel the small second sub-dial to sit too close to the 9 (which is common on most PAMs with a 9 marker). 

 

I guess it all comes down to personal preferences!

post #46705 of 48312
512 for me...but both are nice.
post #46706 of 48312

Thoughts on this watch?

 

http://www.hodinkee.com/articles/jaeger-lecoultre-geophysic-1958

 

Came across it last night.  I like the classic/retro look to it, but it's pricey for me.  There are probably simliar looking watches that are quite a bit cheaper, but I really like this one.  Love the lume plots. 

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by mimo View Post
 

 

Indeed.  And in the real world, I'd still rather have a scruffy old Sub than a new Omega that is trying to capture the essence of a scruffy old Sub - for a lot less money.  But I like the way they look nevertheless.

 

I thought it was trying to capture the essence of a scruffy old Seamaster.  :D  Either way, where are you finding scruffy old Subs for less money much less a lot less money?  I've seen two Seamasters in the last month that were less than practically every scruffy old Sub I've ever seen.  In fact the latter is usually 50% more minimum.  I'm genuinely curious btw in case it reads otherwise.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by DLJr View Post


I own the Welzeit and Orion (35mm). I've tried on the Metro, as well as most other models. From my experience, the Metro wears smaller than similarly sized models because of the lugs. If you are willing to get used to smsller watches, it does wear wonderfully.

 

I'm willing to try, that's for sure.  And the thing is, I'm not a big guy.  I'm 5'10" and a 33" waist.  My wrists are relatively average at best and feel small at the moment.  I think it's more a matter of feeling accustomed to the size watch I've been wearing the past few years.  I'll just have to have more looks in person and on the wrist.  

post #46707 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by BLAUGRANA View Post

I thought it was trying to capture the essence of a scruffy old Seamaster.  :D  Either way, where are you finding scruffy old Subs for less money much less a lot less money?  I've seen two Seamasters in the last month that were less than practically every scruffy old Sub I've ever seen.  In fact the latter is usually 50% more minimum.  I'm genuinely curious btw in case it reads otherwise.

 

 

Depending on condition and so on, you quite regularly see second-hand "no date" Submariners for around US$5000 on Chrono24 and other such places. Some are a few hundred less, some are a couple of hundred over. That's more than $2500 less than the new Seamaster 300, so a substantial saving, and you get a genuinely aged, classic watch instead of a new watch that's imitating a genuinely aged classic!

 

I'd love to get a vintage Seamaster 300, as I prefer the original to the new Seamaster 300, but vintage SM300s have increased in price quite dramatically over the past 4-5 years. Frankly, I suspect that's why Omega decided to release an updated version of the classic Seamaster 300, much as they decided to re-release the "PloProf" some years back, after values for vintage PloProf Seamasters increased four-fold in less than a decade (if I remember correctly, anyway).

 

You still see reasonable, vintage SM300s for US$3 - 4000 but if they've got something special about them, such as the "big triangle" dial, they can easily sell for a few thousand more and then you're firmly into Submariner territory.

 

Someone on here posted a photo of their vintage SM300 a month or two back - it looked lovely.

post #46708 of 48312
I believe that was a Watchco 'NOS' Seamaster 300? And I agree, it looked great.

Quote:
Originally Posted by IGotId View Post

Which do you prefer?

Definitely the 620, as I don't like the sub second placement on the 512 - too far from the dial edge. And not because it might signal a small movement in a larger case, but because I think it balances poorly with the '3' on the other side of the dial. And while this is probably heresy, I much prefer automatic watches (never really warmed to winding my 177), so I'd be willing to live with the 'Automatic' on the dial.
post #46709 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Journeyman View Post
 

 

Depending on condition and so on, you quite regularly see second-hand "no date" Submariners for around US$5000 on Chrono24 and other such places. Some are a few hundred less, some are a couple of hundred over. That's more than $2500 less than the new Seamaster 300, so a substantial saving, and you get a genuinely aged, classic watch instead of a new watch that's imitating a genuinely aged classic!

 

I'd love to get a vintage Seamaster 300, as I prefer the original to the new Seamaster 300, but vintage SM300s have increased in price quite dramatically over the past 4-5 years. Frankly, I suspect that's why Omega decided to release an updated version of the classic Seamaster 300, much as they decided to re-release the "PloProf" some years back, after values for vintage PloProf Seamasters increased four-fold in less than a decade (if I remember correctly, anyway).

 

You still see reasonable, vintage SM300s for US$3 - 4000 but if they've got something special about them, such as the "big triangle" dial, they can easily sell for a few thousand more and then you're firmly into Submariner territory.

 

Someone on here posted a photo of their vintage SM300 a month or two back - it looked lovely.

 

I'm leery about Chrono 24, but the prices I'm seeing on other sites tends to be higher.  That doesn't surprise me as Chrono 24 tends to have the cheapest prices out there from what I've seen.  Anyway, I've seen the Seamaster, like new, for $4200 twice in the past month.  I also know of a grey market dealer that from everything I've read is very reliable and who can get one new for ~ $4900.  This is the non-Bond version mind you which retails for ~ $6500 according to Omega's site.  Personally I like the much maligned "fauxtina" of the new version.  I suppose it's why I also like the Geophysic 1958 I linked above.  Nothing against the vintage pieces, but I don't necessarily like the condition I see out there and I'd rather the watch age with me.  I'm the same with a lot of my outerwear.  If it breaks in over time fine, but I'm in no hurry to get it there.

 

In the episode of Talking Watches with Eric Ku he had a 1957 Railmaster and a 1957 Speedmaster.  I believe he said that the Speedmaster was more rare than the Daytona.  I can see the increase in price due in part to the rarity.  In fact I saw a used Railmaster from around that period for $9000+ on 1st Dibs.  

post #46710 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by BLAUGRANA View Post

 

Nothing against the vintage pieces, but I don't necessarily like the condition I see out there and I'd rather the watch age with me.  I'm the same with a lot of my outerwear.  If it breaks in over time fine, but I'm in no hurry to get it there.

 

 

Absolutely. I tend to like genuine vintage, rather than re-edition in the style of vintage, watches but I don't understand the obsession with patina and so on that some people have. If I buy an older watch, I want it to be in as near to NOS condition as possible so that, as you say, it can age with me.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by BLAUGRANA View Post

 

In the episode of Talking Watches with Eric Ku he had a 1957 Railmaster and a 1957 Speedmaster.  I believe he said that the Speedmaster was more rare than the Daytona.  I can see the increase in price due in part to the rarity.  In fact I saw a used Railmaster from around that period for $9000+ on 1st Dibs.  

 

Yes, entirely agree. Rolex have been making the Submariner continuously, in virtually the same form, for 60 years. Apart from Rolex enthusiasts, the vast majority of people would have great trouble telling a 1950s Submariner from a 2005 Submariner, so there's much greater availability. However, Omega only made classic, vintage ref. 165.024 and 166.024 SM300s for about eight years from the early to the late 1960s, so there are far, far fewer vintage SM300s than there are Submariner 5513s.

 

1st-gen, pre-moon Speedmasters with the original Calibre 361 movement from the late 1950s and early 1960s can fetch crazy prices.

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...)