The Watch Appreciation Thread (Reviews and Photos of Men's Timepieces by Rolex, Patek Philippe, Brei

[Mr. Moo]

Hey fan, you could have at least sent a thank you note for my PM last night.

 

[Fuuma]

Originally Posted by gdl203

Using off-the-shelf ebauches and modifying them is firmly grounded in Dirk Dornblueth's history. Always had, from day one. This is the DD&S tradition. That should make him OK, right?

Ok, allow me to solve this debate, post a picture of the watch and I'll tell you if it looks nice.

 

[itsstillmatt]

Originally Posted by Fuuma

Ok, allow me to solve this debate, post a picture of the watch and I'll tell you if it looks nice.
What!!!!!!!!!!!! You can't tell anything about a watch from what it looks like on the side you actually see!!!!! Heathen.

 

[zjpj83]

Originally Posted by mafoofan

Every other major maker which moved on from pocket watches to wristwatches, ditched the chatons decades and decades ago because they no longer served a purpose.

This simply isn't true.

 

[Fuuma]

Originally Posted by iammatt

What!!!!!!!!!!!! You can't tell anything about a watch from what it looks like on the side you actually see!!!!! Heathen.

Hey I'm all about the urological tradishion.

 

[gdl203]

Originally Posted by Fuuma

Ok, allow me to solve this debate, post a picture of the watch and I'll tell you if it looks nice.

This post and below (including the post where I write that I find foo's 5001 movement far superior to the DD 99.2...)

 

[Fuuma]

Originally Posted by gdl203

This post and below (including the post where I write that I find foo's 5001 movement far superior to the DD 99.2...)

So it's a custom company? (heard the name before but it was probably in this thread). The watch is much too thick for my taste but it certainly doesn't look bad, especially considering all the stuff that is going on.

Is the 5001 almost the same? Are they similarly priced?

 

[gdl203]

Originally Posted by Fuuma

So it's a custom company? (heard the name before but it was probably in this thread). The watch is much too thick for my taste but it certainly doesn't look bad, especially considering all the stuff that is going on.

Is the 5001 almost the same? Are they similarly priced?

Not a custom company in the sense that they make waht you want. They have a handful of models but since they make the watches to order, they can include some customer requests and modifications (e.g. engraving name instead of serial # on bridges).

The Port dial layout has some similarities (two subdials for power reserve and seconds) but otherwise is a very different watch. Pellaton movement is a great automatic movement, case shape and size are a bit different - less height/diameter ratio than the DD which is indeed a bit chunky. Prices are completely different (Port more expensive), so are distribution channels, ordering process, customer relationship, production output, etc....

 

[Fuuma]

Originally Posted by gdl203

Not a custom company in the sense that they make waht you want. They have a handful of models but since they make the watches to order, they can include some customer requests and modifications (e.g. engraving name instead of serial # on bridges).

The Port dial layout has some similarities (two subdials for power reserve and seconds) but otherwise is a very different watch. Pellaton movement is a great automatic movement, case shape and size are a bit different - less height/diameter ratio than the DD which is indeed a bit chunky. Prices are completely different (Port more expensive), so are distribution channels, ordering process, customer relationship, production output, etc....

The Centersecond looks pretty good + they have a good name which is important cause it's written on the damn watch. This is why I don't think I could wear a Patek Philippe...

What is "DD"? What about "Port"? I have no idea what a 5001 is BTW...

 

[gdl203]

DD = Dirk Dornblüth
Port = Portuguese (foo's OneWatch), referencing the 5001 you mentioned - some pictures above in silver dial and rose gold hands/numerals

 

[TheFoo]

Originally Posted by zjpj83

This simply isn't true.

I should have been more specific: screwed chatons.

 

[TheFoo]

Originally Posted by iammatt

What!!!!!!!!!!!! You can't tell anything about a watch from what it looks like on the side you actually see!!!!! Heathen.

Oh, come on! You don't care about the hand stitching in your shirts? Speaking for myself: my aesthetic opinions change with my understanding of an object's purpose and history. Watches don't speak to everyone, but to those whom they do, the insides naturally matter a lot.

 

[itsstillmatt]

Originally Posted by mafoofan

Oh, come on! You don't care about the hand stitching in your shirts? Speaking for myself: my aesthetic opinions change with my understanding of an object's purpose and history. Watches don't speak to everyone, but to those whom they do, the insides naturally matter a lot.
I'm not sure these are comparable. I didn't suggest I would wear a pulsar.

 

[medtech_expat]

Originally Posted by mafoofan

Au contraire. It goes to the heart of why people continue to value mechanical watchmaking--and, thus, what makes one movement nicer than another. Some of us like fancy-looking things; others value things done very, very well within limiting parameters. I happen to fall into the latter camp.

You speak as if these concepts are mutually-exclusive, which is clearly not the case. There is a sweet spot where both style and substance meet and overlap.

 

[TheFoo]

Originally Posted by iammatt

I'm not sure these are comparable. I didn't suggest I would wear a pulsar.

Well, all I can say is that they're comparable to me.

I think it just comes down to the fact that different beautiful objects resonate differently with different people. Details and subtleties that seem geeky or irrelevant to outsiders are often crucial to the enthusiast. I find no personal resonance in, say, fishing rods, but I bet a lot of people care very greatly about them in ways I cannot fully appreciate.