or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › The Watch Appreciation Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Watch Appreciation Thread - Page 915

post #13711 of 31158
post #13712 of 31158
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dino944 View Post

Ah thats funny that you looked at the VC Historique 1968.  I was fairly certain that I wanted a RO (either a Jumbo or chronograph), but on my last visit to NYC, I went to the VC bouttique and tried on the Historique 1968, the 1955 ultra thin, and the 1954 Aronde (not an ultra thin watch by any means but still interesting).  The 1968 a very nice piece, but I thought the price was rediculous.  Years ago I was a huge advocate for VC as they made some truly beautiful watches, with great movements, and at a great price (considering who their competion was/is).  I own 2 VCs that I purchased new in the last 10 years and I really think they fit the descriptions of being truly beautiful, having great movements, and being a tremendous value.  Unfortunately, I think many of their designs today are not that attractive and their pricing is rediculous.  The only models I really like from them these days are from their Historique line.  Years ago a friend who ran an store that as an AD for VC, Lange, GP, VC, Panerai, Zenith, Bvlgari, Jacque Edroz, and Rolex told me wait and see VC prices are going to become crazy.  He had attended a meeting and people at VC were annoyed that dealers were discounting their products such as the VC Historique Chronograph, while the Patek 5070 chronograph was often selling above list price (both were using the same Lemania base at the time).  The VC chrono was a freakin bargain with a list price at $17,000 (before any discounts) while the Pateks were over $30K.  What happened, VC replaced the Historique Chronograph with the Malte Chronograph (which used the same movement as the prior chrono, they put it in a larger case, similar in size to Patek's 5070) and then they cranked the price up o $34,000 and the damn thing wasn't as good looking as the Historique Chronograph that it replaced.  And keep in mind gold prices were not as insane as they are today. Anyway, the VC 1955 didn't interest me in person, and although I liked the 1968 (although not thrilled with a round movement in a square watch), the 1968 was so flat and large for a square watch that I didn't think it looked great on my wrist, and the entire time I looked at it I could not help thinking it should be about 1/2 of what its list price is.

I think of the ones you've narrowed it down to you have some nice choices with the AP Jules Audemars and the Parmigiani Fleurier Tonda 1950.  I think stylistically the Parmigiani Fleurier Tonda 1950 is really quite striking in terms of design.  I love the lugs and dial!  My reservation with that piece would be what is their distribution chain and service center like.  A brand like AP, I know I can count on for parts and service.  A friend of mine bought his wife a watch from a smaller more obscure brand and when she damaged the bezel, it was a nightmare getting a replacement part.  I just don't know too much about Parmigiani Fleurier, but if they have a service center set up in the US and you know other people have had good experiences with them, then I would say its a tough choice between that and an AP JA.

Good luck on your research and let us know what you decide.  Either way I'm sure you will enjoy whichever ultra thin you choose.

I had the same reaction to the price of the Historique watches and the other VCs I have seen. In the UK the 1968 will run you a cool £27,060. I suppose I don't love the 1968 enough to pay that kind of money for it. I am also not entirely convinced by the tone of the gold; I'd prefer a slightly pinker/reddish gold rather than the yellower tones of the Historique.

The Parmigiani is also lovely, but I had similar concerns about dealers and servicing. I live in northern Scotland, and I would have to go to London to find a Parmigiani AD. When you plan on owning a watch for at least 30 years or more, you do think hard about whether or not it will be easy to maintain in the long-term.

By contrast I have very little to complain about the AP JA Extra-Thin and everything to like. I like the mixture of polished and brushed finishing; the size of the case really gives the watch serious wrist presence, the sunburst dial is subtle yet radiant, and I have a good relationship with an AD. When my RO has needed servicing in the past I have always found the staff that I have dealt with to be attentive, polite and competent. No complaints. I also like that AP is still independently/family owned and not part of a giant conglomerate.
post #13713 of 31158
Quote:
Originally Posted by aleksandr View Post

Would never in a million years consider Hublot, but randomly wandered in to a local watch place, saw this and fell in love:
http://www.amazon.com/Hublot-Classic-Fusion-Automatic-542-CM-1770-RX/dp/B006BQ1N3U/
Nowhere near the somewhat oversized dimensions of the regular Big Bangs, it looks surprisingly understated and classy in person. Hmm. Thoughts?

Not understated. Not classy. Still a Hublot.
post #13714 of 31158
Quote:
Originally Posted by fritzl View Post


dino, thank you for your thoughtful insight. It's always a pleasure to read.
I'm not exactly in the market for a new watch. I stumbled across an ad in a magazine and the quoted price of € 2400,- seemed pretty reasonable. did a little research on my own. actually, i like the burgundy bezel. 

Hi fritzl, earlier I meant to say thank you for the kind words about my previous post.

The more I look at the red/burgandy bezel, the more I like it.  In addtition, the more I thought about the price, the more I thought this watch represents a fantastic opportunity for Rolex/Tudor, particularly here in the US to get a strong foothold in the under $5,000 market for sports watches in the US.  I was just in a Rolex AD yesterday, and I saw the the Non-Date Ceramic Sub for the first time in person.  Overall, I liked the watch.  Over the years I've owned 3 Subs and each had the date.  But these watches are starting to carry prices that seem a bit high for a steel Rolex.  The non-date Sub was $7,500 and the Sub Date was $8550.  To be honest I was surprised the price difference was so great.  Years ago the price difference was only a few hundred dollars and the differences for a while were more significant (such as different movement, no chronometer cert. for the no date, and then there was the solid end links on the Sub Date, and then more recently, there was the ceramic bezel and solid bracelet to further distinguish the two watches and price differences.  I think when the non-date Sub was closer to $6,000 someone who might spend upto $5,000 might stretch and spend a bit more to get it.  But now the gap between those wanting a new Rolex Sub but who can only spend around $5K are even further from their wish of owning one.  However, the Tudor if as you suggest hits our shores at around $3,000 that might satisfiy a lot of would be buyers desires to own a Sub, and maybe take some sales from other companies with watches prices significantly less than a Rolex Sub.   

 

However, I think for this Tudor to really have some good sales figures in the States, Rolex will have to spend some money and advertise the watch.  I regularly see advertisements for various Rolex watches in many types of magazines such as watch magazines, automobile magazines, fashion magazines, travel magazines, and sports magazines.  However, the few times I see ads for Tudor in US magazines, its only in watch magazines.  I never see ads for Tudors in automobile magazines, sports magazines, or travel magazines.  I think Rolex should spend some money and spread the word about this great new diving watch.  With such a reasonable price its a great opportunity for Rolex/Tudor, now its a matter of whether they really take advantage of this watch a market it properly.  I guess we will have to wait and see what Rolex does with this watch.   Even if you decide its not the right watch for you, I look forward to hearing your thoughts once you have seen it in person. 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by academe View Post


I had the same reaction to the price of the Historique watches and the other VCs I have seen. In the UK the 1968 will run you a cool £27,060. I suppose I don't love the 1968 enough to pay that kind of money for it. I am also not entirely convinced by the tone of the gold; I'd prefer a slightly pinker/reddish gold rather than the yellower tones of the Historique.
The Parmigiani is also lovely, but I had similar concerns about dealers and servicing. I live in northern Scotland, and I would have to go to London to find a Parmigiani AD. When you plan on owning a watch for at least 30 years or more, you do think hard about whether or not it will be easy to maintain in the long-term.
By contrast I have very little to complain about the AP JA Extra-Thin and everything to like. I like the mixture of polished and brushed finishing; the size of the case really gives the watch serious wrist presence, the sunburst dial is subtle yet radiant, and I have a good relationship with an AD. When my RO has needed servicing in the past I have always found the staff that I have dealt with to be attentive, polite and competent. No complaints. I also like that AP is still independently/family owned and not part of a giant conglomerate.  

 

I agree with you and would also prefer a deeper pink color for the gold used on the VC 1968.  For some reasone, VC uses 4N pink gold on the 1968 (which is almost yellow), rather than the deeper pink color they get using 5N pink gold, which is what they use on the Historique American 1921, and the Chronometer Royal 1907, and the Aronde 1954.  If you look at VC's website even the computer images show that the watches like the 1968 that are 4N pink gold look nearly yellow.   I really do not understand why they use 2 different shade of pink gold on their watches.

 

I think the Parmigiani is a beautiful watch, but the longer term outlook for parts and service issue would make me uncomfortable on an expensive watch.  A friend of mine spent roughly $140,000 on a tourbillion made by a very small very obscure company.  He got to give them some of his own in put to make the watch more special and specifically for him, which is cool.  Its very rare as they only make a handful of watches per year.  Its a nice watch, however, I don't think its nicer than any tourbillions from more established companies such as AP, VC, Lange, Piaget, etc.  Further, if I were him I'd worry that if the head of the company/the watch maker dies (as he is at last 60), that parts and service could be a nightmare turning his rare and largely hand made tourbillion into and rare handmade paperweight if a part breaks.

 

It sounds like the Jules Audemars is the right watch for you as it will fit your needs, its not rediculous in terms of price, and you know they will be around for a long time to handle service issues.   I also like that the company is still owned by someone from one of the founding families, rather than being under the umbrella of a huge conglomerate that makes everything from tooth brushes to frozen pizza.  Its a company and an owner dedicated to the ideals and pricipals of its founders.  Good luck and keep us posted as you go through the research and possible purchase process.

post #13715 of 31158
Quote:
Originally Posted by Philpot View Post

Well, she's here. According to the serial number, this Seamaster was made in 1957. As I said before, I'm a 17y.o. high schooler with a limited budget. I had been looking around at new watches and none of them really fit what I was looking for, so I started to look at vintage. When I saw this, I fell in love. Yes, the dial has been redone. So is it the most collectable vintage watch out there? No. But I quite like the black face really, and since all I want out of this watch is personal enjoyment... it serves its purpose :) I'm quite happy with this as a starter for my collection.

I'll need a new band though, my wrist is too dang small.

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)

 

 

 

 

 

 


Excellent first find, excellent. A NATO band might make it substantially more youthful.

post #13716 of 31158
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dino944 View Post

Hi fritzl, earlier I meant to say thank you for the kind words about my previous post. Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
The more I look at the red/burgandy bezel, the more I like it.  In addtition, the more I thought about the price, the more I thought this watch represents a fantastic opportunity for Rolex/Tudor, particularly here in the US to get a strong foothold in the under $5,000 market for sports watches in the US.  I was just in a Rolex AD yesterday, and I saw the the Non-Date Ceramic Sub for the first time in person.  Overall, I liked the watch.  Over the years I've owned 3 Subs and each had the date.  But these watches are starting to carry prices that seem a bit high for a steel Rolex.  The non-date Sub was $7,500 and the Sub Date was $8550.  To be honest I was surprised the price difference was so great.  Years ago the price difference was only a few hundred dollars and the differences for a while were more significant (such as different movement, no chronometer cert. for the no date, and then there was the solid end links on the Sub Date, and then more recently, there was the ceramic bezel and solid bracelet to further distinguish the two watches and price differences.  I think when the non-date Sub was closer to $6,000 someone who might spend upto $5,000 might stretch and spend a bit more to get it.  But now the gap between those wanting a new Rolex Sub but who can only spend around $5K are even further from their wish of owning one.  However, the Tudor if as you suggest hits our shores at around $3,000 that might satisfiy a lot of would be buyers desires to own a Sub, and maybe take some sales from other companies with watches prices significantly less than a Rolex Sub.   

However, I think for this Tudor to really have some good sales figures in the States, Rolex will have to spend some money and advertise the watch.  I regularly see advertisements for various Rolex watches in many types of magazines such as watch magazines, automobile magazines, fashion magazines, travel magazines, and sports magazines.  However, the few times I see ads for Tudor in US magazines, its only in watch magazines.  I never see ads for Tudors in automobile magazines, sports magazines, or travel magazines.  I think Rolex should spend some money and spread the word about this great new diving watch.  With such a reasonable price its a great opportunity for Rolex/Tudor, now its a matter of whether they really take advantage of this watch a market it properly.  I guess we will have to wait and see what Rolex does with this watch.
   Even if you decide its not the right watch for you, I look forward to hearing your thoughts once you have seen it in person. 

oh, it's easy. you present your knowledge in an authentic manner. i like this.

regarding the price i was referring to the MSRP of € 2400. the ad was in a car magazine(Austria).

well, let me say, i really don't like the ceramic versions, which are so popular. I do not endorse Rolex's decision to jump more or less completely on this train. I can imagine, I'm not a technician by any sort, that the material is superior and it shows some techonological leadership, which is part of the watch game, imo.

I will definitely let you know about my thoughts.
post #13717 of 31158
Quote:
Originally Posted by fritzl View Post


well, let me say, i really don't like the ceramic versions, which are so popular. I do not endorse Rolex's decision to jump more or less completely on this train. I can imagine, I'm not a technician by any sort, that the material is superior and it shows some techonological leadership, which is part of the watch game, imo.
I will definitely let you know about my thoughts.


Ceramic coatings will start to wear off sooner or later, as they aren't bulletproof as most people think.
post #13718 of 31158
Quote:
Originally Posted by Find Finn View Post

Ceramic coatings will start to wear off sooner or later, as they aren't bulletproof as most people think.

well, i don't need them and I don't like the artificial look of them. horses for courses.
post #13719 of 31158
I didn't read everything Dino wrote, as I'm lazy. shog[1].gif


I think it fits some watch designs, but in general I'm not a fan either. If "you are" in the market for a ceramic coated bezel/watch, it's worth keeping in mind, that the coating wont last.
post #13720 of 31158

Got this a couple of weeks ago.

 

 

post #13721 of 31158
Quote:
Originally Posted by Find Finn View Post


Ceramic coatings will start to wear off sooner or later, as they aren't bulletproof as most people think.

I'm not sure I know what you mean. The Tudor Black Bay bezel is made out of steel and the Ceramic Bezels the Rolex models use are not coated with Ceramic. They are made entirely out of Ceramic and these materials are rather durable and will not wear off.

post #13722 of 31158

Wearing this one today.

post #13723 of 31158
Quote:
Originally Posted by fritzl View Post

well, let me say, i really don't like the ceramic versions, which are so popular. I do not endorse Rolex's decision to jump more or less completely on this train. I can imagine, I'm not a technician by any sort, that the material is superior and it shows some techonological leadership, which is part of the watch game, imo.
I will definitely let you know about my thoughts.

 

I have mixed feelings about the look of the newer ceramic versions of the Sub & GMT.  I am sure I could enjoy owning one.  But at the price they cost, one could get a very nice vintage Sub or GMT.  

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Find Finn View Post


Ceramic coatings will start to wear off sooner or later, as they aren't bulletproof as most people think.  

Ceramic bezels can be damaged.  Someone on another forum posted a photo after dropping a ceramic bezel Sub onto a non-carpeted floor from a height of 3-4 ft.  There was a picture of the bezel in 2 or 3 large pieces.  However, I'm not sure the ceramic will wear off, as its a ceramic insert and not a ceramic coating. Rolex says there are light coatings of platinum or gold that are applied to the graduation markings on the bezels, and I think those could wear off over time. 

post #13724 of 31158
Quote:
Originally Posted by JonathanCWalker View Post

Got this a couple of weeks ago.

 

 

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)

 

Congrats and enjoy it! 

 cheers.gif

post #13725 of 31158
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dino944 View Post

I have mixed feelings about the look of the newer ceramic versions of the Sub & GMT.  I am sure I could enjoy owning one.  But at the price they cost, one could get a very nice vintage Sub or GMT.  

this
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › The Watch Appreciation Thread