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

The Watch Appreciation Thread - Page 1126

post #16876 of 34727
Quote:
Originally Posted by benjamin831 View Post



What do you guys think? I'm leaning towards the gray ruthenium colorway but afraid that it'll be less versatile over the long-term. Decisions decisions...

 

Go try them on. I saw them at an AD and I did not like the grey in person at all.... Also, the lumenous material on hands throws things off a bit... I like the older model better.

post #16877 of 34727
Quote:
Originally Posted by Belligero View Post


On the other hand, if you meant choosing between a $15K-ish-used-price steel JLC perpetual calendar and a simple Patek, then I'd agree completely. And in a lot of cases, you wouldn't have to spend extra anyway. But then, I like simple watches and I'm a bit leery of high complications like perpetual calendar mechanisms. The term "white elephant" comes to mind.

I've owned a couple of JLC watches in the past. I think they make wonderfull watches. Heck, JLC does a great job at making movements. They've even been used in other companys watches to include Patek at one time or another. They also do a marvelous job of providing some compllications in metals such as steel that helps to allow them to provide a cheaper alternative to Patek.

 

I personally don't own a perpetual or annual calendar at this time. However if I were to get one, I think I would personally hold off until I could afford a Patek.


Edited by dddrees - 1/15/13 at 5:01am
post #16878 of 34727
Quote:
Originally Posted by dddrees View Post

I've owned a couple of JLC watches in the past. I think they make wonderfull watches. Heck, JLC does a great job at making movements. They've even been used in other companys watches to include Patek at one time or another. They also do a marvelous job of providing some compllications in metals such as steel that helps to allow them to provide a cheaper alternative to Patek.

 

I personally don't own a perpetual or annual calendar at this time. However if I were to get one, I think I would personally hold off until I could afford a Patek.

You stole my lightningnod[1].gif

post #16879 of 34727
Quote:
Originally Posted by dddrees View Post

Nice, very nice.

 

Wearing this one today.

1000

That watch doesnt look good on you anymore! You should sell it to me, ASAPbiggrin.gif 

post #16880 of 34727
Quote:
Originally Posted by dddrees View Post

[...]They also do a marvelous job of providing some complications in metals such as steel that helps to allow them to provide a cheaper alternative to Patek. I personally don't own a perpetual or annual calendar at this time. However if I were to get one, I think I would personally hold off until I could afford a Patek.
Absolutely. Exotic complications like perpetual calendars, minute repeaters and tourbillons don't interest me much, but I'd go big or go home if I was looking at one too. That, or stick with JLC but go for a simpler movement in platinum.

Speaking of complications, I think that the tourbillon should have stayed in pocket watches, and is way overdone... especially by companies that outsource them in hopes that it will add horological credibility to their range (*cough* Panerai). It's a truly senseless feature in a wristwatch. I think the industry is doing itself a disservice by implying that above a certain price level, a tourbillon complication is a must-have.

Back to semi-reality, the price point of something like a perpetual calendar from JLC is about where I'd start looking at a simpler watch from Patek instead. It's a feature that I think is more hassle than it's worth, adds a lot of clutter to the dial, and requires a hell of a lot of extra parts... which I don't think is a good thing, owing to my Neanderthal sensibilities. If I'm going to have a bunch of subdials and/or apertures, I'd rather have a top-quality chrono.

Minute repeaters are straight-up mo-fuggin' baller, though.


watchness24

Particularly from a company like Patek.
post #16881 of 34727
Quote:
Originally Posted by depechedior View Post

Been a while so I thought I'd share...

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)

ubutyta5.jpg

 

The 5070 is a real stunner! 

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by apropos View Post


You are of course correct, it is a FP movement, not an AP movment. smile.gif

(bad photo warning)

Here is the Corum...

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)

...

 

and the Piaget.

 

Although, I generally prefer Piaget's offerings to that of Corum, I prefer Corum's version of the coin watch.  I like the tails side more for watch dial and the lugs are a little chunkier which I think look better.

 

Great watch thanks for sharing some photos.

post #16882 of 34727
Figured I should try and add something that I actually own to this thread. I like this watch a lot but I have noticed tiny rough, almost fraying on the inside of the bezel, near where it meets the glass. You can see it most easily in the picture directly to the right of the "3". I dont think this is from hard wearing, is this a finishing issue?

post #16883 of 34727
Quote:
Originally Posted by Belligero View Post


Absolutely. Exotic complications like perpetual calendars, minute repeaters and tourbillons don't interest me much, but I'd go big or go home if I was looking at one too. That, or stick with JLC but go for a simpler movement in platinum.
Back to semi-reality...I'd start looking at a simpler watch from Patek instead. It's a feature that I think is more hassle than it's worth, adds a lot of clutter to the dial, and requires a hell of a lot of extra parts... which I don't think is a good thing, owing to my Neanderthal sensibilities. If I'm going to have a bunch of subdials and/or apertures, I'd rather have a top-quality chrono.

 

That Patek is beautiful.

 

What you said really rings true for me too. I currently am working through an ALS bug, but the watches that appeal to me from them are the simpler ones: 1815 or the Richard Lange. Don't get me wrong, the Lange 1 is beautiful, but i'd get the "vanilla" version here as well. Let's see how long this bug lasts. If I do in fact spring for an ALS, I'm thinking a 5 year anniversary present: the 1815 in the year 2015 seems fitting right?

 

I like a bit of poetry.

post #16884 of 34727
Quote:
Originally Posted by Belligero View Post


Absolutely. Exotic complications like perpetual calendars, minute repeaters and tourbillons don't interest me much, but I'd go big or go home if I was looking at one too. That, or stick with JLC but go for a simpler movement in platinum.

Speaking of complications, I think that the tourbillon should have stayed in pocket watches, and is way overdone... especially by companies that outsource them in hopes that it will add horological credibility to their range (*cough* Panerai). It's a truly senseless feature in a wristwatch. I think the industry is doing itself a disservice by implying that above a certain price level, a tourbillon complication is a must-have.

Back to semi-reality, the price point of something like a perpetual calendar from JLC is about where I'd start looking at a simpler watch from Patek instead. It's a feature that I think is more hassle than it's worth, adds a lot of clutter to the dial, and requires a hell of a lot of extra parts... which I don't think is a good thing, owing to my Neanderthal sensibilities. If I'm going to have a bunch of subdials and/or apertures, I'd rather have a top-quality chrono.

Minute repeaters are straight-up mo-fuggin' baller, though.


watchness24

Particularly from a company like Patek.

One day I would luv to own a Patek repeater.

 

 

For now I'll just have to be content (and I am by the way) with what I have already.

post #16885 of 34727

dddrees: what DO you have already?

 

seems like a killer collection icon_gu_b_slayer[1].gif
 

post #16886 of 34727
Quote:
Originally Posted by ant702 View Post

That watch doesnt look good on you anymore! You should sell it to me, ASAPbiggrin.gif 

Sorry, it's a keeper.

post #16887 of 34727
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cylon View Post

dddrees: what DO you have already?

 

seems like a killer collection icon_gu_b_slayer[1].gif
 

I have a few, and I've actually posted some here.

 

 

Thank you.

post #16888 of 34727
Quote:
Originally Posted by Axelman 17 View Post

Figured I should try and add something that I actually own to this thread. I like this watch a lot but I have noticed tiny rough, almost fraying on the inside of the bezel, near where it meets the glass. You can see it most easily in the picture directly to the right of the "3". I dont think this is from hard wearing, is this a finishing issue?


Google the issue... I am pretty sure that there was something about this on the German Forum of Watchuseek. Manufacturer's problem. I think it may be rust?
post #16889 of 34727
Quote:
Originally Posted by dddrees View Post

One day I would luv to own a Patek repeater.
For now I'll just have to be content (and I am by the way) with what I have already.

this. Belligero - that is a real beauty.
--
axelman - i like your dornbluth. classy piece.
post #16890 of 34727
Quote:
Originally Posted by Axelman 17 View Post

Figured I should try and add something that I actually own to this thread. I like this watch a lot but I have noticed tiny rough, almost fraying on the inside of the bezel, near where it meets the glass. You can see it most easily in the picture directly to the right of the "3". I dont think this is from hard wearing, is this a finishing issue?

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)

 

Handsome watch.  Fraying or pitting would be very bothersome to me.  I'd defintitely google it and then contact the company/service center.

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