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

The Watch Appreciation Thread - Page 1148

post #17206 of 34709
Hey all,

Thanks a lot for the input on the Ball Watches - I'm quite open to looking into a vintage omega/zenith...these can be found between $800-$1000? That sounds like a steal!

Stitch/others - agreed on the SF Approved point, I wouldn't let that alone deter me. However, it is nice to know what the more style savvy gents think about the watch's appearance - this site got me onto Allen Edmonds shoes and now I'm hooked!

I'm also pretty torn between a silver face vs a blue...leather vs bracket...tough calls
post #17207 of 34709
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dino944 View Post

I'm a huge fan of AP (I love my RO) but I feel like this year's offerings while maybe a new use of matterials, seems like stuff we've seen before.  The Offshore is a great model and a huge success for them, but after a while the various versions such as the Volcano, the Bumble Bee, Safari, Montoya, CF, all start to look the same to me.  Yes some of the matterials are differnt, but mostly I find the most distinguishing feature is only what bright color they use to highlight the dial or strap.

I am not entirely sure I agree. I think many of the great houses could - in some interpretations - be accussed of incrementalism; the other view is that these changes represent subtle evolutions of core and beloved designs. Lots of viewer subjectivity comes into play in either case. For example, I wasn't particularly thrilled by APs 'updated' ROs last year. I still believe that 39mm is probably the optimum case size, and don't really 'get' the new 37 and 41 case sizes. The only 'new' offering I really liked was the re-issued Jumbo, but still wouldn't buy one because its still too similar to my Dualtime for me to fork out the cash for it.

I suppose my interest in the new Diver stems for the fact that I've come to think of it as the latest successor to the original RO, and have been keen to see how it evolved. The ceramic case is a nice addition to the range and will make it very different from a tactile and visual perspective.

Actually have been wishing that AP would revise their Edward Piguet offerings. Have often felt that was the least developed line...
post #17208 of 34709
Quote:
Originally Posted by Newcomer View Post

I could not agree more. I think that the Reverso and MC line are JLC's bread and butter. And I agree with your assessment, the focus of the watch is really on the time--as it should be!

I really don't think anything in the new line-up will tempt me away from the MUT Moon, however. I think that JLC kind of played it safe this year. The one watch that I really love is the Jubilee Ultra Thin. That watch is absolutely insane. I really wish that the majority of the MC line was manual rather than automatic, but I guess you cannot have everything you want!

I do like the MUT Moon but the seconds hand bothers me for some reason. Would have preferred it with only hours, minutes, date and moon phases.
post #17209 of 34709
Lebowski10 - i would recommend a leather strap. much more versatile. easily goes from casual dressy. bracelet, not so much.
post #17210 of 34709
I was thinking the same, stitch - especially since I find myself wearing brown shoes/belt the majority of the time...my tag with a black case and bracelet can fill in for the black shoe and casual attire
post #17211 of 34709
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dino944 View Post

Thanks dddrees.  Here is a quick wrist shot that really shows the layers or appearance of depth created by the stepped lugs, raised & angled bezel, and then the dial with sunken subdial.




The view from the back isn't too bad either wink.gif .   The movement is based on a JLC Reverso movement.



Beautiful watch Dino! VC always makes such extravagant designs. Reminds me of the Cioccolatone somewhat.

Interesting to see the JLC cal 822 in there.

By the way, do you actually own a Dino?
post #17212 of 34709
Quote:
Originally Posted by academe View Post


I am not entirely sure I agree. I think many of the great houses could - in some interpretations - be accussed of incrementalism; the other view is that these changes represent subtle evolutions of core and beloved designs. Lots of viewer subjectivity comes into play in either case. For example, I wasn't particularly thrilled by APs 'updated' ROs last year. I still believe that 39mm is probably the optimum case size, and don't really 'get' the new 37 and 41 case sizes. The only 'new' offering I really liked was the re-issued Jumbo, but still wouldn't buy one because its still too similar to my Dualtime for me to fork out the cash for it.

I suppose my interest in the new Diver stems for the fact that I've come to think of it as the latest successor to the original RO, and have been keen to see how it evolved. The ceramic case is a nice addition to the range and will make it very different from a tactile and visual perspective.

Actually have been wishing that AP would revise their Edward Piguet offerings. Have often felt that was the least developed line...

I agree that many great watch companies practice incrementalism and current designs slowly evolve.  There is nothing wrong with that.  Rolex has done that for a long time and one of the benefits is that models do not look dated in just 5 years or so and resale remains strong on watches like Submariners, GMTS, Daytonas, etc.  I guess I just didn't see much that excited me from SIHH from any watch companies including AP.

 

AP does work in differnet materials, although I'm not sure I alway see a value in that, especially at the prices they charge.  I can see using Titanium (very light weight, hypo alergenic for those with allergies to nickel alloys, and very durable) and I recognize thats a very tough material to work with, hence its cost is reflected when used for watches.  Carbon Fiber makes sense in a racing car where weight savings combined with strength are crucial to top speed and acceleration.  However, on AP's carbon watches...well to me it just cheapens the look of the watch.  Much of the details of the case and bezel get lost in the black coloring, not to mention, although its just my taste I find black watches are sometimes cool looking but often remind me of inexpensive plastic watches...but thats just me.  The Offshore is a great watch, its just I find many of the newer versions are just color changes (and they do way too many limited edition Offshores.  If you do lots of limited editions often based on color changes, eventually they just don't seem as special).  As for the new ceramic diver if you love it go for it.  Its nice looking although it basically looks like their Offshore Carbon Diver other than the markings are now orange instead of yellow.  I really like the diver, I just prefer in in steel with a matching bracelet....but I can see a strap would also make it a different experience than your Dual Time, which is a beauty!

 

I agree the Edward Piguet line is largely underdeveloped or forgotten.

post #17213 of 34709
Quote:
Originally Posted by ~ B ~ View Post


Beautiful watch Dino! VC always makes such extravagant designs. Reminds me of the Cioccolatone somewhat.

Interesting to see the JLC cal 822 in there.

By the way, do you actually own a Dino?

Hi B,

 

Interesting, I've never looked at it and thought about the Cioccolatone.  However, now that you mention it, the layering/stepped effect does remind me of it.  Although, the Carree's design is based on a VC from the 1930s while I believe the Cioccolatone is from around the 1950s. Who knows, maybe the Carree got them to thinking about watch a watch would look like if they rounded and smoothed most of its lines...just kidding...no idea.  Both are beauties IMHO.

 

My friends call me Dino.  I don't own a Dino, but I have one of its descendants, a 1989 328GTS.

post #17214 of 34709
4u7a5yme.jpg
post #17215 of 34709
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dino944 View Post

I agree that many great watch companies practice incrementalism and current designs slowly evolve.  There is nothing wrong with that.  Rolex has done that for a long time and one of the benefits is that models do not look dated in just 5 years or so and resale remains strong on watches like Submariners, GMTS, Daytonas, etc.  I guess I just didn't see much that excited me from SIHH from any watch companies including AP.

AP does work in differnet materials, although I'm not sure I alway see a value in that, especially at the prices they charge.  I can see using Titanium (very light weight, hypo alergenic for those with allergies to nickel alloys, and very durable) and I recognize thats a very tough material to work with, hence its cost is reflected when used for watches.  Carbon Fiber makes sense in a racing car where weight savings combined with strength are crucial to top speed and acceleration.  However, on AP's carbon watches...well to me it just cheapens the look of the watch.  Much of the details of the case and bezel get lost in the black coloring, not to mention, although its just my taste I find black watches are sometimes cool looking but often remind me of inexpensive plastic watches...but thats just me.  The Offshore is a great watch, its just I find many of the newer versions are just color changes (and they do way too many limited edition Offshores.  If you do lots of limited editions often based on color changes, eventually they just don't seem as special).  As for the new ceramic diver if you love it go for it.  Its nice looking although it basically looks like their Offshore Carbon Diver other than the markings are now orange instead of yellow.  I really like the diver, I just prefer in in steel with a matching bracelet....but I can see a strap would also make it a different experience than your Dual Time, which is a beauty!

I agree the Edward Piguet line is largely underdeveloped or forgotten.

Fully agree with you on the multiple LE iterations of the ROO chronos. It's a bit of a smorgasbord, but many love them for it.

Toss up for me when I next have the cash is between either the Jules Extra Thin or one of the Divers...The Millenary 4101 has been on my radar, too. Apples and oranges, I know. I waver back and forth. Would like to have a refined dress watch in my collection, but feel that I would get more use from the Diver. I spend most of my spare time chasing after small children, I wear tweeds and flannels to work, and spend time in the outdoors, so in many ways, the Diver would be a better fit to my lifestyle...
post #17216 of 34709
Quote:
Originally Posted by vincefb View Post

4u7a5yme.jpg

Nice Overseas! smile.gif I do like it on a strap.
post #17217 of 34709
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lebowski10 View Post

Hey all,

Thanks a lot for the input on the Ball Watches - I'm quite open to looking into a vintage omega/zenith...these can be found between $800-$1000? That sounds like a steal!

Stitch/others - agreed on the SF Approved point, I wouldn't let that alone deter me. However, it is nice to know what the more style savvy gents think about the watch's appearance - this site got me onto Allen Edmonds shoes and now I'm hooked!

I'm also pretty torn between a silver face vs a blue...leather vs bracket...tough calls

What about a Stowa or Nomos? My Stowa was around 800 I think.

It gets more wrist time than my Sub LV

2A924C0C-9C53-4E27-AC95-E98D5D1B6F2D-2061-0000019E77164451_zps0e47bc6d.jpg
post #17218 of 34709
Talking about AP, PP, and VC, and their respective reputations has kind of got me thinking recently. As a relative newcomer to horology, it is interesting to read the perspective of others in regards to the 'trinity.' As a younger guy (at least in regards to most on this thread), I feel like I have a very different perspective of the trinity than most. I think that out of the three, I definitely view PP to be in a league of its own (I am excluding AL&S). PP is definitely what I have always perceived as the tip-top of the tier. Somewhere below them I view VC. I actually never heard of VC until I became more interested in watches. Even now, I view them as a slight step down from PP, but in the same realm.

What I find kind of funny is how people tend to lump AP in with PP and VC (and AL&S). At least from my perspective, I generally associate AP with rappers, nouveau riche, etc. In a lot of ways, like a more expensive Hublot or possible IWC. Now, that is not to say that I necessarily think that. There are a lot of AP pieces that I would LOVE to own. I just typically do not think of them as being part of that top tier anymore. They do not market like PP or VC, they have much more 'mainstream' styles, they use celebrities. When I think of AP, I automatically think of the ROO, and various special editions.

I guess I just find it interesting, because for me, AP just does not hold the same cachet as I think it does for other generations.
post #17219 of 34709
newcomer - that is very interesting.

i first started learning about watches in my early 20s, mostly through advertisements, and then through watch articles and eventually watch magazines at about 25. around that time, i actually had mentally grouped AP/VC/PP together in my head, before i ever heard the term, "the big three." just from the ads i saw, the things i read, and the vibe i got. i just put those 3 at the top of the pile, and i dont think i am from an earlier generation, i mean, im only 30 (even though saying that makes me feel old).

so i find it interesting that though you probably saw much of the same things i did, you processed it differently.

i do think that a lot of people think first of RO/ROO when they hear AP, and that is certainly different than the vibe of VC/PP, but for me, the first image i think of is the equation of time watch, and that is probably because i saw so many ads for it. when i think of AP i think of their very rich history, the fact they are still privately owned and partially by someone of the original family, their many many high complication watches, their constant innovations in haute watchmaking, and their very classy models. the RO/ROO are a nice (the nice ones that is, everyone makes watches that people dont like) afterthought to me. like a tasty dessert after a steak. and for me, that is why i feel they deserve to be planted firmly in "the big three."

sidebar - i also had, and still do have, the impression, that though PP is part of "the big three," i see them as slightly above.
post #17220 of 34709
Quote:
Originally Posted by Newcomer View Post

Talking about AP, PP, and VC, and their respective reputations has kind of got me thinking recently. As a relative newcomer to horology, it is interesting to read the perspective of others in regards to the 'trinity.' As a younger guy (at least in regards to most on this thread), I feel like I have a very different perspective of the trinity than most. I think that out of the three, I definitely view PP to be in a league of its own (I am excluding AL&S). PP is definitely what I have always perceived as the tip-top of the tier. Somewhere below them I view VC. I actually never heard of VC until I became more interested in watches. Even now, I view them as a slight step down from PP, but in the same realm.

What I find kind of funny is how people tend to lump AP in with PP and VC (and AL&S). At least from my perspective, I generally associate AP with rappers, nouveau riche, etc. In a lot of ways, like a more expensive Hublot or possible IWC. Now, that is not to say that I necessarily think that. There are a lot of AP pieces that I would LOVE to own. I just typically do not think of them as being part of that top tier anymore. They do not market like PP or VC, they have much more 'mainstream' styles, they use celebrities. When I think of AP, I automatically think of the ROO, and various special editions.

I guess I just find it interesting, because for me, AP just does not hold the same cachet as I think it does for other generations.

Hey! I'm only 28! lol. I see where you are coming from though but of the people who i know around my age who are into watches most would definitely group VC and Patek together, some would even consider VC more prestigious because it is less well known that PP so a kind of inverse snobbery. Actually a friend of mine (take this with a grain of salt because he only has a VC and not a Patek) even goes so far as to say that PP is for CEOs, heads of state etc, while VC is for aristocrats and old money. In my view though i would say VC, PP, AL&S etc are all top of the food chain when it comes to watches and which one is better is all just nitpicking.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › The Watch Appreciation Thread