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

The Watch Appreciation Thread - Page 1156

post #17326 of 35990
Quote:
Originally Posted by dicee View Post

Just picked up my first Sinn (Flieger 356 with display back). I think I'm in love. Please ignore my logo, its for my strap hustle.

 

 

This is a great watch!  Wear it well.

 

I hate the term "tool watches," as most folks use it to support their decision for buying a Rolex, but if I want to get a sporty watch, this would be it.  Wrist shots, please!

post #17327 of 35990
Quote:
Originally Posted by bruceposey View Post

Personally, I love my Rolex Explorer 114270 with its 3130 movement. A good watch for me is one I don't have to think about. Besides, the idea of accurate time representation on your wrist "is a confidence game invented by the Swiss". I defy anyone to tell me which movie that quote came from. Years ago I used to wear a gold Rolex Submariner. While tending bar at First Avenue in MPLS during Prince's heyday a elderly gentleman came up to me and asked for the time. With much fanfare and exaggerated movement I pulled back my sleeve like a magician so all could see my "precious". In a radio announcers voice I told the old geezer that it was 11:15pm. He pulled back his sleeve also. On his wrist was a beaten and battered Timex W-1. With a smirk on his face he looked at me and said, "Yep, your right". Of course I want a Breguet, and several Patek's. A handmade Dufour would be nice too. But my Rolex just keeps working.

114270 for the win! Nice shot and thanks for sharing this story!
post #17328 of 35990
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dino944 View Post

Mine was also a 114270, great watch.  I purchased it new, but back then it only cost $2,850.  With all the price increases most of mine (all purchased new) only cost about half of what the list prices are today.  Mine wasn't getting much wrist time in the last few years, I was wearing my Ex2 and Sub more so I found it a new home. 

Dino, thanks for this. I haven't been collecting for very long, but I do find myself thinking about the right balance of variety and quantity. I want to make sure my pieces get decent wrist time, that I look forward to wearing them - otherwise I'd rather have them benefit someone else. But I also don't want to regret trading away an old love haha. Fortunately I think I made the right trades (traded in a couple of Calatravas for my perpetuals and I don't miss the Calatravas). You ended up getting another Speedy Pro after you let one go, right? Or am I mixing up stories now?

Right now I feel at peace with my collection. I'm looking at a few chronographs but I don't feel a burning need to get one.
post #17329 of 35990
Quote:
Originally Posted by Belligero View Post


The comparison I'd use regarding the Odets review is to a wealthy wine enthusiast reviewing a top-class IPA by Grand Cru Bordeaux criteria. He's an amateur horlogerie lover with a taste for hand finishing who didn't really have an appreciation of the fundamental difference between a machine-finished Rolex movement and a elaborately-decorated hand-finished movement; they're as distinct as wine and beer. Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)

Rolex is all about absolute precision of manufacture, which is not something that's easy to assess for an amateur and has nothing to do with decoration. That particualr 3000 movement was certainly rough-looking in spots (I have no idea where the marks on the balance weights would have come from, though) but it still had exemplary stability and positional error. They might not have been the most nicely-finished jewel seats, but that watch wouldn't have put in a performance like that if they weren't in precisely the right place.

 

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)



I think his review was well-intentioned, but when he says "ease of service" and "minimal parts count" like they're undesirable things, it's clear that his taste for complicated, highly-decorated movements makes him overlook the factors that make the machine-finished function-first movement so unbeatable in daily use. The engineering that goes into them is the best in the industry, and especially these days, there's nobody even similar in price who takes quality control and true Swiss manufacturing as seriously. To be fair, the 3000 was not exactly the best effort in Rolex's history, either, but it still delivers on the real-world criteria of reliability, accuracy and toughness.

 

 

Great analysis of Walt's review.  I always say no watch can be everything to everyone.  Different brands or models suit different purposes.  Its the same with clothing.  One might wear a beautiful bespoke suit to a wedding or other nice event.  But you aren't going to wear it to wash your car or do yard work.  So there is a place in my wardrobe for nice suits and a place in my wardrobe for jeans and sneakers.  By the same toke my VC Carree and Submariner were not designed for the same purposes or events and each has a place in my wardrobe.

post #17330 of 35990
Quote:
c Originally Posted by jeff13007 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by apropos View Post

This is what i find the most sad about the whole status symbol thing that rolex has no become a part off. IMO most people who will buy a Rolex will do it as a way to show some form of prestige, and Rolex as i believe you mentioned earlier will catch a lot of flak especially from those "Rookie WIS" guys when it should be looked at for what it is: a manufacturer with a great history and near bulletproof watches that can be worn in almost every occasion on almost any part of the planet.

 

Yes for some a Rolex is a status symbol.  However, the whole status symbol applies to almost any good brand of watch.  It is simply as our tastes and information levels increase, our desire and what we see as prestigious changes.  I've heard guys brag about Tags...sure its a good watch, but there are others brands that watch collectors consider finer.  However, in some circles, a Tag is considered a great watch and people will brag about or be impressed by them.   I met a guy that had a Patek, and he was talking to someone I knew, telling him that he bought a Patek and its the best watch in the world...blah, blah, blah.  It was a lovely watch but he knew nothing about it.  All he could say about it was the dealer told him its the best in the world.  To me he bought it as a conversation piece/status symbol to brag about.  Great watch...but it was kind of wasted on him and would probably be better on a real Patek fan's wrist. 

 

In the end, Rolex makes a great product.  Its not intended to go after Patek or Lange's market share, and its not priced or finished the same way.  Rolex is a brand that is well known, and for some people, they buy it saying to a dealer I want a good watch that can withstand whatever I subject it to, and I want it to last the rest of my life.  This is a one time buyer, buying what he perceives as a very good watch or the best watch for his budget.  Other's buy a Rolex (Omega, Breitling, or other good brand) and it sparks an interest in watches and other fine brands.  In the world of collecting anything we all have to start somewhere, and from there if we choose we can learn more, and as our tastes and information grow, our appreciation for other brands becomes stronger.   

Quote:
Originally Posted by bruceposey View Post

Personally, I love my Rolex Explorer 114270 with its 3130 movement. A good watch for me is one I don't have to think about. Besides, the idea of accurate time representation on your wrist "is a confidence game invented by the Swiss". I defy anyone to tell me which movie that quote came from. Years ago I used to wear a gold Rolex Submariner. While tending bar at First Avenue in MPLS during Prince's heyday an elderly gentleman came up to me and asked for the time. With much fanfare and exaggerated movement I pulled back my sleeve like a magician so all could see my "precious". In a radio announcers voice I told the old geezer that it was 11:15pm. He pulled back his sleeve also. On his wrist was a beaten and battered Timex W-1. With a smirk on his face he looked at me and said, "Yep, your right". Of course I want a Breguet, and several Patek's. A handmade Dufour would be nice too. But my Rolex just keeps working Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)

.

 

 Nice 114270, and thanks for the entertaining story!


Edited by Dino944 - 1/26/13 at 8:42pm
post #17331 of 35990
Quote:
Originally Posted by no frills View Post


Dino, thanks for this. I haven't been collecting for very long, but I do find myself thinking about the right balance of variety and quantity. I want to make sure my pieces get decent wrist time, that I look forward to wearing them - otherwise I'd rather have them benefit someone else. But I also don't want to regret trading away an old love haha. Fortunately I think I made the right trades (traded in a couple of Calatravas for my perpetuals and I don't miss the Calatravas). You ended up getting another Speedy Pro after you let one go, right? Or am I mixing up stories now?

Right now I feel at peace with my collection. I'm looking at a few chronographs but I don't feel a burning need to get one.

Its easy to get wrapped up in the excitement of buying a new watch.  However, I find that unless an amazing deal is offered that is too good to pass up, I tend to put a great deal of time and effort into researching and shopping for a watch.  IMHO, thats part of the fun of collecting.  If I sell or trade a watch its generally because they have not gotten much wrist time in more than a year.  That way I know when its leaving my home to go to someone else's I'm not going to miss it (there are definitely watches I own that I would not sell ever, like my old 16520 Zenith based Daytona).  I still adore the design of the 114270 Explorer and I'll always sneak a peak if I see one on someone's wrist.  But sometimes our taste or needs change.  I think if you are at peace with your collection...then for now don't rush into anything.  Savor what you have.  One year I bought a few watches and it seemed that by purchasing them in such a short period I didn't really have to time to appreciate all of their nuances and get to know them to the fullest. 

 

The story about getting a Speedy Pro after mistakenly letting one go involves one of my  good friends from college. I think he was too impulsive selling it to help fund the latest watch that caught his eye.  I owned a Seamaster a long time ago, but never a Speedy Pro (but its a great watch).   As mentioned, if you are at peace with your collection...enjoy it for now and take your time figuring out what you will want next. 


Edited by Dino944 - 1/26/13 at 2:45pm
post #17332 of 35990
Quote:
Originally Posted by apropos View Post

Nice analysis, I'd like to add to that one must also consider the sheer scale of Rolex's operation - this isn't some small operation with a low five or high four figure production figure a year, this is an industrial operation in every sense of the word with production approaching a million a year.

Sure, it bites for those who bought a Rolex thinking/hoping that they were now part of an exclusive/rarefied club, but, well Rolex is what it is - a good and storied producer of fine tool watches with machine-made workhorse movements and sumptuous case finishing.
Apropos time to mention that the last representative standing of the original vision of these principles is about to get bulked up for its 50th — say goodbye to the end of the line:


Edited by Belligero - 1/26/13 at 4:09pm
post #17333 of 35990
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sander View Post


No no, I'm a different species altogether; I don't have the money for four-figure watches, look at those who do in envy and thus like articles like this.

"Envy," not a chance, most of the watches on this thread are obtainable! Most Americans have the" want it now attitude," be patient, work over-time, manage your money! This is for real: My best friend is a millionaire, we both make close to the same amount of money! How did he do it;. he's a cheap bastard!  "dont give snobs any enjoyment, they love to hear how enviuos you are "  

post #17334 of 35990
Quote:
Originally Posted by medtech_expat View Post


I'm not sure about the old school, new school distinction - but having owned a few Journes I don't find its association with the big time names to be appropriate. Journe has extraordinary talent and a keen eye for design, but the ownership experience of his watches does not live up to its promise. After all, what's the point of a watch if it fails to fulfill its primary function as a reliable timekeeper?

Dufour, on the other hand, is a master who inexplicably somehow falls under the radar.

 

That is unfortunate.

 

Which company do you think would be suitable for ranking as a "New School" big three as you understand the idea of it and comparable to Dufour and ALS?

post #17335 of 35990
Quote:
Originally Posted by no frills View Post

I bought the 114270 pre-owned.  I love the 36mm size - perfect for my smallish 6.25" wrist.

great watch. sadly almost anything under 40mm i feel looks too dainty on my wrist.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dino944 View Post



In the end, Rolex makes a great product.  Its not intended to go after Patek or Lange's market share, and its not priced or finished the same way.

i always find myself saying pretty much that. you just cant argue with a rolex. its not the best watch, the nicest, or the fanciest. but it is exactly what they want to be and you really just cant argue with it. just my opinion.

i miss my rolex. im sad with each passing day that i dont own one any more.
post #17336 of 35990
Quote:
Originally Posted by in stitches View Post

great watch. sadly almost anything under 40mm i feel looks too dainty on my wrist.
i always find myself saying pretty much that. you just cant argue with a rolex. its not the best watch, the nicest, or the fanciest. but it is exactly what they want to be and you really just cant argue with it. just my opinion.

i miss my rolex. im sad with each passing day that i dont own one any more.
Well, they're likely to visually bulk up the only 40 mm sports model with its original case lines remaining, so you may be in luck this spring if you feel it's too small. Personally, I wouldn't have it any other way, and I'm not at all small of wrist:

post #17337 of 35990

On sizing and preferences:

Quote:
Originally Posted by in stitches View Post


great watch. sadly almost anything under 40mm i feel looks too dainty on my wrist.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Belligero View Post


Well, they're likely to visually bulk up the only 40 mm sports model with its original case lines remaining, so you may be in luck this spring if you feel it's too small. Personally, I wouldn't have it any other way, and I'm not at all small of wrist:
 

 

Belligero, is that your 116520 at 40mm (from this recent post and the last one)?  Looking great!


Sizing is an interesting thing.  I think of myself as having a wrist on the smaller size (6.25") so I feel fine wearing smaller pieces (my 3919J was 33mm and I love my 114270 and 3940P's 36mm dimensions), although since my arm bulks upwards past 17" my wife tells me I could wear bigger pieces and get away with it.

 

Sure enough, when I wear my Nautilus I feel like it doesn't wear large at all (43mm ear to ear), but then again I think this piece tends to wear flat/thin versus other sporty/SS watches.

 

 

 

I have yet to put a 116520 on my wrist but that may well be in my sights over the next year or so.  As usual I'd like to see what it looks/feels like on my wrist before I make a decision.

post #17338 of 35990
Quote:
Originally Posted by no frills View Post

On sizing and preferences:

Belligero, is that your 116520 at 40mm (from this recent post and the last one)?  Looking great!


Sizing is an interesting thing.  I think of myself as having a wrist on the smaller size (6.25") so I feel fine wearing smaller pieces (my 3919J was 33mm and I love my 114270 and 3940P's 36mm dimensions), although since my arm bulks upwards past 17" my wife tells me I could wear bigger pieces and get away with it.

Sure enough, when I wear my Nautilus I feel like it doesn't wear large at all (43mm ear to ear), but then again I think this piece tends to wear flat/thin versus other sporty/SS watches.
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)

I have yet to put a 116520 on my wrist but that may well be in my sights over the next year or so.  As usual I'd like to see what it looks/feels like on my wrist before I make a decision.
As of twenty hours ago, it is. Thanks! I wasn't prepared for how much I'd like it after spending some time with it on the wrist. I've guess been subconsciously pining for one ever since I met an ex-Patek Philippe watchmaker who had moved to Norway to work with remotely operated subsea robotics, and who was wearing a 4130-movement Daytona.

Sizing is a personal thing, but I'm now down to zero watches over 40 mm and I'm an ex-rower with 200 mm / 7 3/4" wrists. The 116520 is at my maximum shininess tolerance so 40 mm is definitely as big as I'd want to go with the design, or I'd risk continual magpie assaults.

I've tried on the 43 mm 5712R (absolutely gorgeous) and I'd agree that it wears similarly to a 40 mm Daytona due to the slimness and shape. Lovely, lovely watches, those Nautili.

I gave the current GMT II another chance, and decided that it was still too charmless and Grim-Reaper-like, despite the quality. It just doesn't suit my style — too modern.

post #17339 of 35990
Quote:
Originally Posted by Belligero View Post


As of twenty hours ago, it is. Thanks! I wasn't prepared for how much I'd like it after spending some time with it on the wrist. I've guess been subconsciously pining for one ever since I met an ex-Patek Philippe watchmaker who had moved to Norway to work with remotely operated subsea robotics, and who was wearing a 4130-movement Daytona.

Sizing is a personal thing, but I'm now down to zero watches over 40 mm and I'm an ex-rower with 200 mm / 7 3/4" wrists. The 116520 is at my maximum shininess tolerance so 40 mm is definitely as big as I'd want to go with the design, or I'd risk continual magpie assaults.

I've tried on the 43 mm 5712R (absolutely gorgeous) and I'd agree that it wears similarly to a 40 mm Daytona due to the slimness and shape. Lovely, lovely watches, those Nautili.

I gave the current GMT II another chance, and decided that it was still too charmless and Grim-Reaper-like, despite the quality. It just doesn't suit my style — too modern.

 

Oh - the 116520 is new to you! Congratulations! It really looks good on you - wear it in good health!

 

I posted earlier in this thread that I was looking at chronograph types, and was looking at either the 116520 (or 16520 if I can find one) or the Omega Speedy Pro with a display back.  Still haven't decided, but then I haven't pursued this with the zeal I applied to my previous acquisitions.  Thanks for sharing your perspectives.  I will probably stick to a 40mm 116520 if I end up going in this direction.

post #17340 of 35990
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dino944 View Post

Its easy to get wrapped up in the excitement of buying a new watch.  However, I find that unless an amazing deal is offered that is too good to pass up, I tend to put a great deal of time and effort into researching and shopping for a watch.  IMHO, thats part of the fun of collecting.  If I sell or trade a watch its generally because they have not gotten much wrist time in more than a year.  That way I know when its leaving my home to go to someone else's I'm not going to miss it (there are definitely watches I own that I would not sell ever, like my old 16520 Zenith based Daytona).  I still adore the design of the 114270 Explorer and I'll always sneak a peak if I see one on someone's wrist.  But sometimes our taste or needs change.  I think if you are at peace with your collection...then for now don't rush into anything.  Savor what you have.  One year I bought a few watches and it seemed that by purchasing them in such a short period I didn't really have to time to appreciate all of their nuances and get to know them to the fullest. 

 

The story about getting a Speedy Pro after mistakenly letting one go involves one of my  good friends from college. I think he was too impulsive selling it to help fund the latest watch that caught his eye.  I owned a Seamaster a long time ago, but never a Speedy Pro (but its a great watch).   As mentioned, if you are at peace with your collection...enjoy it for now and take your time figuring out what you will want next. 

 

Good perspective, as always. I will take my time figuring out what I will want next.

 

In the meantime, I wore my 114270 last night to the gym because I needed a second hand to time some rest between sets.  Can sure take a beating, that little beauty.

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