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

The Watch Appreciation Thread - Page 1560

post #23386 of 36839
Quote:
Originally Posted by NonServiam View Post

I am indeed! Shorts and an H&M button down wink.gif I am rarely anything other than casual. Work or play. Today I went shopping in town, and right now I'm cooking dinner, timing with the JLC.

 

I have no qualms wearing a yellow gold piece on a leather strap with casual wear either.  Like my "Frills pose" for today:

 

 

I elected to unblur the area with the shades because (a) I like these shades and (b) this is SF, after all.  fistbump.gif

post #23387 of 36839
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dino944 View Post

Sorry, I'm just not a calendar or annual calendar person.  I've never really seen one that I liked enough to even remotely consider.  The only calendar watches that interest me are actual perpetual calendars, but those are generally well beyond my budget.  As for Blancpain, while I respect the quality of their work, I've yet to see or handle a BP that I really liked.  Even their really high end complicated pieces don't interest me, and once you get into a certain price range there are watches I'd rather have from other companies.

i am not a huge BP fan either, and agree 100% about their higher end pieces landing in a price range where there are many many other options i would opt for instead, but i have a friend who has their AC and it was very nice, and i think the price was pretty reasonable at the time iirc.

this AC for example, from my beloved JLC, would definitely find a happy home with me. i think it a superbly designed watch, and in no way makes me think, hey, that really should be a perp but they stopped short.

drool.gif


 
Quote:
Dopey, that's a really funny way to look at it.  I never considered that.  Only about half of my watches have dates on them, and when possible I would opt for a watch without a date because I prefer its symmetry (but that's more of a preference pertaining to appearance over function).   I think we have all seen watches that make us say, "Oh why the f*ck did the cut a hole in the dial for a date?  This watch would have been absolutely perfect as a time only piece."

i too tend to prefer symmetrical watches. that was one of the main reasons why i chose the 112 when i went for a panerai. it is 100% simple symmetrical beauty. the symmetry of squadra hometime was also a huge factor for me when i chose it. the AM/PM at 9 o'clock across from the date at 3 o'clock, both the same size, font and color scheme, coupled with the seconds sub-dial at 6 o'clock made for a wonderfully symmetrical appearance that really appealed to me.

the rolex i just bought has nothing to symmetricize (new word) the date, but what would a DJ be without the date after all? despite my love for symmetry, i have never found it to be an issue with the DJ. it just works for me.

but as always, YMMV.
post #23388 of 36839
frills, your arms are HEWGE!!! icon_gu_b_slayer[1].gif
post #23389 of 36839

Another comparison to think about: rumors are swirling around that the 5711 in PLATINUM may well be produced in limited quantities.  If the rumors are true, it may retail in the low $90s.

 

$90,000+ for a no-complication 5711.  Wow.

 

How does it compare to a 5711 in stainless steel?  Well, pictures have also emerged via KIH from PuristSPro.  5711/1A in SS on the left, 5711/1P on the right:

 

 

 

 

From these pics and the different lighting, it seems clear that the 5711 in SS has a dial that's closer to blue/gray than the more "electric blue" / "brighter blue" for the 5711/1P.  From some of the pics it does look like the platinum version stands out in terms of how "pure" the white metal looks (as it should, given the price premium). 

 

Actually thought my 5711/1A's dial would be comparable, but I really need to see the 5711/1P in person.

 

But here's the thing: even if the rumors ARE true, the 5711/1P will likely go for several years wait time if sourced through an AD.  If bought on the secondary market, it will likely trade for a significant premium - like the 5131 right now, maybe in the $120s to $130s. Whoa.

 

What would you rather get for that kind of price point?  A 3970 perpetual calendar chrono in platinum for a 5711 in platinum?  Easy choice for me.

post #23390 of 36839
Quote:
Originally Posted by in stitches View Post

frills, your arms are HEWGE!!! icon_gu_b_slayer[1].gif

 

Hah - darn photo angle!  It does look like the arms are 30 inches around, but they're more like (slightly over) half that. 

 

Angle of the photo also makes my waist look huge, but I cropped that out!  biggrin.gif

post #23391 of 36839
Quote:
Originally Posted by wurger View Post

Can anyone answer why having external pushers compare to inserted pushers cost more? Does that complicates the movement?

Personally, I think its more of a styling choice.  In the end many very expensive dress watches from  Patek, Lange, VC, etc that use pushers that are flush with the case, so I don't know that its a real cost issue, as they have no need to cut corners, particularly if one considers their pricing.  

Quote:
Originally Posted by no frills View Post

 

You're absolutely right, of course.  A really difficult balancing act especially with the older watches.  The other issue with this piece is that it's not complete - no box, no papers.  It's being offered at a fairly steep discount because of this, versus the $30K+ numbers I see for complete pieces, but that does make me hesitate because I'll encounter the same hurdle in reselling the piece if I'm unfortunate enough to have to let it go at some point in the future.

 

 

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)

 

Great question, NukeDino captured my thinking/feeling in his post below; offers enough diversity given the range of metals, case shapes, and little nitpicky details (the fact that the 5040J offers that tonneau shape, display back and track around the dial - all of which the 3940P does not - gives it cool variety for me)... it certainly satiates my need for diversity when I need a little bit of a change.

 

And since I sweat a ton, I find that I rotate across leather straps pretty much every day to give each of them a rest.  If I wear the 3970 in yellow gold on a Monday and don't get to wear the 3970 in platinum till Thursday, I am yankering to have it on my wrist by the middle of the week!  Just my personal feeling.

 

 

I am not immune to feeling like other pieces are rendered obsolete: in fact, I used to own two very basic Calatravas and when I was gunning for the perp-cals, I just felt that they won't get any wrist time anymore.  So I traded them in to help finance the perp-cals and future acquisitions.  Regret always comes in retrospect so I'm fortunate that I don't miss the Calatravas one bit.

 

 

+1 to Dino's read of how I feel about the diversity of my current pieces.  Totally captures what I wanted to express.

 

As for perp cal versus annual cal - I feel the same way, with one caveat: if the annual calendar does offer an interesting "look," I'd consider it.  Aesthetics versus the level of complication - because if it was all about the level of complication the perp cals will always (by definition) win the day.  For example, the 5205 annual calendar offers an interesting "modern" take on Patek calendar complications (pics from PuristS, etc):

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)

 

 

 

A more "modern" readable dial, bigger case (versus the 36mm case of the 3940), a nice sweeping seconds hand (which the perp cals from earlier generations did not have, not counting the retrograding 5059s, etc). 

 

And look at the very interesting design of the pierced lugs!

 

 

 

 

My problem with the 5205 is Patek's current pricing.  Retail of $49,500!  Even pre-owned, it's rare to get this one for under $40K.  For those prices you can easily find a mint, complete 3940 perpetual calendar in yellow gold - an absolute Patek classic.  White gold in the low to mid $40s if you're a white metal kind of guy.  So with this kind of relative price differentials... you're not even "going big" necessarily... for the same price, you can get either an annual calendar... or a perpetual calendar.  If that's the game, then it's perp-cals for me all day long. 

 

 

Yeah - as long as the aesthetics are cool/different enough and there's a price differential that I can live with, I can see myself going for an annual calendar. 

 

For example, if the 5205G was priced in the low to mid $20s (where older annual calendars are trading in the secondary market - see for example the 5035), then vis-a-vis the $40K that you need to ramp up to a pre-owned 3940, well, that complication-to-value ratio makes sense to me.

 

But if we're comparing an annual calendar with interesting aesthetics for more or less the same price as a mint perpetual calendar from the same manufacturer - whoa.  It's perp-cal for me. 

 

So let's pick an annual vs perpetual calendar with comparable aesthetics but some price difference, to make the thought experiment interesting.  Let's pit the 5146 versus the 3940.  Currently in production, the 5146 trades more cheaply than the 5205 in the secondary market - so a yellow gold can probably be had in the mid- to high $30s.  But, with a bit of negotiating you can probably get a 3940 in yellow gold for $40K or maybe slightly less.  So for that $2,000 to $5,000 difference, at those price levels, would you rather have this:

 

Patek 5146J - annual calendar.  Cal 324 self-winding movement:

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)

 

 

 

CREATOR: gd-jpeg v1.0 (using IJG JPEG v62), quality = 80

 

 

Or this?  Patek 3940J - perpetual calendar.  Cal 240 self-winding movement.

 

 

 

 

 

For me - and I suspect, for Dino as well, but I might be wrong - I'd pay the differential to get the perpetual calendar.  $2,000 to $5,000 is still a lot of money, though in percentage terms once you get to the mid-$30s it's relatively more palatable/acceptable.

 

But I am not sure others would feel the same way!  What do the TWAT folks think?

 

Spot on Frills!   fistbump.gif   

 

Even at a good price for the Double Red Sea-Dweller, no box and papers would be a deal breaker for me.  I just could not do it.  If I am spending that amount of money for one, then I'd probably be willing to put in more money and buy one that's mint with B&P.  

 

I think one can own several perpetual calendars and/or perpetual calendar chronographs, and if there is a enough variety in terms of design, case metal, and movement one can enjoy them without feeling they are redundant.  However, something as basic as a Calatrava, is going to be unnecessary, or redundant when the 3940, 5040, a 3970s, do everything that a Calatrava does and more.  I would not feel regret over using the Calatravas to take some of the edge off of a more complicated piece.  To me that makes sense.

 

The 5205 is an interesting design, I like the pierced lugs, but overall I don't love it.  If going for something with windows for date, date, etc...I prefer some of the more classic designs one might see using windows for day and date on vintage PP perpetual calendars from say the 1940s and 1950s.  Also, as you have pointed out the price difference between some of the annual calendars and mint condition with box & papers real perpetuals isn't that far off.  I would DEFINITELY, spend the extra and get a real perpetual calendar.  Sure its a lot of money, but as my Mom used to say, "Its never the last hundred, its the first thousand."  Meaning once you are that far into it, don't hold back just because its a bit more.  Granted in the $2K-5K isn't a few hundred, but in the grand scheme of things when you are talking roughly $40+K its really not that much.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by NonServiam View Post

Today smile.gif

1872483116dd0ef76bf319d4e7288ba4_zps64fcd875.jpg

Beautiful JLC!

post #23392 of 36839
frills - IF i was a mad baller, id look into getting that plat 5711 just because, but as a non baller, id happily have the SS and feel just as good. but, at present, neither is happening. frown.gif
post #23393 of 36839
Quote:
Originally Posted by in stitches View Post

this AC for example, from my beloved JLC, would definitely find a happy home with me. i think it a superbly designed watch, and in no way makes me think, hey, that really should be a perp but they stopped short.

drool.gif


 
i too tend to prefer symmetrical watches. that was one of the main reasons why i chose the 112 when i went for a panerai. it is 100% simple symmetrical beauty. the symmetry of squadra hometime was also a huge factor for me when i chose it. the AM/PM at 9 o'clock across from the date at 3 o'clock, both the same size, font and color scheme, coupled with the seconds sub-dial at 6 o'clock made for a wonderfully symmetrical appearance that really appealed to me.

the rolex i just bought has nothing to symmetricize (new word) the date, but what would a DJ be without the date after all? despite my love for symmetry, i have never found it to be an issue with the DJ. it just works for me.

but as always, YMMV.

I like JLCs a lot, but I can't say that I love the above watch.  Aside from it being an AC, I generally don't care for a centrally mounted hand pointing to the date around the outer edge of the dial.  VC has done this in the past and I didn't like it from them either.  I think if they changed the date on the above JLC, I might like it more...but then again still an AC wink.gif

 

Symmetricize ? ... lets just call that a Stitch-ism. I think if you bought a Datejust without a date...it wouldn't be very Datejusty...look at that I made a word too!  fistbump.gif  I like symmetry, but I can also like asymmetry if done correctly...Lange 1, Cartier Tank Asymetrique, or VC 1972 from 2000-2006, or Patek's old 5015.  

Quote:
Originally Posted by in stitches View Post

frills, your arms are HEWGE!!! icon_gu_b_slayer[1].gif

I think if we took the that pic and photoshopped it so his arms were green, it would look like the Incredible Hulk busting out of that shirt!

Quote:
Originally Posted by no frills View Post

Another comparison to think about: rumors are swirling around that the 5711 in PLATINUM may well be produced in limited quantities.  If the rumors are true, it may retail in the low $90s.

 

$90,000+ for a no-complication 5711.  Wow.

 

How does it compare to a 5711 in stainless steel?  Well, pictures have also emerged via KIH from PuristSPro.  5711/1A in SS on the left, 5711/1P on the right:

 

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)

 

 

 

 

 

 

From these pics and the different lighting, it seems clear that the 5711 in SS has a dial that's closer to blue/gray than the more "electric blue" / "brighter blue" for the 5711/1P.  From some of the pics it does look like the platinum version stands out in terms of how "pure" the white metal looks (as it should, given the price premium). 

 

Actually thought my 5711/1A's dial would be comparable, but I really need to see the 5711/1P in person.

 

But here's the thing: even if the rumors ARE true, the 5711/1P will likely go for several years wait time if sourced through an AD.  If bought on the secondary market, it will likely trade for a significant premium - like the 5131 right now, maybe in the $120s to $130s. Whoa.

 

What would you rather get for that kind of price point?  A 3970 perpetual calendar chrono in platinum for a 5711 in platinum?  Easy choice for me.

Interesting photo opp comparing the 5711/A1 and the 5711/1P.  I noticed immediately the difference in dial color.  I think the brighter blue makes the Platinum version look a little more sporty.  I find the dial on the all steel more interesting as it transitions from blue to gray.  I think it also gives it a bit more versatility in terms of wearing it dressy or casual clothing.  I would find the heft of an all platinum Nautilus very cool...however at that kind of money...I'd go with a 3970 or other complicated Patek.  Still very interesting to see photos of them side by side.  

post #23394 of 36839
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dino944 View Post

I like JLCs a lot, but I can't say that I love the above watch.  Aside from it being an AC, I generally don't care for a centrally mounted hand pointing to the date around the outer edge of the dial.  VC has done this in the past and I didn't like it from them either.  I think if they changed the date on the above JLC, I might like it more...but then again still an AC wink.gif

welp, on this one all i can says is, as the legendary ron burgundy said,


Quote:
Symmetricize ? ... lets just call that a Stitch-ism. I think if you bought a Datejust without a date...it wouldn't be very Datejusty...look at that I made a word too!  fistbump.gif
  I like symmetry, but I can also like asymmetry if done correctly...Lange 1, Cartier Tank Asymetrique, or VC 1972 from 2000-2006, or Patek's old 5015.  

agree 100% to all that. and nice job on the new word!
Quote:
I think if we took the that pic and photoshopped it so his arms were green, it would look like the Incredible Hulk busting out of that shirt!

to quote another visual...

post #23395 of 36839
NS,

repost for extreme awesomeness
Quote:
Originally Posted by NonServiam View Post

Today smile.gif

1872483116dd0ef76bf319d4e7288ba4_zps64fcd875.jpg
post #23396 of 36839

Remember this one?

 

http://www.hodinkee.com/blog/patek-philippe-creates-unique-5004-split-seconds-perpetual-calendar-in-titanium-for-only-watch-2013

 

With this press image?

 

 

Actual pics now available via Antiquorum's site, not just for Patek but for every watch maker creating a unique piece:

 

http://www.antiquorum.com/press-releases/antiquorum-presents-the-first-hands-on-images-of-timepieces-offered-in-only-watch-2013/

 

Here are the pics for the PP 5004T:

 

 

 

 

Just sharing!

post #23397 of 36839

The odds of my next watch being a Rolex just went up.  In the metal, this thing rocks the house.  I just wish it came with the same cool glidelock adjustable bracelet as the Sub C.

 

post #23398 of 36839
frills - do not want. well, ok, id take and flip.

roger - now youre talking. man o man i want that. i fell even more in love with it when i tried it on.
post #23399 of 36839
Quote:
Originally Posted by RogerP View Post

The odds of my next watch being a Rolex just went up.  In the metal, this thing rocks the house.  I just wish it came with the same cool glidelock adjustable bracelet as the Sub C.

 

inlove.gif  That's a hot watch!  I haven't been into a Rolex dealer in a while, so I've yet to see one in person.  If I get a chance I may pop into an AD to see if I can get a look at one.  The Breitling chronograph you posted the other day was quite nice...but I'd rather have the blue/black GMT...just my 2 cents. 

post #23400 of 36839
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dino944 View Post

. . .
Dopey, that's a really funny way to look at it.  I never considered that.  Only about half of my watches have dates on them, and when possible I would opt for a watch without a date because I prefer its symmetry (but that's more of a preference pertaining to appearance over function).   I think we have all seen watches that make us say, "Oh why the f*ck did the cut a hole in the dial for a date?  This watch would have been absolutely perfect as a time only piece."

. . .
I know I am an outlier and most people don't share my dislike for simple date indicators. I certainly don't expect to convince anyone, though I know I am right!!! But just in case I wasn't clear - it really bugs me that the simple date function is, BY DESIGN, wrong half the months of the year. I know collectors don't really care since most don't have autowinders running constantly so must constantly reset their watches frequently for reasons other than the only-semi-functional date mechanism. But to my mind, a functional watch should be one which you can set once and forget about. It should not lose or gain a meaningful amount of time and you should be able to ignore it, other than servicing it every x years. If it gains or loses too much time, that is considered either out of spec or else a design flaw and one that the maker tries to improve upon. It would annoy you if you constantly had to fix the time because it was inaccurate. Likewise, it should bother you that the date is inaccurate and especially that it is inaccurate on purpose. To me, this is just bad engineering; if you can't make it work properly, leave it out. But something that is broken on purpose feels like a splinter in my brain. On those watches I have with a date function, I simply never set it and try to pretend it isn't there.

But I know no one else really cares.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › The Watch Appreciation Thread