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

The Watch Appreciation Thread - Page 1837

post #27541 of 33940
Quote:
Originally Posted by TC (Houston) View Post

Uggghh, you know what sux? Going watchless to the office because you're expecting to find a new one in box sitting on your desk when you arrive, and then it's not there! Apparently there was some bad weather up northeast on Friday? Anyways, my watch didn't make it onto the plane, so won't be here until tomorrow. Another looong night. LOL

I was looking forward to having my new (to me) Seiko Tuna delivered yesterday and wearing it today but no USPS in my neighborhood yesterday thanks to our class 3 killstorm.
post #27542 of 33940
Quote:
Originally Posted by in stitches View Post

TELL US NOW
she's purty inlove.gif

post #27543 of 33940
Quote:
Originally Posted by mimo View Post

During my summer tyre-kicking I came to the same conclusions - the 41mm case is OK, but 39mm is perfect.  And for price comparisons, a mint 39mm ROC costs about $12k used.  As even a used Daytona is still $10k-plus if mint with box and papers, then the ROC looks like a real winner.  But new versus new, I think Rob's probably right: the ROC might still be nicer, but two-Daytonas-nice is debatable.

I hear this over and over on a lot of the forums, and it seems that is the consensus among long-time AP and RO enthusiasts. However, after going through the same analysis, I came to the exact opposite conclusion. When I was able to check out the 15300 and the Dual Time, those aren't watches I would be interested in at any price--just too dainty for my tastes and the proportions seemed a little compressed (blasphemy I know!). It's probably because the 41mm models are what actually got me interested in the RO and I had spent so many hours looking at pictures of them. I must be APs target mkt for the rollout of the 41mm RO line. LOL
post #27544 of 33940
Quote:
Originally Posted by HRoi View Post

she's purty inlove.gif
 

She's a Grande Lange 1?

 

Sweet!  Congratulations, HRoi, and a very happy new year indeed!

post #27545 of 33940
Quote:
Originally Posted by HRoi View Post

she's purty inlove.gif

My goodness, outstanding!!! Congratulations!
post #27546 of 33940
yes sir, and thank you. it is a happy new year for me and between this and the JLC i think i am done for awhile. satisfied.gif

post #27547 of 33940
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbarwick View Post
 

I stare at mine everyday for a good 5-10 minutes.  At some point I won't but the newness has not worn off.  

With great watches...newness often is irrelevant.  I often find myself taking a good long look at many of the watches during the day, and its got nothing to do with needing to know the time.  

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith T View Post

I'm wearing the Roadster, back in the office today (old pic):

Looks great Keith!  Nice to see some Cariter love here.  

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by jbarwick View Post
 

Stichy - Does the Cartier look that flat in person?  Maybe that particular watch is hard to photograph but when comparing it to the Roadster above, which is quite lovely, the one you posted seems to be lacking in that department.  Hopefully this made sense.

It has sort of a domed or rounded shape IIRC.  Although its far from my favorite offering from them.  I've tried on the mens and I'd rather have DJ.  Even Mrs. Dino isn't a fan of the BB. 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith T View Post

Stitchy, I've never warmed up to the design of the Ballon Bleu, and THANK GOD my "lady friend" is not into watches.

+1 

...although Mrs. Dino likes watches...she isn't a fan of the BB.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Isolation View Post
 

I took some pictures so I thought I'd post here since it features my watch. I don't really own expensive watches, so here's a nice, but I think, good and stylish Seiko Premier Chronograph.

 

 

 

I pretty much only wear Seikos. Right now I do not see the appeal of going up in price range and brands; I'd rather go more upscale with other parts of my wardrobe first (as this thrifted jacket might indicate), still I appreciate the sweet watches posted here.

Seiko is a good solid brand and a good way to get into watches.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Newcomer View Post


Quite nice. It looks good on you.

What you said inspired me to write a brief thought.

As some of you may know (or have noticed), I was first interested in clothing before I started to spend the bulk of my time looking into watches. Although I still am interested in shoes, clothing, etc., I have found that watches provide (at least for me) me with so much more enjoyment than those other parts of my wardrobe. Unlike my favorite pair of shoes, I can wear my favorite watch every darn day. It is not uncomfortable, it does not fit differently if I have gained or lost weight, I don't worry about wearing it in the rain, I don't need to think about how it will pair with various accessories. I can just strap it on and admire it. Additionally, a watch is not afflicted with the same temporal constraints as clothing. If a watch is well taken care of, it can last for generations, easily. It can also look great with very little maintenance. There is no need to shine it, or brush it, or dryclean it, or wash it, etc. Simply wipe it down with a cloth at the end of the day. There is also less chance of it getting "injured." Nothing is worse that getting a grease stain on a tie, or someone spilling coffee on you, or (if you are into cars) somebody rear ending your vehicle. The only dings I have in my watches have been put there by none other than myself.

It is the one thing that I own that has almost become a part of me. And without me, it will not function.

+1 Spot on Nuke.  I love nice shoes and clothing, but they have taken a back seat over the years to watches, for many of the same reasons you have mentioned.  Beyond that, if you tire of a watch or decide its not your taste you can trade it and if purchased smartly they retain good value (and in rare cases they appreciate)...that is never happening with the nicest suit or shoes.  

 

I love wearing nice clothing, but even at nice events sometimes I worry about not having my clothes damaged.  I went to a wedding where they served some sort of soup/biscque...well some F@cking $hithead waiter spilled a large blob of soup on the back of a nice Rubinacci suit jacket...and never said a word.  At least if the guy told me I might have been able to get it out before it set into the fabric.  Neither I nor my wife noticed it until we got home from our trip and it had dried into the fabric.  When I saw the color of the stain I knew instantly what it was.    

 

So I love nice clothing and shoes...but watches for me are much more enjoyable, more durable, and often look as fantastic now as they did 20 years ago or more.  

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by TC (Houston) View Post

Uggghh, you know what sux? Going watchless to the office because you're expecting to find a new one in box sitting on your desk when you arrive, and then it's not there! Apparently there was some bad weather up northeast on Friday? Anyways, my watch didn't make it onto the plane, so won't be here until tomorrow. Another looong night. LOL

Yes, insane weather here in the Northeast.  We had about a foot of snow Friday and temps of about -1F.  Then yesterday it was 55F, with downpours, and then overnight dropped down again to 12F...so lots of ice.  Lots of flights have been cancelled in the last few days.  Hoping your new toy arrives soon...looking forward to pix!

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by CHRK33 View Post

Just wanted to share a belated pic of my Christmas/wedding gift from my little sister - I know the Mark XVII doesn't get lots of love here, but considering the context and the fact that it was a thoughtful and charming gift (the Le Petit Prince tie-in), I really do love this watch. Even with my Reverso 1931 and 15202, this will get a ton of wear. I really love it.

Very nice!  Congrats and wear it in good health.  Really nice gift from your little sis.  I'm sure you will get many years of enjoyment from it.

post #27548 of 33940
Quote:
Originally Posted by HRoi View Post

she's purty inlove.gifWarning: Spoiler! (Click to show)

holy balls. MOAR PICS!!!

--

regarding the gold RO, i remember reading in watch time a while back that the 18K RO is super scratch-able and it really shows on the brushed finish areas. its a very delicate surface.
post #27549 of 33940
Awesome watch hroi, enjoy.
post #27550 of 33940
Quote:
Originally Posted by HRoi View Post

yes sir, and thank you. it is a happy new year for me and between this and the JLC i think i am done for awhile. satisfied.gif

 

Damn that's beautiful! Congrats! :bounce2:

post #27551 of 33940
Absolutely awesome Hroi. Just a gorgeous watch, I hope that you wear it in the very best of health! I would love to see more pics when you get the chance, as well as hear how you reached your decision. Is it new or used? And where did you get it from! Sorry for the 20 questions, I would just like to hear more about the buying experience.
post #27552 of 33940
HRoi, congrats, that's a beautiful Lange....and yes, we'd all love to see more pics.




Its been harsh all over the US, but for you guys up north, where the *bitter* cold and the snow have been especially bad lately....just think warm thoughts, okay?
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
post #27553 of 33940
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaplan View Post

Thanks. Did the Mk XVI come on a croc grain strap? I thought it was a real croc? Either way, I found it a little odd that IWC chose to dress the buckle down, from a deployant to a tang, and dress the leather up, going from buffalo to croc, when they replaced the XV with the XVI...


@suaviter, I use a Bergeon tool too (No 6767). Less risk of getting scratches when changing spring bars, than when changing Panerai style straps with a screwdriver, IME.


Kaplan, I still have the original strap in unworn condition, and I honestly can't say if it's actual croc or just croc-grain...I would have to look. But regardless, I switched it out for a similar pattern (in calf) immediately, and I do this for a lot of my watches. No intentions to sell, but it's nice to keep that OEM strap's virginity intact, just in case.

Agree with you that that IWC made some interesting choices in the transition from Mark XV to XVI (and subsequently XVII, possibly even moreso), but I will say that the buffalo is a nice look on that piece.

Someone also had posted a pic of their IWC pilot (think it was a XVI) on a black Maratac composite strap, and I thought that was a great combo. Can't recall if that was here on SF, or possibly another watch forum, but I quite liked it.
post #27554 of 33940
Quote:
Originally Posted by Newcomer View Post

Has anyone had a chance to read the article on Hodinkee yesterday?

http://www.hodinkee.com/blog/audemars-piguet-royal-oak-chronograph-review

A great article, despite it being review for the most part. Nonetheless, I like the general premise--that the ROC is nothing short of a modern classic. It really is an excellent combination of past and present. I am not sure how I feel about the rose gold, and I feel like the author has similar feelings. Gold may be a big soft, especially considering all the brushed and polished surfaces.

I haven't had a chance to read it but I plan to when I get a bit of time.  

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by suaviter View Post
 

 

Great article ... after this thread with our friend dino and TC's showcasing I have serious Royal Oak fever. 

Once you catch RO fever...there is no cure.   The best you can hope for is a prescription from the doctor to explain to your wife/significant other why you need a RO!

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by HRoi View Post

hmm...how does one unscrew a hexagonal screw? that may be explained in the video, but i am not in a position to play it right now

Only the top/cap is hexagonal.  Personally, I think its a nice finishing touch, but not that practical on the chrono pushers.  I find them a bit slick and a pain to grasp to unscrew.  The "teethed" screw down pushers on Daytonas, Overseas and other watches are easier to screw/unscrew.  

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by in stitches View Post

great read, gorgeous watch, but for me, the simple 3 handed RO is the watch to have. :swoon:

also, thoughts on the 15202?

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by robw View Post


I read it. I am an AP fan and own a stainless RO chrono (the prior 39mm model) which I absolutely love. I wouldn't have any problem with wearing the watch in gold either.

However, I have a hard time seeing what this new model brings to the table other than a larger case. It has the same non exclusive chrono mvmt as the prior model (which is I have to say works great and has been running flawlessly for me for years). Without question a beautiful and beautifully made, high quality, high end product, but it seems to me like most of the RO offshore models: extremely cool but not especially interesting. 54k for this watch is hard to justify. The comparison to Patek IMO is a non starter. I don't especially like the nautilus which itself is outrageously priced but they are just not in the same league.

A Rolex Daytona in rose gold lists these days for about 37k or so and that has its own excellent house mvmt. It's very hard for me to see the premium AP is looking for here as justified. Maybe on the secondary or grey market with discounting, the difference between those 2 watches gets a lot smaller. I can see myself paying more for the AP but not much frankly.

I think the idea expressed in the article that the customer AP has in mind for the RO and offshore models (that is most of them, some are quite complicated and interesting) is not really interested in the horological aspects is essentially correct.

Personally, I think its a beautiful watch.  The finish greatly exceeds that of what you will get with a current Rolex Daytona.  There simply is no comparison.  As for the price...well you have to remember you are now dealing with a boat load of gold.  Keep in mind a new SS Daytona is under $14,000 ...but in rose its $40,000.  As for the AP in steel its about $24,000.  So what you are really seeing is prices escalating by about $30K on each watch.  In the mid 1990s a steel Daytona was about $4,000 and in gold it was $17,000.  In the late 90s a RO chrono listed for $12,500 and in gold it was about $25,000...but you could get bigger discounts on the APs.  Fast forward to huge price increase both because watch companies decided they could (even on steel models) and the huge jump in the price of gold in recent years and you now have gold watches that sell for crazy money.  Even a basic Calatrava was a $9,500 watch (before huge discounts in the late 1990s you could buy new from ADs for about $6K)...now they are hovering around $30K.

 

I'm not sure which model you are comparing to a Patek.  Patek does some great movements...and maybe its blasphemy, but the 5980 is a hideous watch.  Lumpy, and lacking the beauty, and svelte lines of the 5711 and original 3700, and a goofy subdial within a subdial that I find tough to read...oh and in RG I believe its list price was about $80K...so you pay another $25K for its inhouse movement.  I'll gladly compare a 5711 to a 15202 Jumbo both in steel, because that is fair in terms of function, metal, and price...but if you want to talk chrono versions of each...the finish is fantastic on both, you don't get an inhouse movement on the RO Chrono (but its a lot less expensive) and its a far better looking chronograph.

 

As an owner of a RO Jumbo (not a chrono) and an owner of a few Daytonas...I think each is a fantastic watch, with its own merits and its own fan base.  Also don't forget, Rolex only has only had an inhouse movement since 2000, prior to that it used a heavily modified El Primero and prior to that a Valjoux 72.  So back when they started, none of them used an inhouse movement.  Beyond that...check the prices of the Rolex's without inhouse movements and you will find they often exceed those of the current models in the second hand market.  In house movements are nice, but they only have so much value in the real world.  I own and in house movement Daytona and a El Primero based Daytona and each are really nice...but I favor the old model over the new.  I consider myself lucky to own examples from each brand.  However, the quality of the RO greatly exceeds what you will find in a Daytona and I can see a premium for them over the current Daytona...but YMMV.

Below is mid 90s Daytona                                                       Here is a newer model from just after I purchased it.  

  

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by qubed View Post
 

I was a bit surprised to see how scratch heavy the rose gold ROC was. How scratchy are stainless Royal Oaks? Anyone have both a stainless & gold one and can compare them? 

Gold is insanely soft.  It shows hairlines from dress shirts in just a few days.  I have a SS RO that I've worn as a daily wearer for 16 months and because I'm careful with it it still looks like new.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by mimo View Post
 

During my summer tyre-kicking I came to the same conclusions - the 41mm case is OK, but 39mm is perfect.  And for price comparisons, a mint 39mm ROC costs about $12k used.  As even a used Daytona is still $10k-plus if mint with box and papers, then the ROC looks like a real winner.  But new versus new, I think Rob's probably right: the ROC might still be nicer, but two-Daytonas-nice is debatable.

 

 

I think there is room in a collection for ROs of different sizes.  When shopping for ROs I considered 15300, the 15400, and the 39mm and 41mm chrono.  As far as time only pieces....I favor the Jumbo.  Its a classic based on the original specs.  Everything about it is exceptional, and I greatly prefer the 2 hands, dark date wheel, dial, and the classic 2121 movement.  I just felt for a time only, the 41 was nice...but the proportions seemed a bit off to me, at least on my wrist.  While the chrono, I prefer in the 41.  The subdials fill out the size better, it takes on a sportier feel than the 39 version.  I always liked the 39 chrono, but something about it didn't work for me.   I think the 41 Chrono would be my next choice for an AP if I were to ever choose a second RO.  

Quote:
Originally Posted by HRoi View Post

yes sir, and thank you. it is a happy new year for me and between this and the JLC i think i am done for awhile. satisfied.gif

Stunning!!! Congrats and enjoy that beauty in good health! Way to ring in the New Year!!!

post #27555 of 33940
great stuff, dino. any thoughts though on the 15202 vs the 15400?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › The Watch Appreciation Thread