The Watch Appreciation Thread (Reviews and Photos of Men's Timepieces by Rolex, Patek Philippe, Brei

[Dino944]

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.

Hi Dopey. I get what you are saying. When I said that it was a funny way to look at it, I was not making fun of you or disagreeing. I was merely noting, that you hit upon a rather interesting point I had not considered. What you said is correct, it made me laugh a little, but I like your line of reasoning. I can appreciate where you are coming from, and I think its important to remember as watch collectors and SFers we tend to be more particular about design, function, and aesthetics than maybe an average person that just goes into an shop and buys one Rolex, Omega, Breitling, etc with the intention that it will be his only good watch for the rest of his life. I do have some watches with dates on them, and I can live with it being on most of them. However, your statement might make me give the whole simple date thing a bit more thought next time I am considering a watch...although I might be able to suffer with it on a Blue Black GMT 2 .

#symmetricize4life

Also with you on that pointer date on the JLC...nice execution IMO.....indeed, a rare disagreement with Dino. Horses for courses.

As for you guys disagreeing with me...its ok with me if you want to be wrong once in a while

 

[jbarwick]

Neither of the ADs within a short distance have received a BLNR. This thread is a tease.

 

[in stitches]



You should get a day counter that is marked for seven days followed by a bunch of smiley faces.

...an average person that just goes into an shop and buys one Rolex, Omega, Breitling, etc with the intention that it will be his only good watch for the rest of his life....

does. not. compute. brain. overload. hurts. so. much.

although I might be able to suffer with it on a Blue Black GMT 2 .

yeah you could!

As for you guys disagreeing with me...its ok with me if you want to be wrong once in a while

:foo:

 

[rnguy001]

Minority opinion - I don't dislike this watch

Remember this one? http://www.hodinkee.com/blog/patek-...tual-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-rel...ges-of-timepieces-offered-in-only-watch-2013/ Here are the pics for the PP 5004T: Just sharing!

Damn awesome photo, the center links almost look brushed. ALMOST. Can't wait to see one in person, either. My man this would make a fine first Rolex for you I think

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.

Dopey Your requirements then exclude 99.999999% of autos with dates. You clearly don't miss the date and that's great. For me, I feel my watches are incomplete without the date, because I'm such a habit whore that I constantly look at my watch for the date. It may be OCD'ish of me, but I can't live without one. I don't mind having to wind the crown a few times to set the date every other month. No more than I would, oh I don't know, mind winding a manual watch every day. But some people swear by manual winds and I get it. I guess there's always G-shock.

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.

 

[cyc wid it]

While the JLC MUT Moon Phase still beckons... a dress watch isn't necessary for my current job etc. Maybe I've caught :foo: syndrome, but I've been thinking of a "one watch" for now. I currently have my Watchco SM300, but am considering something along the lines of an older Datejust with silver dial/baton markers. I'm not sold on the newer ones, but trying one on might change my mind. Suggestions/opinions welcome.

 

[in stitches]



Minority opinion - I don't dislike this watch

tbh, if they just got rid of the "woven" dial and made it straight gray or black, i wouldnt hate it myself.

Damn awesome photo, the center links almost look brushed. ALMOST. Can't wait to see one in person, either. My man this would make a fine first Rolex for you I think

in person, the center links are very clearly polished. that pic just doesnt show it. but, i like the polished center links.

Dopey
I guess there's always G-shock.

Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!

While the JLC MUT Moon Phase still beckons... a dress watch isn't necessary for my current job etc. Maybe I've caught :foo: syndrome, but I've been thinking of a "one watch" for now. I currently have my Watchco SM300, but am considering something along the lines of an older Datejust with silver dial/baton markers. I'm not sold on the newer ones, but trying one on might change my mind. Suggestions/opinions welcome.

a classic vintage DJ with stick markers is a great one watch.

 

[RogerP]

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.

I quite agree.

On the great date debate - I go both ways, so to speak. I don't wish any of my no-date watches had a date function, nor do I wish to delete the date function from any of my watches so equipped. It's definitely NOT something I need, though. I also sign and date a number of documents in a single day, but find I can pretty much remember the date after the first one. Frankly, I'd be kind of worried it I couldn't. And it's sitting at the bottom right hand corner of my computer screen all day, every day, just a glance away.

 

[scottcw]



You should get a day counter that is marked for seven days followed by a bunch of smiley faces.

Ask and ye shall receive...

 

[CHRK33]

Thanks to everyone who suggested some great wedding thank you gifts for my dad. I really appreciate everyone's thoughtfulness.

So I narrowed down my choices and they are at pretty different price points, so I wanted to get folks' thoughts before I make the final call.

1) Tudor Black Bay on a strap for $3300. My cousin would be bringing this from Greece for me and if my dad didn't like it, he would be stuck. I tried it on a year ago and liked it but wasn't in love.

2) IWC Mark XVII on a strap for $4K from our usual AD. Option to return it if he wasn't a fan -- I wouldn't mind if he did as I want him to love it. Late entry, but I always liked this watch. I find the 3 date window interesting and attractive, even though I know it is useless. Ha.

3) And if I wanted to go crazy and splurge and my dad deserves it for everything he has done for me. Either an Rolex Explorer II (white dial) or Milgauss (green crystal) for $7K. He is a Rolex guy and would like them I think. And both are sufficiently idiosyncratic, which I am a fan of.

I am leaning towards the IWC on the strap largely because of the price differential. It also is not like anything else my dad has and he already has a couple Rolexes (the last version of the yachtmaster and a gold and steel submariner). We own a restaurant and it seems like something could take some abuse in the kitchen and the like. That being said the Rolexes are wearing me down.

Sorry for the long winded stream of consciousness post but if you guys have any immediate reactions, would love to hear them. Thanks.

 

[wurger]

i think you are asking a lot from a mechanical item. its not the watch makers fault that we have a marsupialed calendar.

the facts as i see it are two fold.

1. making a mechanical watch to fully account for all the changes in the calendar year and cycle is both difficult and costly. it can be done, but its not cheap. that is pretty much fact as far as i know.

2. a date on a watch is a very useful thing for many people, myself included. many people need to check the date throughout the day, and having it displayed on your wrist is the quickest and easiest way to make sure you have it right.

that being the case, i think that it is more than reasonable for a watch maker to use a date on their watch, so that its wearer can take advantage of that function, and they should do their best to incorporate said date in a way that is as aesthetically pleasing as possible.

if one can afford an AC or better yet a PC, that is great. but most cant, and that should not preclude them from having a date on their watch. a watch maker using a simple date function in this way gives a person the opportunity to have the date at the ready, and not break the bank. if that means that 5 times a year you spend 10 seconds changing the date, i think that really is a small penance. and is in no way bad engineering. its utilitarian and economical engineering imo.

If you want to use a Day Counter as a clumsy proxy for the date, that is OK with me. It is a fine use of the function, as long as you remember to reset it every so often.

Dopey

Your requirements then exclude 99.999999% of autos with dates. You clearly don't miss the date and that's great. For me, I feel my watches are incomplete without the date, because I'm such a habit whore that I constantly look at my watch for the date. It may be OCD'ish of me, but I can't live without one. I don't mind having to wind the crown a few times to set the date every other month. No more than I would, oh I don't know, mind winding a manual watch every day. But some people swear by manual winds and I get it.

I guess there's always G-shock.

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.

It's really just a difference of opinion here, while people appreciate that mechanical watches as one of the most complicated and expensive jewellery a man can wear, it serves an important function of telling the time, and in the discussion here, the date.

The fact our calendar has 30/31/28/29 days, and with 99% of watch date display on a disc, it's physically impossible to engineer a cost effective design that can cater for that, and there are the a lot more expensive annual and perpetual calenders which Stitchy pointed out, and let me point out even perpetual calenders, when a watch is stopped, all indications have to be newly set and if over shoot happens, the owner will have to wait for the movement to stop before resetting again. Would you classify this as bad engineering?

Like the simple display of hours, minutes and seconds, the date is a display of something that is useful to the user. I guess my tolerance of changing the date display 5 times a year is not asking for much, and we all accept that a mechanical watch has its limitations on accuracy and displays, and I find the fact a watch can be 5 min faster or slower after a few months of wear with no adjustment a lot more troublesome than the fact I have change the date.

With the date, it's more of an assurance device to make sure I have the right date and the assurance is always with me when I need it, and I am not always in front of a computer.

If we can all live with all that, we should give the date display some approval.

 

[in stitches]



Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!

It's really just a difference of opinion here, while people appreciate that mechanical watches as one of the most complicated and expensive jewellery a man can wear, it serves an important function of telling the time, and in the discussion here, the date.

The fact our calendar has 30/31/28/29 days, and with 99% of watch date display on a disc, it's physically impossible to engineer a cost effective design that can cater for that, and there are the a lot more expensive annual and perpetual calenders which Stitchy pointed out, and let me point out even perpetual calenders, when a watch is stopped, all indications have to be newly set and if over shoot happens, the owner will have to wait for the movement to stop before resetting again. Would you classify this as bad engineering?

Like the simple display of hours, minutes and seconds, the date is a display of something that is useful to the user. I guess my tolerance of changing the date display 5 times a year is not asking for much, and we all accept that a mechanical watch has its limitations on accuracy and displays, and I find the fact a watch can be 5 min faster or slower after a few months of wear with no adjustment a lot more troublesome than the fact I have change the date.

With the date, it's more of an assurance device to make sure I have the right date and the assurance is always with me when I need it, and I am not always in front of a computer.

If we can all live with all that, we should the date display some approval.

LIKE
---


CHRK33 - of those options i like the milgauss.

 

[wurger]

Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!

It's really just a difference of opinion here, while people appreciate that mechanical watches as one of the most complicated and expensive jewellery a man can wear, it serves an important function of telling the time, and in the discussion here, the date.

The fact our calendar has 30/31/28/29 days, and with 99% of watch date display on a disc, it's physically impossible to engineer a cost effective design that can cater for that, and there are the a lot more expensive annual and perpetual calenders which Stitchy pointed out, and let me point out even perpetual calenders, when a watch is stopped, all indications have to be newly set and if over shoot happens, the owner will have to wait for the movement to stop before resetting again. Would you classify this as bad engineering?

Like the simple display of hours, minutes and seconds, the date is a display of something that is useful to the user. I guess my tolerance of changing the date display 5 times a year is not asking for much, and we all accept that a mechanical watch has its limitations on accuracy and displays, and I find the fact a watch can be 5 min faster or slower after a few months of wear with no adjustment a lot more troublesome than the fact I have change the date.

With the date, it's more of an assurance device to make sure I have the right date and the assurance is always with me when I need it, and I am not always in front of a computer.

If we can all live with all that, we should give the date display some approval.

LIKE
---


CHRK33 - of those options i like the milgauss.

Cheers Stitchy, but you don't sleep much! Too much time on SF!

 

[RogerP]

Thanks to everyone who suggested some great wedding thank you gifts for my dad. I really appreciate everyone's thoughtfulness.

So I narrowed down my choices and they are at pretty different price points, so I wanted to get folks' thoughts before I make the final call.

1) Tudor Black Bay on a strap for $3300. My cousin would be bringing this from Greece for me and if my dad didn't like it, he would be stuck. I tried it on a year ago and liked it but wasn't in love.

2) IWC Mark XVII on a strap for $4K from our usual AD. Option to return it if he wasn't a fan -- I wouldn't mind if he did as I want him to love it. Late entry, but I always liked this watch. I find the 3 date window interesting and attractive, even though I know it is useless. Ha.

3) And if I wanted to go crazy and splurge and my dad deserves it for everything he has done for me. Either an Rolex Explorer II (white dial) or Milgauss (green crystal) for $7K. He is a Rolex guy and would like them I think. And both are sufficiently idiosyncratic, which I am a fan of.

I am leaning towards the IWC on the strap largely because of the price differential. It also is not like anything else my dad has and he already has a couple Rolexes (the last version of the yachtmaster and a gold and steel submariner). We own a restaurant and it seems like something could take some abuse in the kitchen and the like. That being said the Rolexes are wearing me down.

Sorry for the long winded stream of consciousness post but if you guys have any immediate reactions, would love to hear them. Thanks.

1) The Black Bay is polarizing - some love the striking colour combinations (me) - others definitely don't dig it at all. If you don't know where your Dad stands, I'd pass on that one.

2) A safe choice and a lovely pilots watch. I don't find that IWC's ETA / Sellita-powered watches present a compelling value equation (i.e., you can get comparable aesthetics and overall quality for a good deal less elsewhere). Then again, it's a gift, so value for money isn't likely going to impact how well it is received.

3) He's a Rolex man. He owns several for a reason - he likes the brand and likes the product. If you can swing it, this would be the way to go.

 

[no frills]

Thanks to everyone who suggested some great wedding thank you gifts for my dad. I really appreciate everyone's thoughtfulness.

So I narrowed down my choices and they are at pretty different price points, so I wanted to get folks' thoughts before I make the final call.

1) Tudor Black Bay on a strap for $3300. My cousin would be bringing this from Greece for me and if my dad didn't like it, he would be stuck. I tried it on a year ago and liked it but wasn't in love.

2) IWC Mark XVII on a strap for $4K from our usual AD. Option to return it if he wasn't a fan -- I wouldn't mind if he did as I want him to love it. Late entry, but I always liked this watch. I find the 3 date window interesting and attractive, even though I know it is useless. Ha.

3) And if I wanted to go crazy and splurge and my dad deserves it for everything he has done for me. Either an Rolex Explorer II (white dial) or Milgauss (green crystal) for $7K. He is a Rolex guy and would like them I think. And both are sufficiently idiosyncratic, which I am a fan of.

I am leaning towards the IWC on the strap largely because of the price differential. It also is not like anything else my dad has and he already has a couple Rolexes (the last version of the yachtmaster and a gold and steel submariner). We own a restaurant and it seems like something could take some abuse in the kitchen and the like. That being said the Rolexes are wearing me down.

Sorry for the long winded stream of consciousness post but if you guys have any immediate reactions, would love to hear them. Thanks.

Milgauss gets my vote!

 

[dddrees]

The Milgauss gets my vote as well.