The Watch Appreciation Thread - Page 664

Originally Posted by mafoofan 

In my opinion, the new Submariner is the most successful of Rolex's recent redesigns. The wider lugs are in keeping with the rugged, sporty nature of the watch, and the bracelet is a thousand times improved.
I'm glad to see JLC is tweaking the Master Control to have a narrower bezel. Honestly, I have a hard time understanding the few comments earlier in preference for the beefier bezel. The Master Control always had a narrower bezel, up until the most recent redesign four or five years ago. The thicker bezel was anomalous relative to the model's history and clearly not liked very well. In my opinion, the thinner bezel restores a lot of elegance to the watch that was previously lost.
I think IWC has lost it. Well, maybe they're selling a lot more watches, but only at the expense of anything I personally found interesting about the brand. The new Pilot watches are pastiches: designed to be reminiscent of flight instruments (hence the silly date display) rather than function as the real flight instruments they once were. The standard Pilot watch hasn't looked good since the Mark XV.

Originally Posted by mafoofan 

In my opinion, the new Submariner is the most successful of Rolex's recent redesigns. The wider lugs are in keeping with the rugged, sporty nature of the watch, and the bracelet is a thousand times improved.
I'm glad to see JLC is tweaking the Master Control to have a narrower bezel. Honestly, I have a hard time understanding the few comments earlier in preference for the beefier bezel. The Master Control always had a narrower bezel, up until the most recent redesign four or five years ago. The thicker bezel was anomalous relative to the model's history and clearly not liked very well. In my opinion, the thinner bezel restores a lot of elegance to the watch that was previously lost.
I think IWC has lost it. Well, maybe they're selling a lot more watches, but only at the expense of anything I personally found interesting about the brand. The new Pilot watches are pastiches: designed to be reminiscent of flight instruments (hence the silly date display) rather than function as the real flight instruments they once were. The standard Pilot watch hasn't looked good since the Mark XV.

Originally Posted by Cylon 

Don't worry Lonneker, I understood your post completely. It was quite brilliant. I only quoted you to repost the atrocious timepiece...too bad it didn't reappear

My comments were completely directed at ThatGuy, who is quite literally that guy.

Sorry for the misunderstanding friend!

Originally Posted by Kid Nickels 

ya I think I know what you mean... and for the record I don't like the watch he pictured either. But, I do like some of their other offerings in a similar style. More like these from the 1945 Collection ... Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)

Originally Posted by Kid Nickels 

I was thinking that as well... oh the irony! Thx Cylon

Originally Posted by Cylon 

I wouldn't crap all over GP for the sake of one troll.
GP has some amazing pieces...................cept for the lugs

Originally Posted by Newcomer 

Foo--although I agree with you on your observations regarding IWC and Rolex, but I did want to comment on the JLC statement. I was just wondering what you meant by "not understanding the few comments." Do you mean that in regards to not understanding where I am coming from, or do you mean that in not understanding why I would think that way? I guess I have an answer to both. First, I agree with you that the thinner bezel definitely does restore a lot of elegance to the watch, and the changes do bring it more in line with its predecessor, the Master Grande Taille.
I will first address my position, I guess. When the Master Control drew me in, I didn't exactly understand why. In essence, it is just a typical 3-handed watch with a date display. It was only when I saw the new one that I realized why I love the original iteration of the Master Control so much. Really, it all comes down to the Bezel. There is something about the incongruity of the size of bezel in comparison with the numbers that makes me appreciate the Master Control so much. In being a little bit "off," there is a certain charm that comes with the watch. But I would not characterize it as something that is negative, as it has always drawn me in. It is something that effectively causes me give it a double take. I get the same feeling when I see perhaps my favorite JLC, the Reserve de Marche [which I actually prefer in its newer form]. Just looking at the Reserve de Marche, there is something off. The dials are asymmetrical but at the same time so balanced. I feel like this dichotomy of balance and incongruity is very interesting, as well as being very difficult to describe. Here is a simple analogy. You have a co-worker, and you notice that she is a pretty girl. Over time, however, you are drawn in by just one of her features, perhaps her freckles. Objectively speaking, freckles are often not associated with "beauty." However, they add a certain innocence, or some other benefit, that the girl would not have if she did not have freckles. Etc. I am sure you get the point. Sometimes, a design comes together in such a way that it works despite the fact that certain elements are, on paper, less than ideal. I'm a big admirer of unconventional beauty myself, and I do tend succumb quite easily to the charms of the "imperfect." I love the slightly too heavy bezel. I love the ever so slightly too small numerals, and the way their smallness is accentuated by the wide bezel.
Now, why would I like something that is a bit off? I find the Master Control a very versatile watch. Like you said, it is not as elegant as it could have been. Thus, I find myself much more comfortable dressing the watch down. I have worn it with jeans and a polo a few times, as well as with a suit. I love that it has a somewhat casual element that, in my opinion, marries so well into the formal elements. And in regards to it not being liked very well... how do you figure that? From what I have heard, it has sold extremely well.
If I wanted a perfectly proportioned three-hander with date, there is a bona fide bevy to choose from. I like that mine is a little different.

Originally Posted by Warren G. 

I agree the bracelet is a lot better. long overdue....
I understand.... FWIW, the cyclops is really easy to take off and put back on.
The newer Sub cyclops have an AR coating now. So you can actually read the date now. With the older version, sometime the date is just too blurry or impossible to read from a hand distance (defeat the main purpose, lol I know right)

Originally Posted by ruzzi 

Any SF'ers experienced at buying watches from second hand dealers online?
I live in Australia and I'm considering buying a mint IWC Mark XV from a second hand dealer in Singapore that's listed it on Timezone.
However, I've never bought a good watch online, let alone bought a good watch and this is my first 'serious' watch purchase. I saved for the last few months for the watch so I don't want to botch it!
If anyone could help me out, tips, guidance etc, please PM me - would be greatly appreciated!

Originally Posted by Hayward 

It seems like all the watch marques have gone insane. Too Big, Too Busy. Pretty happy with my Sinn, Seiko and Orient watches. Even some of JLC's more tasteful designs are just too big now.

I keep telling myself I should have a more expensive CBD watch but I find this one close to ideal: simple, easy to read, in-house movement, all the right homage styling cues but not insane.

Originally Posted by Hayward 

It seems like all the watch marques have gone insane. Too Big, Too Busy. Pretty happy with my Sinn, Seiko and Orient watches. Even some of JLC's more tasteful designs are just too big now.

I keep telling myself I should have a more expensive CBD watch but I find this one close to ideal: simple, easy to read, in-house movement, all the right homage styling cues but not insane.

Originally Posted by div25sec9 

I'm considering the MC myself; as an owner, what are the pro's and con's?

Originally Posted by Warren G. 

Hehe that isn't my wrist shot. I stole that picture from TZ. I always like the RDM, but the first one measuring at 37mm, it was really underwhelming in person. I think 39mm is the perfect size for that watch. I'm also a huge fan of the Reverso. But its a watch everybody should try on before pulling the trigger. As they vary a lot in thickness in addition to the case size which makes them wear differently.
Anyway guys, I just pull the trigger on a Sub-C. I know most people are against the new lugs. But I can live with it... I'm stoked! It should be here on Tuesday. Borrow pic from the seller. Got a few more bucks left over, So I'll have a good start for my next watch....

Originally Posted by Hayward 

It seems like all the watch marques have gone insane. Too Big, Too Busy. [/URL]

Originally Posted by Dino944 


Here is one of my dress watches, purchased new in 2002.  I will probably wear this one over the weekend.

Originally Posted by Kappelan 

I don't really like modern trend in watch industry, especially about the sizes. Sometimes it's just ridiculous. That's why usually I prefer the vintage.
I like your Orient Star.
That's pretty nice dress watches.