or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › The Watch Appreciation Thread - Part two (Rolex, Patek Philippe, Audemars Piguet, Jaeger LeCoultre, Baume & Mercier and more)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Watch Appreciation Thread - Part two (Rolex, Patek Philippe, Audemars Piguet, Jaeger LeCoultre, Baume & Mercier and more) - Page 54

post #796 of 3970
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheWraith View Post


Yes indeed, all dial watches like the 39mm Explorer do wear large, so I think slightly smaller at 38mm would do a world of good. It's surprising how much of a difference just 1mm can make, but it can. Apart from the size (I'd still get the new 39mm version if I could, though, but I would prefer it at 38mm), the new Explorer looks just about perfect to me in every other way.

Thanks for the video links, @RFX45.

 

 

I love the size of the 39mm Explorer.  Does probably wear more like a 40 but relatively thin so it works well on the wrist.

 

On a related note, always a little weary of re-sizing.  I agree it can make a huge difference, but sometimes not in a good way - even 1mm might throw off the balance of dial/watch.  E.g. Daydate 40 vs Daydate II

post #797 of 3970
1mm size difference can be a good or bad thing depending on your own wrist size and preferences, that's for sure. For my own slimmer wrist, I'd prefer 38mm to 39mm, but 39mm is still good.
post #798 of 3970

So knowing very little about Daytonas, I'm curious as to what Daytona this is.  I'm assuming it's vintage:

 

https://www.instagram.com/p/BDA2cGhqytD/

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by mimo View Post
 

 

But how about a 36mm Black Bay?  A real sleeper perhaps, if the price is right.

 

 

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)

 

 

 

It doesn't look bad, but it also looks rather "naked" to me.  Seems small for a dive watch and it looks like the bezel is missing (as it is indeed missing).  I absolutely love it though because it gives me hope for a 36mm Ranger.  

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by bkotsko View Post
 

The sleeper for me is the new Black Bay black (not the PVD version) at 41mm with the in house movement and the riveted bracelet and fully drilled springbar holes.

 

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)

 

 

Those subtle differences made it a winner for me and on the next shortlist.

 

It seems to me though that the Black Bay Black is the most popular Black Bay and therefore isn't a sleeper.  Good points you made about it though.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by firenze_rob View Post

I do prefer the Tudor rose logo over the crest.

 

Absolutely, and I can't understand the decision to put the shield on the Black Bay Bronze.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by iLuveketchup View Post

Wish they offered a 36mm Explorer (again) with no applied indices. The 36mm Black Bay is my pick of the bunch.

 

I would love a 36mm Explorer, but with the same face, etc as the 1016.  If only Rolex would do a tribute watch like that... without the rehaut of course.

post #799 of 3970
Quote:
Originally Posted by mimo View Post


I'll let someone else dissect the new Monza!  Not sure TWAT will love it (why so big, and so loud?), but I'm pretty sure they'll sell a few.  It's the bright red Mustang GT of wristwatches.

I'm feeling this Monza. Any pricing info? Thanks!
post #800 of 3970
Quote:
Originally Posted by forex View Post

I don't understand why Rolex released a new version of Explorer I. I have it and like it, it could be my one watch (possibly) and I keep staring at the new version but not noticing significant changes, most releases are similar (read DJ41, how is it different from DJII? Different clasp and thinner case?).[...]
Also new 3235 movement, less-bloated bezel (likely identical to the Day-Date 40's), new Jubilee bracelet (DJII was Oyster-only), and much better-looking lugs. I'm not thrilled that they kept it at a nominal 41 mm, but I'll take a caliper to it once they arrive in Norway and see what the actual dimensions are; I wouldn't be surprised if they're the same as the DD40's. It certainly looks more refined than the Datejust II.

The Explorer keeps the 214270 reference number, so I'm not sure I'd call it a new version. There's plenty of precedent for a minor change during a model's production run; they've done it with the 116520 Daytona (fatter hands), 116000 OP (ditto), and 14270 Explorer ("blackout" dial), to name but a few. Not to mention the transition from matte to WG/glossy dials in the '80s on the 5513, 16660, 16750 and 16800.

The Air-King, on the other hand... facepalm.gif

Three words: Parts. Bin. Special.

Specifically, it appears to be the Milgauss case/bezel/bracelet (though it could be DJ II — the caliper will soon tell) and pre-2016 Explorer dial blanks, just with some different dial printing and a bit of green paint on the seconds hand (I bet the hands are the same as the new Explorer's, so at least there's one non-old-stock component). Just to get rid of any doubt that it's randomly assembled from leftover components, it even has the older non-Paraflex 3131 movement. Lame-o.


Edit: No need to wait for confirmation; it's a Milgauss case. They mention its magnetic shielding for the movement in the specifications.
Edited by Belligero - 3/17/16 at 3:46am
post #801 of 3970
The Explorer and white dial Daytona both look fantastic, though (par for the course for Rolex on most models recently) the Daytona is too busy between the bezel and dial. The thing that kept me away from that model in the past is the lack of contrast, you simply could not read the time on the current models quickly (black and white dials, at least). That could still be the case with the black, looks like the white is now more contrast and that helps a lot.

One of those will be hard to resist as my next watch.
post #802 of 3970
Quote:
Originally Posted by Belligero View Post


The Air-King, on the other hand... facepalm.gif

Three words: Parts. Bin. Special.

Looks like a train wreck. Awful.
post #803 of 3970
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigbadbuff View Post

Looks like a train wreck. Awful.

like an ugly girl who's sloppy drunk!
post #804 of 3970
Quote:
Originally Posted by tigerpac View Post

I knew buying a Daytona less 2 months ago would spur the ceramic bezel!! censored.gif

And they updated the Explorer I a bit, the other model I bought less than 2 years ago... Rolex why do you hate me??
Nothing wrong with the steel bezel. I don't think the ceramic is better, just different, and its bold/high-contrast look seems less versatile. In my opinion, they both look pretty sweet:


image credit: watchanish

Besides, now your Daytona is OG! cool.gif
Quote:
Originally Posted by SteveH35 View Post

As Basel comes around, I will post here my biggest secret to watch collecting: avoid recency bias. These things are made to last forever. There's no reason that the newer model is necessarily better than the older model. In the long run, it will all even out. If you want to find bargains, all you have to do is be patient or go back to older pieces. That being said, I like the new Daytona wink.gif
Well put. Sure, it's cool to see the new stuff, but decent mechanical watches really ought be an area which isn't so affected by neomania.

In fact, one could argue that everything new sucks:

"What has happened in the past ten to twenty years is that manufacturers of consumer products have learned that:

Consumers are easily misled and will buy based on features that have numeric specifications attached to them, since they lack the skills and experience to appreciate more subtle, but more fundamental, quality differences."

Mind you, the watch industry isn't entirely immune; it's a lot easier to market gee-whiz specs than it is to communicate how something is made without cutting corners.
smile.gif
post #805 of 3970
Quote:
Originally Posted by Belligero View Post

Nothing wrong with the steel bezel. I don't think the ceramic is better, just different, and its bold/high-contrast look seems less versatile. In my opinion, they both look pretty sweet:

+1 

 

I like the looks of both.  However, even with a 116520 (or its predecessor) not being dress watches, the steel bezel helped dress them up enough that I could comfortably wear them with a suit for work.   The new ceramic bezel Daytona crosses the line into pure sports watch territory, and at least for my line of work, I couldn't wear it with a suit. 

post #806 of 3970
Thread Starter 

Interesting point.  I have to say that on cool reflection, I think the steel bezeled versions are still better looking.  Maybe it's because there is so much ceramic around from different makers. The black on black one looks particularly un-Rolex now.  Not that either of the new versions is ugly or anything.  I'll say it straight: the non-ceramic models look more classy imho.

 

Having said that, I laughed at the Playtona when it came out.  Then I saw it for real and literally dreamed about it.  Rolex is a powerful demon indeed.

post #807 of 3970
Quote:
Originally Posted by Belligero View Post


Nothing wrong with the steel bezel. I don't think the ceramic is better, just different, and its bold/high-contrast look seems less versatile. In my opinion, they both look pretty sweet:
 

 

Agree with this, though it's probably a bit too bold for me. Now if they went back to a brushed bracelet, then maybe the aesthetic would work better for me personally. In the update, I like the black dial version better because I think it hides the "in your face-ness" (if that's a thing) of the new bezel. I prefer the white dial version of the previous model for the reason Dino listed, and I prefer the previous generation model as a whole in general. Hooray for non-ceramic bezels.

post #808 of 3970

Agree with Dino about the higher contrast of the ceramic bezel taking the new Daytonas in a sportier direction. The watch definitely "pops" more -- whether you like that is going to be down to personal taste. To me, it actually helps counterbalance the "bling" of the polished center links, as these are no longer reinforced by a silver bezel and silver chapter rings.

post #809 of 3970
Quote:
Originally Posted by Omega Male View Post

Agree with Dino about the higher contrast of the ceramic bezel taking the new Daytonas in a sportier direction. The watch definitely "pops" more -- whether you like that is going to be down to personal taste. To me, it actually helps counterbalance the "bling" of the polished center links, as these are no longer reinforced by a silver bezel and silver chapter rings.

Exactly this. And the reason why it's the first Daytona I've been tempted by.
post #810 of 3970
To paraphrase something from another non-watch enthusiast forum:

Please sell me all of your old unwanted Daytonas so that you can go buy the new ones. lol8[1].gif
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › The Watch Appreciation Thread - Part two (Rolex, Patek Philippe, Audemars Piguet, Jaeger LeCoultre, Baume & Mercier and more)