The Watch Appreciation Thread - Part two (Rolex, Patek Philippe, Audemars Piguet, Jaeger LeCoultre,

[Dino944]

Seem to be a common complaint, even to my friend who picked this up last week.

They should've balanced it with the crowns at 2 & 4 o'clock... or do a square date pusher but I suppose that will affect water resistance.

Yes, crowns at 2 and 4 would have worked at least to my eyes. They could even have done the more classic style small depressed button, which requires a stylus to press. I think a square button might only have affected water resistance if someone accidentally depressed it underwater. The Patek Nautilus Chronograph even with angled pushers, which are not screw down is still water resistant to 120m. With Rolex, for example, I read many years ago that the screw down pushers on Daytonas have nothing to do with water resistance. They put them on Daytonas to keep newbie idiot owners from either accidentally, or intentionally (and stupidly) pressing the chronograph buttons while underwater. I believe at one point in the late 60's early 70's some people were bringing Daytonas back to dealers/service centers after activating the pushers underwater. After adding screw down pushers, dealers could then tell clients, make sure these are screwed down to the case before wearing in water.

 

[Newcomer]

This may, or may not, be a hot take: in my view, the VC Overseas - with certain limited exceptions - kind of sucks.

To me, it feels exceptionally derivative, it has way too many Maltese crosses, and is too shiny. Further, unlike the AP 16202 or the Patek 5711, it does not have the thinness. Finally, I didn't used to mind it as much, but the Cory Richards / Everest version made the regular edition feel so unremarkable.

 

[mebiuspower]

I thought people want more Maltese crosses...

 

[Scuppers]

This may, or may not, be a hot take: in my view, the VC Overseas - with certain limited exceptions - kind of sucks.

To me, it feels exceptionally derivative, it has way too many Maltese crosses, and is too shiny. Further, unlike the AP 16202 or the Patek 5711, it does not have the thinness. Finally, I didn't used to mind it as much, but the Cory Richards / Everest version made the regular edition feel so unremarkable.

Agree.

 

[Dino944]

This may, or may not, be a hot take: in my view, the VC Overseas - with certain limited exceptions - kind of sucks.

To me, it feels exceptionally derivative, it has way too many Maltese crosses, and is too shiny. Further, unlike the AP 16202 or the Patek 5711, it does not have the thinness. Finally, I didn't used to mind it as much, but the Cory Richards / Everest version made the regular edition feel so unremarkable.

Agreed. For me the Overseas just never quite hit the mark, and it always felt like it took a back seat to the RO and the Nautilus. I can remember trying on the 1st generation Overseas, which was their first decent attempt at a sports watch since the 222 (I don't count the hideous 333 or the Phidias), but thinking it just wasn't the same level of quality or as appealing to my eyes as a RO or Nautilus. When I started looking seriously for a belated 40th birthday present, I looked at the 2nd generation, Overseas, the 15202, 15300, 15400, the Aquanaut, and Nautilus. The 2nd generation Overseas, was IMHO, the worst version, it needlessly grew to 42mm (without any new developments in terms movements or movement sizes), had clunky hour markers, clumsy hands, annoying different sized subdials on chronographs, a really garish bracelet, and the only real tie to their sports watch history was the bezel. It also just didn't have the workmanship or really interesting nuances that one finds if you look closely at the cases of the RO or Nautilus. I found the Aquanaut too derivative of the Nautilus and not my taste, and I've always liked the look of the RO a little more than the Nautilus, so my choice was easy. Personally, I think the current/3rd generation of Overseas is a big improvement over the 2nd generation, but personally, I'd rather have a 222 - especially if VC ever made one in white metal with a dark dial.

 

[Vocans]

This may, or may not, be a hot take: in my view, the VC Overseas - with certain limited exceptions - kind of sucks.

To me, it feels exceptionally derivative, it has way too many Maltese crosses, and is too shiny. Further, unlike the AP 16202 or the Patek 5711, it does not have the thinness. Finally, I didn't used to mind it as much, but the Cory Richards / Everest version made the regular edition feel so unremarkable.

My biggest problem is the size, they all seem like they're just too big for an integrated sports watch. But then again I feel the same way about the 41mm Royal Oaks.

 

[Dino944]

My biggest problem is the size, they all seem like they're just too big for an integrated sports watch. But then again I feel the same way about the 41mm Royal Oaks.

For the hell of it, you should try on if possible at some point a 39mm RO, especially a 15202 or its replacement. The Jumbo/Extra Thin ROs fit differently than their 41mm siblings or even their thicker siblings like the 15300.

 

[Vocans]

For the hell of it, you should try on if possible at some point a 39mm RO, especially a 15202 or its replacement. The Jumbo/Extra Thin ROs fit differently than their 41mm siblings or even their thicker siblings like the 15300.

Jumbo is actually the only current size I haven't tried on just yet. The 37mm worked fairly well and I actually liked the 38mm chrono a fair bit

 

[mak1277]

This may, or may not, be a hot take: in my view, the VC Overseas - with certain limited exceptions - kind of sucks.

To me, it feels exceptionally derivative, it has way too many Maltese crosses, and is too shiny. Further, unlike the AP 16202 or the Patek 5711, it does not have the thinness. Finally, I didn't used to mind it as much, but the Cory Richards / Everest version made the regular edition feel so unremarkable.

That Everest version is so good

 

[Dino944]

Jumbo is actually the only current size I haven't tried on just yet. The 37mm worked fairly well and I actually liked the 38mm chrono a fair bit

View attachment 1825612

The 38mm chrono looks good on you. The Jumbo fits differently because although 1 mm larger in diameter, the case and the bracelet links are thinner (causing the bracelet to seem a little less rigid and drape more around the wrist) than those of the other RO models.

 

[l1mab3an]

In the Overseas pricerange I do prefer the Historique American but obviously thats just so apples to oranges.

This may, or may not, be a hot take: in my view, the VC Overseas - with certain limited exceptions - kind of sucks.

To me, it feels exceptionally derivative, it has way too many Maltese crosses, and is too shiny. Further, unlike the AP 16202 or the Patek 5711, it does not have the thinness. Finally, I didn't used to mind it as much, but the Cory Richards / Everest version made the regular edition feel so unremarkable.

I agree, and then I see photos like this and just dig it ..

 

[mebiuspower]

The dial is definitely very attractive and it does have a unique case style which is recognizable at a distance...

 

[mossrockss]

just noticed Omega now lists case thickness on their watch pages. e.g. https://www.omegawatches.com/watch-...r-co-axial-chronometer-38-5-mm-23110392103002

 

[Clouseau]

グーグル翻訳も使えます

翻訳はDeepLの方がいいですよ

 

[chocomallo]

翻訳はDeepLの方がいいですよ

Everyone bitches that 3 ATM isn’t enough, but I saw a guy at the beach today wearing a Tank on a leather strap. Guess he didn’t get the message.

And DeepL for the win. Google is atrocious between Japanese and English.