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

[Viral]

It’s Tuesday, right?

 

[Dino944]

Messner used what he used because back then there were no better alternatives. Nowadays climbers use much better and more durable clothes and gear, including watches.

I need a watch for the gym, street workout, swimming and diving, climbing, hiking etc. I use G shock for that. No idea how Datejust or any PP could be considered a real alternative. On the other hand G shock would look ridiculous with e.g polo shirt and creased chinos or sport jacket, button down shirt and wool trousers. Probably a dress watch would look OK and still 2 watches would be enough, but sports watch for sports and casual wear, everyday watch for „dressy casual” and a dress watch seems more logical to me.

I think it part of the issue is sports watches have become so costly or viewed as so precious that people rarely wear them for their intended use. Don't get me wrong, I know a few guys here in the past who spoke of wearing Subs or Sea-Dwellers for snorkeling and diving, but most don't. When I got my first good watch, a Rolex 16750 GMT, brand new from an AD, I did everything with it. I wore it for swimming, golfing, tennis, shooting, at batting cages and subjected it to all sorts of punishment in the 10 years I had that watch. My 16570 Ex2 has been a bit more babied but still it has gone swimming, shooting, working out, playing raquetball etc. Some of my watch friends even joke about people posting on the internet, questions like, "Is it safe to wear a Submariner in the swimming pool?" So now they post photos of them with desserts and send them in group chats, with questions like, "Is it safe to wear a Sea-Dweller while eating creme brulee? Or is it safe to wearing an Explorer while getting fitted for a pair of bespoke shoes?"

I always struggle with a 3 watch collection (yes a first world problem), because I feel like I need a 4th watch that could fall into any category, because hey why not? However, for me it's my Tank LC XL for dress (and sometimes casual), a Royal Oak for luxury sports watch when I don't need a true dress watch but GMT/Sub/Explorer II might seem too casual, and a GMT II for very casual activities.

 

[Texasmade]

It’s Tuesday, right?

You know it!

 

[Wild Strawberry Rabbit]

@Dino944 Yeah, Sub can easily work as a real sports/tool watch. However it was stated by someone else that Sub is redundant as it could be easily replaced by Datejust, which I don’t think is true.

 

[Idesofmarch17]

 

[va230815]

No speedy unfortunately. Will have to suffice with the obligatory douche photo

 

[kongmw]

Master of the waiting-for-the-subway-with-chinese-takeout shot!

 

[symphvaria]

I think it part of the issue is sports watches have become so costly or viewed as so precious that people rarely wear them for their intended use. Don't get me wrong, I know a few guys here in the past who spoke of wearing Subs or Sea-Dwellers for snorkeling and diving, but most don't. When I got my first good watch, a Rolex 16750 GMT, brand new from an AD, I did everything with it. I wore it for swimming, golfing, tennis, shooting, at batting cages and subjected it to all sorts of punishment in the 10 years I had that watch. My 16570 Ex2 has been a bit more babied but still it has gone swimming, shooting, working out, playing raquetball etc. Some of my watch friends even joke about people posting on the internet, questions like, "Is it safe to wear a Submariner in the swimming pool?" So now they post photos of them with desserts and send them in group chats, with questions like, "Is it safe to wear a Sea-Dweller while eating creme brulee? Or is it safe to wearing an Explorer while getting fitted for a pair of bespoke shoes?"

This is my opinion on the “but I can’t use a Datejust at the gym!” argument as well. I really see absolutely nothing with using steel sports watches for, well, sports. The idea of these things becoming luxury commodities to be babied lest they lose resale value is a very recent development.

 

[classicalthunde]

The idea of these things becoming luxury commodities to be babied lest they lose resale value is a very recent development.

on the other hand, Rolex watches have also been synonymous with luxury for the better part of a half a century

 

[aristoi bcn]

I inherited this Omega when grandpa passed away around 10 years ago. I had it restored some years ago but have no clue which model it is. Does someone here know it?

 

[symphvaria]

on the other hand, Rolex watches have also been synonymous with luxury for the better part of a half a century

This is true, but only to the extent that the 70s were half a century ago. The decade prior they were certainly tools and nothing more, and even in the era of neo-vintage luxury oriented Rolex, the obsession with retail value and babying watches is certainly no older than a decade or two at most. My father most certainly did not have resale value in mind when he wore his 5 digit reference Datejust every single day no matter the occasion, and it shows.

 

[Kappelan]

I always struggle with a 3 watch collection (yes a first world problem), because I feel like I need a 4th watch that could fall into any category, because hey why not? However, for me it's my Tank LC XL for dress (and sometimes casual), a Royal Oak for luxury sports watch when I don't need a true dress watch but GMT/Sub/Explorer II might seem too casual, and a GMT II for very casual activities.

I also probably would need a 4th watch for activities like skiing, skating, spending time with kids on lakes in summer. Something not too expensive and quartz. G-Shock or Apple Watch will do but in my case it would be one of my Aquaracers.

 

[Dino944]

This is true, but only to the extent that the 70s were half a century ago. The decade prior they were certainly tools and nothing more, and even in the era of neo-vintage luxury oriented Rolex, the obsession with retail value and babying watches is certainly no older than a decade or two at most. My father most certainly did not have resale value in mind when he wore his 5 digit reference Datejust every single day no matter the occasion, and it shows.

Agreed, they were considered luxury items, but people wore their watches and didn't baby them, because you couldn't buy and flip a Rolex (other than a steel Daytona starting in the 90s) to make a profit. Dealers had showcases loaded with them. All that has changed, and so did the way people use them (or the way they don't use them - just putting them in safes).

 

[Neville Southall]

Dope.

 

[TheFoo]

Not generally an Overseas fan, but the new panda variation is pure wow. Love the contrasting seconds ring, which is missing from the prior reverse panda version of the watch. Also, at $32K, a great deal! Only nit to pick is the date window, but I can live with it. I’m glad they dressed it up with a frame, at least.