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

[Belligero]

Amen, brother. The Datograph is another example of a chronograph with a date function done right, as it's a well-integrated feature rather than an awkwardly-placed afterthought.

However, the VC does speak to me. Unfortunately, it's saying:

 

[wurger]

VC should have kept its big date design, right in the middle.

 

[Viral]

I would have to agree.

Wow..........2 major purchases in a short period if time - congrats! Can you provide some details of each watch?

For the Skydweller, did you go with SS or PM or mixed? I'm partial to the SS with blue face.

In regards to the Santos, which size did you go with?

 

[Dino944]

^They do look nice, but I really don't get this idea of having to squeeze a date window into a three-dial chronograph. Unfortunately, though, you see it all too often nowadays on newer chronograph models.

The strange thing, though, is that I've never, ever heard anyone talk about classic chronographs such as the Speedmaster or Daytona and say, "Y'know, it's a nice watch, but I won't buy it because it doesn't have a date window..."

Where did this insistence on adding a date function come from? It seems to be the answer to a question that no-one asked.

Edited to add:

I don't mind chronographs with dates when they have a different subdial layout of the subdials at 12, 9, and 6 o'clock, and the date (and even a day) over in the 3 o'clock position, as that looks much more balanced to me. I've seen various models of Sinn, IWC, Omega automatic chronos and even a Seiko or two with that arrangement and it looks quite nice.

However, having the subdials at 3, 6, and 9 o'clock and then squeezing a date window in at 4 o'clock or even at 6 o'clock just seems cramped, unbalanced and inelegant.

The practice of putting a date on chronographs often between the 4 & 5 or even at the 6 position on a compax chronograph layout is actually something that has been going on for quite a while. Just look at old images of Zenith El Primero chronographs, the old Ebel 1911 Chronograph, AP's Royal Oak Chronograph (which has been around for 20 years), or Blancpain, Breguet and Cartier's old Pasha chronographs which put the date at 6 (cutting into the subdial).

Regarding Daytonas, back in 1990s, I can say that there were a lot of posts on TZ and other dedicated watch forums where people would post things such as "Why won't Rolex give us a date on a Daytona. We already know that it could have a date as the base movement is a Zenith El Primero, but Rolex won't give us one." Then there were always several posts by people saying until it has a date they won't get one. Interestingly that sentiment seems to have died off in the Rolex world. Not sure if people finally realized Rolex is never going to do it and gave up, or if a new generation of buyers now appreciate that its a design decision and historically there have never been dates on Daytonas and there shouldn't be one now.

I do think its interesting that VC has moved from having a date at the 12 position, and placed it where AP placed theirs. Although, I think VC's version would be a bit less distracting if they followed AP's lead, as in recent years AP made the date window the same color as the dial. That being said, the Overseas chronograph (and most other chronographs) would definitely be a better looking watch if they nixed the date. I guess like many other companies putting date windows on watches, VC believes the watch will appeal to a broader audience if it has a date.

 

[Andy57]

Wow..........2 major purchases in a short period if time - congrats! Can you provide some details of each watch?

For the Skydweller, did you go with SS or PM or mixed? I'm partial to the SS with blue face.

In regards to the Santos, which size did you go with?

The Skydweller is stainless steel with a white gold bezel and a white dial. I went with the large Santos. I wanted to like to medium size, without the date window, but it was just too small on my wrist.

 

[Thin White Duke]

Good post Dino.
I’m an avowed hater of dates around the 4 o clock position. For some reason it just ruins the aesthetic for me. The BP Fifty Fathoms is otherwise a great looking watch but I can’t abide the date position.
Last year I got the Heuer Autavia which has the date position cut into the six o clock sub dial. I think this is probably the best way around this conundrum and I’m fine with it, except the window is so small if the date is double figures it’s not so easy for my ailing eyes to read. I remember being slightly puzzled by some howls of dissent online from purists when this function was revealed. I suspect that you’re right and this was an attempt to appeal to a wider market but some of the purists weren’t best pleased. Can’t please all the people all the time.
As for the Daytona, my grail watch, I hope to find out very soon if I miss having a date on a chrono. My intent is for this to be a casual clothes / weekend watch so I hope I’m not dating many signatures or concerning myself much over what day it is when I wear it.

 

[Viral]

if absolutely necessary, a date at the 3 'o clock position is the only way to go

 

[Texasmade]

I've always preferred chronos with no date on do like the PP Nautilus 5990 and make it a subdial instead of a window. Subdial won't work for a 3 subdial chrono but works on the Nautilus.

 

[Dino944]

Good post Dino.
I’m an avowed hater of dates around the 4 o clock position. For some reason it just ruins the aesthetic for me. The BP Fifty Fathoms is otherwise a great looking watch but I can’t abide the date position.
Last year I got the Heuer Autavia which has the date position cut into the six o clock sub dial. I think this is probably the best way around this conundrum and I’m fine with it, except the window is so small if the date is double figures it’s not so easy for my ailing eyes to read. I remember being slightly puzzled by some howls of dissent online from purists when this function was revealed. I suspect that you’re right and this was an attempt to appeal to a wider market but some of the purists weren’t best pleased. Can’t please all the people all the time.
As for the Daytona, my grail watch, I hope to find out very soon if I miss having a date on a chrono. My intent is for this to be a casual clothes / weekend watch so I hope I’m not dating many signatures or concerning myself much over what day it is when I wear it.

Thanks Duke. For me the date window really depends on the watch. I prefer dress watches that don't have one at all. On chronograph's its definitely depends on the dial. With a 6,9, and 12 subdial design, like on the old IWC 3706 & 3713...having the date at 3 works, maybe because so many watches have a date at 3 that we're more accustomed to it. However, most chronographs which have a date at 3 use a Val 7750 and I've just never truly loved its movement. I have one watch with a date at 6, a Cartier Pasha chronograph, which does cut into the subdial (although thankfully, that's just the dial measuring continuous seconds). I really like the watch, but I might have liked the date window more if it were between 4 and 5 as on current APs. Although, at least Cartier got it right and made the date wheel the same color as the dial.

As for Daytonas, or my dress watches (none of which have a date), once I've worn them for a day or so I get used to not having a date on the dial. It's really not a big deal since I have a calendar in my office, and the date also is on my computer monitor and iPhone.

While the new Santos is not a chronograph, it's a piece where on the large model I might have preferred them to put the date at 3, where it was on the old medium size Santos Galbee. I may even have preferred it between the 4 and 5 as on the old Santos Galbee XL (which is actually smaller than the new medium size Santos). For some reason I find the date at 6 sort of odd...although Cartier has used this position for the date on some Pasha Chronographs, Tank Francaises and Tank Americaines. Oh well, I suppose being so picky about details is often what helps us narrow our choices for potential purchases.

 

[dan'l]

Speaking of date windows, are there any modern Rolex models in gold without the cyclops? I can only think of the Daytona.

Lately I have been fantasizing over a gold sport watch and cannot recall a single gold Rolex w/o the date, except for the Daytona. The Datejust, Day-Date, Sky-Dweller and sport watches (Sub, GMT) in gold all have the cyclops. I think an Oyster Perpetual in gold would be very nice...

 

[Dino944]

Speaking of date windows, are there any modern Rolex models in gold without the cyclops? I can only think of the Daytona.

Lately I have been fantasizing over a gold sport watch and cannot recall a single gold Rolex w/o the date, except for the Daytona. The Datejust, Day-Date, Sky-Dweller and sport watches (Sub, GMT) in gold all have the cyclops. I think an Oyster Perpetual in gold would be very nice...

The only Rolex available in all gold without a cyclops, besides the Daytona, is the Yatchmaster II, which is hideous. Many years ago Rolex did make a no date, Oyster in gold, but that was well over 30 years ago (I'm not sure if it was a manual wind or automatic).

 

[dopey]

The Skydweller is stainless steel with a white gold bezel and a white dial. I went with the large Santos. I wanted to like to medium size, without the date window, but it was just too small on my wrist.

The Skydweller is a really impressive watch from a technical standpoint. From a design point, I think they were to conservative in sticking to traditional Rolex design cues and styling and should have put more effort into simplifying the dial. It has got too many words and looks crowded, even if the face is sizable. But it is very cool. IMO, one of the coolest watches to come out in the last ten years. It is both novel and useful. Congratulations.

 

[dan'l]

Thanks @Dino944, I nearly forgot about the Yachtmaster II! But I agree it is hideous and not even in consideration, though from a mechanical PoV it is a neat piece, with the countdown timer and all (based on the Daytona movement, I believe).

I have an irrational desire to get a GMT Master II in gold with the green dial. For this watch I'd overlook my dislike of the cyclops.

 

[Dino944]

Thanks @Dino944, I nearly forgot about the Yachtmaster II! But I agree it is hideous and not even in consideration, though from a mechanical PoV it is a neat piece, with the countdown timer and all (based on the Daytona movement, I believe).

I have an irrational desire to get a GMT Master II in gold with the green dial. For this watch I'd overlook my dislike of the cyclops.

Yes, the YM's movement is related to the Daytona movement. IMHO, the YM II is one of the ugliest watches they have made in ages.

If going for a new gold GMT I'd be very tempted to get their new rose gold GMT II with black and brown bezel. It is sort of their modern Rootbeer GMT. I was never a fan of the original Rootbeer GMTs (or as they were officially referred to, the Bronze GMTs), but the new one is really handsome and something you should consider.

Anyway, good luck with whatever you decide.

 

[Belligero]

The magnifier is great. Once you try it, it's the watches with a plain date window that'll seem lacking.