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

[Scuppers]

This is surprising. The Grand Seikos I've handled have had really nice finishing. What specifically are you referring to?

While the cases aqnd hands are wonderfully finished, as a product it doesn’t really come together for me. Dials are either garish or flat, and the package suffers from unnecessary heft.

 

[TheFoo]

This is surprising. The Grand Seikos I've handled have had really nice finishing. What specifically are you referring to?

While the cases aqnd hands are wonderfully finished, as a product it doesn’t really come together for me. Dials are either garish or flat, and the package suffers from unnecessary heft.

I find that photos do not capture the glow from the polish work, sharpness of the edges, precision of hands and dial markers, etc. They definitely feel like quality when you handle them—especially the simple, dressy models.

However, I agree they lack in design/style. Every model looks either derivative or toyish.

Also, they are way overhyped. There is all this nonsense parroted about how they are finished better than Swiss watches costing ten times more. Bullshit. Standard production GS watches are all machine-finished. The plates usually aren’t even chamfered! That said, there is no doubt they do machine-finishing exceptionally well—it’s just not remotely the same amount of labor that goes into finishing a Lange, Patek, Vacheron, etc.

In the $4-5K range, for the right model, they can be a really nice choice. They just aren’t the magic, giant-slaying unicorns that some folks make them out to be.

 

[TheFoo]

I'd say it stems from a difference in aesthetics. You remind me of an almost pure Roger Scruton-esque search for classical beauty, with the definition thereof fluid with your life experience (and incorporating practical aspects as well as aesthetic). I'm more of a post-modernist looking for new information, prizing ideas for how orthogonal they are to what I know already.

The watch itself: I actually dislike the case. This calls for something like the Nomos Lambda's. I think the cranes are well executed, relatively balanced, delicate and I like the spot of colour on the head. But can't shake the feeling this is thematically close to the "phoenix" urushi Credor (GBAQ958), not just the colours but the modern take on the clouds and waves.

You can't really criticise the movement without seeing it. 7001 can be plain, and it might even be quite likely given the history of the brand; it can also be the heavily modified version that powers this Blancpain, or the decorated movements custom-made for Ben Chee.

I'm kind of fond of 1990s Taiwan. The place was growing fast with relatively limited corruption by regional standards, and did well post-1998. It's now a clean, pleasant first world country that is worthy of its traditional Chinese heritage, and they did very well with covid. These motives and artwork can still be found in Straits-Chinese owned mid sized firms, or the lobby of real estate conglos.

This watch, or something like it, would have a place in my collection when meeting mainland Chinese for business, or Straits Chinese with a lot of pride for how the PRC has been doing. The parallel I'd draw on is that I've so far had the most positive reactions wearing ultra-cheap HMTs which NRIs often recognise (inciting pre-1991 nostalgia) and which really helps break the ice when it happens. But there is no real equivalent from Chinese brands; so far Japan has been leading the charge in high end Asian watches. I would love to have something Chinese in my collection. And a chunk of it I guess is connecting with and growing along that extraordinary thing happening in the PRC for a few decades. Maybe not Tintin and the Soviets, but perhaps Tintin in America. By the Black Island I feel it's getting late.

Spoiler

Smartphones: I've "quit" Apple with the 4S, and after going through a few brands settled on Xiaomi (but it could well have been Huawei) who delivers consistent innovation a couple generations ahead of the Western branded phones. Little features like dual SIM (invaluable abroad especially if you need a lot of 2FA with your home SIM) or infrared blaster (sooo useful in AC land), but also the cutting edge of innovation on major features particularly cameras. I put up with all the ways in which Chinese software sucks (due to a combination of engineers who copy rather than deeply understand, and a "move fast and break things" culture combined with ruthless competition between departments); with some tweaks you can get a pretty reliable device anyway. It's really hard to get excited about devices 4x more expensive that feel a couple generations behind, even if the software is a work of art. At the same time I completely understand why for most people Apple has a far superior UX.

This makes me think: a truly impressive (IMO, and obviously not for this thread) Chinese watch was the Xiaomi Watch - the original "full computer on the wrist" that looked close to the Apple Watch yet uniquely Chinese and different, not the round things - which I tried to buy for a while without success. It still feels like wearables history. Maybe time to check Aliexpress.

I’m certainly no fan of the postmodern, but I’m also not rigidly classical in my views. I’m really more a rationalist/modernist than anything else.

Nonetheless, wearing any of those three hats, I still can’t see the appeal of this watch. The dial is just so badly done by any standard. Even if was a postmodernist, I’d fail to see anything novel or clever. There is nothing self-knowing, self-indicting, or self-referential about this watch. It expresses no interesting absurdities or contradictions. It does not challenge any preconceptions. Feel free to shine light on anything I’m not seeing.

As for the movement: true that we don’t know what work has been done to it. However, if they aren’t bragging about refinements, that tends to mean there aren’t any. Happy to be proven wrong here, but this goes back to my point about trusting in reliable makers.

 

[am55]

I find that photos do not capture the glow from the polish work, sharpness of the edges, precision of hands and dial markers, etc. They definitely feel like quality when you handle them—especially the simple, dressy models.

However, I agree they lack in design/style. Every model looks either derivative or toyish.

Also, they are way overhyped. There is all this nonsense parroted about how they are finished better than Swiss watches costing ten times more. Bullshit. Standard production GS watches are all machine-finished. The plates usually aren’t even chamfered! That said, there is no doubt they do machine-finishing exceptionally well—it’s just not remotely the same amount of labor that goes into finishing a Lange, Patek, Vacheron, etc.

In the $4-5K range, for the right model, they can be a really nice choice. They just aren’t the magic, giant-slaying unicorns that some folks make them out to be.

$5k?

404 Page Not Found | Grand Seiko

Grand Seiko official site. Made by hand for those who value perfection. Grand Seiko raises the pure essentials of watchmaking to the level of art.

www.grand-seiko.com

SBGZ003J | Grand Seiko

A new Spring Drive masterpiece from the Micro Artist Studio

www.grand-seiko.com

 

[am55]

I find that photos do not capture the glow from the polish work, sharpness of the edges, precision of hands and dial markers, etc. They definitely feel like quality when you handle them—especially the simple, dressy models.

However, I agree they lack in design/style. Every model looks either derivative or toyish.

Why do you think that? On the contrary I feel like Seiko is one of the few brands that has developed a clear design language that turned out to be instrumental to their success and makes most of their launches instantly recognisable as Seiko, even if as you hint sometimes you can tell the Swiss ancestor or cousin. In fact I would wager it is this design language that makes many Westerners uncomfortable with the Seiko look, regardless of how well finished it is and how interesting the movements are. There is something unmistakably alien about it, an abstraction of humanity. But I'd have thought this wilfully modernist approach would have appealed (given your declaration towards the dauphine hands Calatrava some years ago - 5227?) - would be curious to hear more about what you dislike specifically.

 

[sood]

Some watches I’d point to for similar or less money:

$4,300:
View attachment 1543512

$5,600:
View attachment 1543513

$5,950
View attachment 1543535

$6,700:
View attachment 1543521

And those are retail prices. Actual cost would obviously be a good bit lower.

Is the part about actual cost being lower that retail price applicable to new watches as well? if yes, how does it happen?

 

[Sreezy36]

@TheFoo and other horology aficionados, what are your thoughts on the discontinued patek ref: 5134 travel time gmt? This is one of my grail GMT watches. Robust 215 caliber manual wind movement. Minimal aesthetic (for a dual time) and a practical function. Rose gold would be first preference, however, the white gold model looks excellent as well.

 

[Texasmade]

Is the part about actual cost being lower that retail price applicable to new watches as well? if yes, how does it happen?

The Rolex and new Speedmaster aren’t going for below retail right now.

 

[sood]

The Rolex and new Speedmaster aren’t going for below retail right now.

Okay, for others, do you simply ask the seller for reduced pricing?

 

[am55]

I’m certainly no fan of the postmodern, but I’m also not rigidly classical in my views. I’m really more a rationalist/modernist than anything else.

Nonetheless, wearing any of those three hats, I still can’t see the appeal of this watch. The dial is just so badly done by any standard. Even if was a postmodernist, I’d fail to see anything novel or clever. There is nothing self-knowing, self-indicting, or self-referential about this watch. It expresses no interesting absurdities or contradictions. It does not challenge any preconceptions.

Why does post-modernism have to imply this? One of the core tenets is the absence of objectivity; in this case, the ideal varies between persons, cultures, time, and I like to understand each individual, as many as possible, intuitively to broaden my understanding of art (or watches) without being weighed down by personal bagage.

If nothing else, cranes from a Chinese brand is not going to resonate with an American buyer (unless he has an interest in the region) but is a comfortable reference to the now distant and theoretical traditional Chinese past to the PRC buyer, I would guess at least. If you must see irony, the resurgence of Chinese classicism on the mainland after the Great Leap Forward always gets me, but then the "Communist" Party is one of the most powerful forces of capitalism on the planet, so...

But the question was asked in earnest: what is unique about this watch? Why is this their current flagship? And yes, the answer might just be "it's a bit random and nobody really knows" in true mainland style.

 

[TheFoo]

Why do you think that? On the contrary I feel like Seiko is one of the few brands that has developed a clear design language that turned out to be instrumental to their success and makes most of their launches instantly recognisable as Seiko, even if as you hint sometimes you can tell the Swiss ancestor or cousin. In fact I would wager it is this design language that makes many Westerners uncomfortable with the Seiko look, regardless of how well finished it is and how interesting the movements are. There is something unmistakably alien about it, an abstraction of humanity. But I'd have thought this wilfully modernist approach would have appealed (given your declaration towards the dauphine hands Calatrava some years ago - 5227?) - would be curious to hear more about what you dislike specifically.

There is undoubtedly a certain look associated with Seiko. This is discussed in the article you linked to—but note they are discussing vintage watches.

The current Grand Seiko line-up is a mess. Only their vintage tribute models manage to look “unto themselves” and reflect any clear expression of design. The sportier contemporary models are all over the map. Random case shapes. Random dials. Random bracelets. None of the diversity appears to correlate with any purpose. They seem to just be iterating to iterate.

 

[TheFoo]

Is the part about actual cost being lower that retail price applicable to new watches as well? if yes, how does it happen?

Yes. You just have to ask.

 

[Neville Southall]

The more I look at the OP41 (blue dial), the more I like it. Thoughts?

 

[TheFoo]

@TheFoo and other horology aficionados, what are your thoughts on the discontinued patek ref: 5134 travel time gmt? This is one of my grail GMT watches. Robust 215 caliber manual wind movement. Minimal aesthetic (for a dual time) and a practical function. Rose gold would be first preference, however, the white gold model looks excellent as well.

View attachment 1543755

View attachment 1543756

Interesting. I’m not familiar with this reference. Normally I hate crown guards on Calatravas (or any non-sports watch), but in this case they are nicely balanced against the travel time pushers on the left.

Between the two, I like the rose gold better—the Breguet numerals are killer.

 

[TheFoo]

The more I look at the OP41 (blue dial), the more I like it. Thoughts?

Size is weird. A Datejust or OP larger than an Explorer and as large as a Submariner is wrong. I’d go with 36mm.

Compounded with the blue dial, this is a neither-here-nor-there proposition. The watch wants to imply sportiness, but really it’s not a sport watch.