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

[Clouseau]

Isolate and **** off. Be pragmatic.

I certainly did not seek to have as many as I do. We do what we do.

 

[Dino944]

I miss the days of having a "tight five". I enjoyed the act of curating around having the right variety, but ultimately I got tired of the churn needed to actually try all the stuff I was interested in without exploding the collection. I'm at 10 or 13 now depending on how you count some cheapies and it kind of drives me nuts, especially given 3 or 4 of them are clear winners for me now.

I certainly understand what you are saying. If I count my least expensive watch, my MoonSwatch, I'm actually at 16 watches.

I found years ago, that for me the optimal number to own for frequent rotation was 4 watches. When I had 4, I would wear all of them at some point during the week. 5 was fine, I managed to wear all of them during the month, if not during the week. When I reached 6, I was no longer rotating through all of them during the week, and often not wearing all of them during the month.

Perhaps, work or other obligations became more significant, and also led to my not wearing all of my watches as often as I once did.

When people have more than a certain number of watches, some people may feel obligated to wear all of them as often as possible to justify either owning all of them and/or adding more. It was nice when I did wear at least 4 or 5 watches a week, but that can start to feel like work. Now, I don't really think about how often I'm rotating through my watches. I just switch watches when I feel like it, or if there is an event/activity that calls for wearing a specific watch.

I know, first world problems!

 

[pmeis]

I certainly understand what you are saying. If I count my least expensive watch, my MoonSwatch, I'm actually at 16 watches.

I found years ago, that for me the optimal number to own for frequent rotation was 4 watches. When I had 4, I would wear all of them at some point during the week. 5 was fine, I managed to wear all of them during the month, if not during the week. When I reached 6, I was no longer rotating through all of them during the week, and often not wearing all of them during the month.

Perhaps, work or other obligations became more significant, and also led to my not wearing all of my watches as often as I once did.

When people have more than a certain number of watches, some people may feel obligated to wear all of them as often as possible to justify either owning all of them and/or adding more. It was nice when I did wear at least 4 or 5 watches a week, but that can start to feel like work. Now, I don't really think about how often I'm rotating through my watches. I just switch watches when I feel like it, or if there is an event/activity that calls for wearing a specific watch.

I know, first world problems!

I have four that essentially get all my wrist time and two others that I have an attachment to that I still wear an okay amount. Everything else feels like it needs to be scheduled in. I'm trying to segment myself mentally so that I can make myself okay with considering my little Nomos collection as separate from my other watches, but I'm not sure if that trick is really working and it was just the permission I gave myself to let things bloat

 

[am55]

Yes I know… you only gave Rolex to your sister’s boyfriends… peasants !

That's the squattocracy for you.

Knowing Scuppers' tastes he'll probably be seen at the Union over the Australian though.

 

[takashi78]

I certainly understand what you are saying. If I count my least expensive watch, my MoonSwatch, I'm actually at 16 watches.

I would have thought you would have way more watches than that.
How many of those are Cartier?

 

[Omega Male]

Mine are all in my wife's office filing cabinet.

 

[Scuppers]

Yes I know… you only gave Rolex to your sister’s boyfriends… peasants !

Today, bought my sister a VCA suite of snowflake jewellery for her up coming nuptials… the 3rd time.
Prospective groom is currently without watch… working on that!

 

[Dino944]

I would have thought you would have way more watches than that.
How many of those are Cartier?

I have owned other watches, but I sold/traded them many years ago, if they weren't the right piece for me and weren't getting wrist time. Now I don't purchase anything unless I truly love it.

I have 3 Cartiers: a Tank Louis Cartier XL; a Santos; and a Pasha 950 Chronograph.

 

[brax]

Brax, what slot is this? UnFacconable is making a strong case for this being the OneWatch. Of course TheFoo owns this watch.

I bought my PP5170G before Foo bought his so there’s that.

This is slot five. It’s what I wear with business suits.

 

[takashi78]

I have owned other watches, but I sold/traded them many years ago, if they weren't the right piece for me and weren't getting wrist time. Now I don't purchase anything unless I truly love it.

I have 3 Cartiers: a Tank Louis Cartier XL; a Santos; and a Pasha 950 Chronograph.

I will always be a Pasha lover no matter what the sales figures say. And never seen a Pt metal one before.

Is this the model with the F.Piguet movt inside?

 

[Ghotihead2001]

 

[am55]

View attachment 2034709

Now incline it 30-40 degrees, and use that macro lens... it is the three dimensionality of the detail that makes the Breguet dial special.

Like a Beethoven later work, I know it inside out yet on every return, find something new.

 

[Dino944]

I will always be a Pasha lover no matter what the sales figures say. And never seen a Pt metal one before.

Is this the model with the F.Piguet movt inside?

Interestingly, although the Pasha isn't their biggest seller these days according to a friend/fellow Cartier collector back when it was released and all through the 90's it was one "The watches to own" along with the Santos. I think these days people who want a Cartier are usually choosing the brand for their non-round watches. That being said, if they came out with a more modern version and size for the Santos Ronde, I'd definitely get one. I nearly bought one in the mid 90's.

The Pasha has always been one of my favorite Cartier pieces, and it was the watch the originally got me interested in the brand.

Yes, it uses an F. Piguet 1185 as it's base movement. It's very nicely finished, but unlike the Royal Oak chrono and 1st two generations of Overseas chronographs, it doesn't use a gold rotor. Then again, these watches were about half the price of the RO or Overseas chronos, so they were a relative bargain.

Now incline it 30-40 degrees, and use that macro lens... it is the three dimensionality of the detail that makes the Breguet dial special.

View attachment 2034721

Like a Beethoven later work, I know it inside out yet on every return, find something new

I love their guilloche work, but from some angles the ultra straight lugs aren't my favorite design.

 

[Newcomer]

 

[UnFacconable]

My point is that anyone owning more than one is perhaps better served by diversity, rather than versatility.

I think if I just focus my response to this sentence it will help crystallize things. The claim above is premised on the notion that (i) watches have some sort of meaningful objective function (which could be aesthetic or based on mechanical complication) and (ii) that people collect watches to satisfy this objective purpose across a variety of situations.

I call both into question and would submit that collectors are best served to satisfy whatever their desire is to own more things, without having to use someone else's arbitrary criteria. Where you say "anyone" above I would prefer to say "someone". I would bet there are quite a few anyones in this thread like me for whom your statement doesn't resonate. And many anyones for whom it does.

Some people have awesome watch collections consisting entirely of Rolex divers. Or vintage dress watches. Or whatever. Others have awesome collections where each watch serves a specific purpose (see @brax). Some people want to match their watches with different outfits so they get multiple colorways of the same watch. Other people like owning one or more watches from many different makers.

There is no one way to collect. I have no interest in versatility because for me that would be LARPing. From an allocation of resources standpoint, it wouldn't make sense for me to spend a lot of my watch dosh on rare-use scenarios so I will never buy a dress watch. I have a feeling my view is pretty widespread as we've seen every major watch house move toward more casual designs as the demand for dress watches has reduced along side the general casual-ization of society.

I would never criticize anyone who has different wants or needs from their watch collection. None of this stuff matters, so people should do what makes them happy. It turns out I spend 99% of my life not wearing a suit (perhaps more at this point), so my version of brax's slot 5 would sit in its box unworn and unloved. This is a reminder that most of my collection (purchased when I had slightly more formal professional "needs") sits unused for similar reasons but maybe someday my circumstances will change. If I submitted a photo of my "collection" (it's more of an agglomeration) I'm sure some people would say "you need a dress watch" or you need "something from the big 3" but those hold no interest for me even if they would make my agglomeration more acceptable to WISs.

You see the same thing in other consumerist collecting disciplines whether it's cars, wine, purses or baseball cards. Some people prefer to only collect deep Bordeaux verticals while others like having the perfect wine for every meal. Some people have dozens of 911s and nothing else, others want to own a supercar from every maker. All of these collections are based on things with objective qualities but ultimately the collector's passion is subjective because these collections aren't required to fulfill any functional criteria.