Discussion in 'Classic Menswear' started by gdl203, May 20, 2007.
For those interested, here you can hear the cricket:
Memovox: alarm is on when crown is pushed, off when crown is pulled
Hmmm, on my Compressor Memovox, I don't think you can turn off the alarm. I'm going to have to double check that.
There were Rolexes from the 80s/90s with red sunburst dials which were clear enameled metal, I am not sure if they were Rolex-issued or a 3rd party option though.
Speaking of which, anyone else remember how the big Swiss ADs in the 80s/early 90s (their names escape me) used to stock 3rd party replacement dials in exotic materials?
After purchasing a Rolex Datejust, you would be offered the option of perusing a selection of dials, and if you said yes literally a panoply of dials made from malachite, jasper, agate, onyx, etc, would be brought out spread on a velvet tray. My dad has a very old Datejust with a blue jasper dial with diamond hour markers.
These dials were NOT Rolex-made, rather after-market addons sold by these big ADs with Rolex adopting a Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy for them. They would service Rolexes sporting such 3rd party dials no questions asked, which is almost unbelievable given their draconian servicing policies today.
Yep, this PP was purchased in a simpler time, a time when horology was not yet (relatively speaking) a mainstream pastime, a time when IWC made serious watches for serious men instead of mostly toys for big boys, a time when Hublot was Who-blot.
IMO the 5054 IMO messed up the balance of the 5015, with its oversized moonphase to accommodate the date indicator, and the complete lack of numerals from 3 to 9 o'clock. That said, I acknowledge the 5015's design is a bit of an acquired taste with its hobnail bezel, asymmetric dial, old-fashioned screwed-lug design, and all that jazz.
Finally, I am not sure the 5015 dial is porcelain, I've always thought it was vitreous enamel. Patek has a bad habit of describing white enamel dials as "porcelain white" dials, which I think has led to a lot of confusion on the ground.
For all those out there who are wondering what the difference is, porcelain is a ceramic which is fired at higher temperatures than vitreous enamel, which is essentially glass on a metal base. Porcelain is much harder to work with than enamel, and so is rare as the proverbial on watches. In contrast to hot/fired/vitreous enamel there is also "cold" enamel, which is just epoxy resin - the vast majority of enamel dialed watches on the market are cold enamel.
Here's a link to some articles regarding Charlie Sheen and his PP watches.
Link: http://www.patekwatch.blogspot.sg/search/label/Charlie Sheen
Good thing I have two wrists
As someone of Chinese descent, I observe from my mainland cousins a certain attraction in buying from a brand boutique where it's generally acknowledged that no discounts are given. Although I'm not an economist, I believe this is referred to as the point where price elasticity goes "tits-up"...
The Rouge is an exceptionally pretty piece, and oddly enough in the metal it appears more wearable than in pics. As someone who's never really cared for how Reversos sit on my wrist (including GT & XGT cases), the dimensions of the ultra thin are a bang-on fit. I tried on the 1931 tribute in white gold in London last weekend, and it's now broken into my "list." Although I'd prefer twin battons instead of the arabic "12," I think this would look tremendous with a navy strap.
I greatly prefer the 5015 to a 5054. Not sure that it's dial was not porcelain. Everything I ever read about it said it had a porcelain dial, not that it was porcelain white (as a color description). Still I guess its of little importance since its not in the family any more.
I agree while the 5015's very pronounced hobnail bezel may have been an acquired taste it, and it made it a bit more formal looking, however its dial was far more attractive than on the 5054. I thought the font used with its Arabic numbers toned it down and gave it a more whimsical look to go with the asymetric dial. I was also not a fan of the missing numbers from 3-9 around the dial of the 5054 and I thought the smooth bezel gave it a sort of generic look.
This is the perfect use of a highly technical term!
I don't know ...
Actually, I am contemplating a 42mm Panerai, as I sold my 111 a couple of years ago and looking to replace it with something smaller: I was thinking about the 337 Radiomir. The 1940 case is a bit of a bastard looks-wise, without the wire lugs and the onion crown that I assosiate with Radiomirs ...
I think the 337 wins this one, but on the wrist my verdict might be different
The moment I wrote that, I found these pics, and I must admit the 512 it looks pretty good. Maybe even better than the 337.
I even find the fake patinaed "tritium" attractive
^ I think the faux patina can be alright if done very subtly.
I asked about the 512 as I'm not entirely sure how I feel about it.
On one hand, I think the 1940 case is a rather successful combo of the 30's Radiomir and the 50's Luminor. The slimness and reduced size looks like they'll make it easy to wear. And I like the crown and how it (at least in pics) looks flatter than the 399 one.
OTOH, I can see the argument for the wire lugs and onion crown if you're going Radiomir. And I'm wondering if the slimness actually makes the 512 too dainty for a PAM
As for reduced sizes on PAMs, I don't think it works with Luminors but I like the Radiomir 337 - though I think I might have preferred it as a base model.
Actually, I think a 42mm base Radiomir could be a perfect partner for a Luminor Marina. Brown dial and cream coloured luminova, please
Separate names with a comma.