The Watch Appreciation Thread (Reviews and Photos of Men's Timepieces by Rolex, Patek Philippe, Brei

[jim_n]

Hey guys, looking for a recommendation on a new watch. Something sleek and classy enough for a wedding (brothers this summer) but can still be worn daily and look good with a pair of jeans. My price range is around 800-1k. I would also consider shopping used to get the best bang for the buck. Thanks

 

[cchen]

Tudor Pelagos

 

[sunilvarma]

Montblanc Star World-Time GMT Automatic

 

[Hayward]



Hey guys, looking for a recommendation on a new watch. Something sleek and classy enough for a wedding (brothers this summer) but can still be worn daily and look good with a pair of jeans. My price range is around 800-1k. I would also consider shopping used to get the best bang for the buck. Thanks

This question is actually harder to answer than it might seem at first. If you buy new, In the US you're limited to department store type watches. Hamilton, Tissot, Mido, Oris, etc. All of these brands have some classic styles in their lines, But they will still have a generic appearance with stock movements. The US market Japanese made watches are even more boring.

The Japanese makers, particularly Seiko and Orient Star, seem to reserve the more classic designs to their home market. There are dealers who will sell these models overseas, but When they need servicing, you'll need to send them back to Japan for best results. The good news is that they will cost significantly less than your target price.

If I were in your position, I would look for vintage watches. A good example would be Omega watches from the 60s, Particularly in the Constellation and Seamaster sport lines. But then again for half again of what you're willing to spend, You could get a Rolex Datejust from the same period.

 

[marvin100]

Mafoofan, Dino, apropos, et al:

Dropping tons of knowledge. Thanks for much to think about and ruminate on.

 

[ChicagoRon]



This question is actually harder to answer than it might seem at first. If you buy new, In the US you're limited to department store type watches. Hamilton, Tissot, Mido, Oris, etc. All of these brands have some classic styles in their lines, But they will still have a generic appearance with stock movements. The US market Japanese made watches are even more boring.

The Japanese makers, particularly Seiko and Orient Star, seem to reserve the more classic designs to their home market. There are dealers who will sell these models overseas, but When they need servicing, you'll need to send them back to Japan for best results. The good news is that they will cost significantly less than your target price.

If I were in your position, I would look for vintage watches. A good example would be Omega watches from the 60s, Particularly in the Constellation and Seamaster sport lines. But then again for half again of what you're willing to spend, You could get a Rolex Datejust from the same period.

I don't see what's wrong with an entry level watch as a first watch... many Ferrari drivers probably owned a Ford or a Toyota once upon a time.

Also, agree about a vintage Omega - excellent suggestion and fairly easy to find, depending on where the OP lives.

I would love to know where you can get a Datejust in working condition for less than $500 from any period. Most of the older oyster date watches I've seen have been $2k +

 

[culverwood]

I think he meant an extra $500 on top of the £1,000

 

[kungapa]



This question is actually harder to answer than it might seem at first. If you buy new, In the US you're limited to department store type watches. Hamilton, Tissot, Mido, Oris, etc. All of these brands have some classic styles in their lines, But they will still have a generic appearance with stock movements. The US market Japanese made watches are even more boring.

The Japanese makers, particularly Seiko and Orient Star, seem to reserve the more classic designs to their home market. There are dealers who will sell these models overseas, but When they need servicing, you'll need to send them back to Japan for best results. The good news is that they will cost significantly less than your target price.

If I were in your position, I would look for vintage watches. A good example would be Omega watches from the 60s, Particularly in the Constellation and Seamaster sport lines. But then again for half again of what you're willing to spend, You could get a Rolex Datejust from the same period.

Stowa comes in under that price range, but might be hard to source.

 

[RogerP]

By reading from what you posted, do you think it is actually better to purchase the Portuguese handwound rather than the chrono?

As between those two watches, I'd certainly choose the handwound. But in the great wide world of $8-10k watches, I'd almost certainly make a different choice. The Portuguese (and from here on I refer to the handwound only) is a beautiful watch possessed of elegant design features. My issue is with its dimensions. Others will no doubt quickly enter a galssy-eyed trance and rhapsodize about the historical entecedents which inform the present day rendition. I'll happily leave that to them and simply make some comments about the watch itself, since it is the watch you would be purchasing.

44mm is big for a dress watch, IMO. Really big. In a sports chroograph or a dive watch, a case that big is more than okay. But for me, a dress watch of those dimensions simply doesn't make sense. The substantial case diameter is visually exacerbated in the Portuguese by three factors: 1) short lugs, 2) thin case and 3) thin bezel. The end result is an "all dial" watch that looks even larger than its immodest dimensions suggest. It takes a hefty wrist indeed to wear the watch and not have it appear that the watch is wearing you. A pancake on a strap is a look that will work for some, but not for others.

So if the goal is to get a Portuguese, the hand-wound is definitely the one to get, IMO. But if the goal is to get an elegant dress watch in that price range, there are many more appealing options out there. And yes, the foregoing reflects my personal and entirely subjective aesthetic preferences. Though I'm sure that will not deter the usual suspects from telling me that I am "wrong".

 

[TheFoo]



Foo, do you think this holds for the calculation Patek made when they decided to go in-house with the 5270G after using the Lemania-based CH27-70 movement for years (decades!) with their perpetual calendar chronographs?

I don't know if Patek would ever spell it out, but I think the fundamental reason why they are migrating away from the Lemania ebauche has to do with the competitive edge that comes with deploying an in-house movement. Rightly or wrongly, collectors and enthusiasts attach a premium to whether a movement is in-house. Also, as in-house chronographs become more common at lower price points, an ebauche (no matter how fine and sophisticated) becomes a harder and harder sell.

I hear some say that people don't really care about whether movements are in-house. But I think the market demonstrates otherwise. Companies tend to know what their customers want and high-end watchmakers have been significantly ramping up in-house development over the past ten years. Some of this has to do with the fact that ETA is no longer providing kit versions of their ebauches, forcing companies to buy already-assembled movements. But that only affects watches under the $5k price point (give or take). Patek sells its manual-wind chronograph (without other complications), employing the CH-29 in-house movement, for over $60k.

By reading from what you posted, do you think it is actually better to purchase the Portuguese handwound rather than the chrono? 

It would certainly be my pick. At the end, it really depends on what you're looking for. If, despite everything you've learned, you still like the Port. Chrono better--go for it! But if you want a Portuguese, or if you care about having an interesting movement, or if you are aiming to collect classics, or if you care about future value, the Handwound is the better choice. Also, I think it looks infinitely better. The case and movement are nicely harmonized.

In contrast, the rarely depicted side-view of the Port. Chrono:

 

[TheFoo]



As between those two watches, I'd certainly choose the handwound.  But in the great wide world of $8-10k watches, I'd almost certainly make a different choice.  The Portuguese (and from here on I refer to the handwound only) is a beautiful watch possessed of elegant design features.  My issue is with its dimensions.  Others will no doubt quickly enter a galssy-eyed trance and rhapsodize about the historical entecedents which inform the present day rendition.  I'll happily leave that to them and simply make some comments about the watch itself, since it is the watch you would be purchasing.

44mm is big for a dress watch, IMO.  Really big.  In a sports chroograph or a dive watch, a case that big is more than okay.  But for me, a dress watch of those dimensions simply doesn't make sense.  The substantial case diameter is visually exacerbated in the Portuguese by three factors: 1) short lugs, 2) thin case and 3) thin bezel.  The end result is an "all dial" watch that looks even larger than its immodest dimensions suggest.  It takes a hefty wrist indeed to wear the watch and not have it appear that the watch is wearing you. A pancake on a strap is a look that will work for some, but not for others.

You are right that the Portuguese is very large for a dress watch. But for what it's worth, most models (including the Handwound and 5001) are 42mm, not 44mm. I also think the thin bezel, thin case, and short lugs are exactly what make a larger watch more elegant and wearable. You would otherwise have a much chunkier looking watch.

I wear my 5001 daily, with suits and even my dinner jacket. I've never felt conspicuous about it. But then, I think when you love your watch, it somehow always feels appropriate.

 

[RogerP]

Foo - Wristwatch Annual 2010 (the only volume I have with me at the office) lists the Portuguese handwound at 44mm, the 5001 at 42.3mm and the chrono at 40.9mm in diameter, respectively.

I've tried on both the handwound and the 5001 as recently as two weeks ago and those listed dimension are in accordance with my perception of the watches on the wrist. The 5001 sits just at my personal upper limit for a dressy watch to be worn with a suit (42mm) and is better visually balanced to my eye by its thicker case (~13mm versus 10mm for the handwound). I could happily wear the 5001 with a suit, but the wider and thinner hand-wound had too much pancake effect to my eye.

I agree that shorter lugs make a larger watch more wearable - less likelihood of lug overhang and such - but as with a thin bezel, they serve to visually emphasize width. That can be good or bad.

 

[TheFoo]

Huh, you're absolutely right--it is indeed 44mm. Odd. The Jubilee was 42mm.

On the thinness of bezels: I always prefer less metal showing. To the extent a thin bezel makes a watch look bigger, due to emphasizing the dial, it also makes it look more streamlined and low-profile. I would rather have a larger-looking, elegant dress watch than a smaller-looking, chunky one.

 

[Newcomer]



Huh, you're absolutely right--it is indeed 44mm. Odd. The Jubilee was 42mm.

On the thinness of bezels: I always prefer less metal showing. To the extent a thin bezel makes a watch look bigger, due to emphasizing the dial, it also makes it look more streamlined and low-profile. I would rather have a larger-looking, elegant dress watch than a smaller-looking, chunky one.

I am kind of in between on that. I think that the previous-gen GO PML's are nicer than the new ones. I think it is more of a balance issue for me.

For example:

VERSUS

Although I typically like thinner bezeled watches, in regards to thickness, I feel like a thin bezel can often make a watch look slab-sided.

And as an aside, I wonder if the thin bezeled look is a bit on the "trendy" side of things?

 

[Belligero]

The post on originality came to mind when I saw this watch:

A Speedmaster "homage", you say? I'd agree completely, especially since the dial is identical except for the logo.

The only snag is that this one is said to have been introduced in 1954.