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

Discussion in 'Classic Menswear' started by gdl203, May 20, 2007.

Tags:
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. in stitches

    in stitches Kung Joo Moderator

    Messages:
    68,895
    Likes Received:
    31,016
    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2010
    Location:
    Charm City
    

    +1. fantastic choice!

    ---


    mimo - awesome story. very heartwarming. its a great looking watch, and more importantly, im sure it will be a meaningful item of his that will always make him think of his dad, fondly. well done, sir. well done indeed.
     
  2. Kazimir

    Kazimir New Member

    Messages:
    3
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2013
    Regarding all this love for G-Shock, I remember the signature of a WIS member that made me sell most of the watches I liked, but didn't love.

    "Never put on your wrist something that isn't useful or beautiful to you"- quoting with large approximation.

    I have a specific watch for running that shows me the speed, beeps me if I slow the pace and does other things that mechanichal watches can't. But that's a tool to me, not a "watch". It's useful.

    Other than that, I try to see that every moment of my life is unique and fleeting, and I try to spend it in the best company possible.

    So if you really like the G-Shock or it's necessary for a purpose- by all means. If not, just wear your beautiful watches without fear of scratches, most likely they will outlast you anyway.

    Just a humble opinion.
     
  3. rnguy001

    rnguy001 Senior member

    Messages:
    1,121
    Likes Received:
    489
    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2010
    Spot on, Speedy!



    This "King of the G-shocks" is suitably preposterous on my 7" wrist. I got it because it's not as common , and I liked the large rectangular shape. The purple and black version (Decepticon?) is cooler still.

    That being said the G-Shock shown by Nuke is far more useful and comfortable IMO.


     
  4. Kaplan

    Kaplan Senior member

    Messages:
    4,176
    Likes Received:
    2,661
    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2008
    Location:
    In Hedonic Decline
    All this G-Shock talk reminds me of my first watch, a black Casio digital (late 70's IIRC). Sadly I can't find it on Google. It had a black plastic (rubber?) strap, black pushers and the display didn't light up (one of the pushers activated a small light that shone across the display).

    Anyone have better pics of PG's G-Shock?
     
  5. RogerP

    RogerP Senior member

    Messages:
    8,338
    Likes Received:
    5,718
    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2012
    Location:
    Oakville, Ontario, CANADA
    Mimo - that is a rock solid choice, my man. I have owned a couple Tissot autos in the past and they have served me well. Do let us know how he likes it.
     
  6. Keith T

    Keith T TWAT Master.

    Messages:
    1,442
    Likes Received:
    906
    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2004
    Location:
    Texas
    +1 Mimo.

    Well-played. I hope your son gives it lots of wrist time, and he blossoms into a total watch FREAK.



    You know, there's a reason that crack dealers give away free samples :)
     
  7. wurger

    wurger Senior member

    Messages:
    2,887
    Likes Received:
    1,226
    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2011
    Location:
    Sydney
    Mimo, Tissot is my brand of choice when comes to gifts, excellent quality at a low price point, good choice!
     
  8. Newcomer

    Newcomer Senior member

    Messages:
    5,133
    Likes Received:
    4,428
    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2009
    So, something that I have been thinking about lately. Figured I would bring it up here. Vintage Rolex.

    With that lame intro finished, let me get to the meat of it. I was reading the 'dink the other day, and I remember coming across this article:

    http://www.hodinkee.com/blog/rolex-albino-daytona-ben-clymer

    In it, it talks about the "legendary" albino Daytona. Here is a picture for posterity.

    [​IMG]

    In this article, the writer states that in May 2008, the sale of Clapton's Albino Daytona realized the significant sum of $505,000. Five years prior to the 2008 sale, that SAME Daytona sold for $50,109. 1/10 of the price!

    So, when I first laid my eyes on this rare beast, my first thought was "that is absolutely gorgeous." But then I took a step back. I was honest with myself. And I can honestly say that there is no way I would pay anything remotely near that amount. I do not find the albino Daytona nearly as aesthetically pleasing as the Paul Newman variety. And I had to ask myself. Taking away the rarity of the Paul Newman Daytona, and the Paul Newman connection--would I really want it as much as a current generation Rolex? Would I really forsake the technology increases and the increase in quality for the original?

    I am at something of a crossroads. Do I really love vintage Rolex? Or is it just the allure? And, what is even more complicated... what if the market for vintage Rolex bottoms out? If I paid $12,000 for a Steve McQueen Explorer II, I think I would be a bit miffed if they started selling for 1/10, or even 1/5 of what they are selling for now.

    Now, I think there are certain vintage Rolexes that really do appeal to me. I really do love the Steve McQueen Explorer. And the Paul Newman Daytona. The 1675 Pepsi. I have yet to take the plunge into vintage Rolex territory. I have thought about it, but it is difficult for me to think about forking over so much money for something that is at least technologically inferior (I mean not to flame here of course, so please excuse my phraseology) than what is available at retail. I guess I just wanted to spark some discussion more than anything.

    As an aside, I definitely think that vintage Rolex, at least aesthetically, is preferable (generally) to the current lineup. And this post is coming from someone who fawns over vintage Rolex. And from one who really wants to pick up several vintage models. This is merely my attempt at spelling out my thought processes!
     
  9. Newcomer

    Newcomer Senior member

    Messages:
    5,133
    Likes Received:
    4,428
    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2009
    

    Thanks buddy! And I am going to have to check some G-Shocks out in person I guess :).
     
  10. Journeyman

    Journeyman Senior member

    Messages:
    6,779
    Likes Received:
    1,818
    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2005
    Location:
    Brisbane, Australia
    


    I'm pretty sure that it's this model:

    http://www.gshock.com/watches/Classic/GA100-1A1

    (No, I'm not obsessive - I only know that because I was having a look at them in Japan a few weeks back.)
     
    Last edited: Aug 5, 2013
  11. culverwood

    culverwood Senior member

    Messages:
    1,864
    Likes Received:
    239
    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2007
    Location:
    London
    

    The original quotation was by William Morris in 1880.

    "If you want a golden rule that will fit everybody, this is it: Have nothing in your houses that you do not know to be useful, or believe to be beautiful."
     
  12. Belligero

    Belligero Senior member

    Messages:
    934
    Likes Received:
    1,026
    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2010
    Location:
    EUR
    
    I think that's a common dilemma for anyone who's considering new vs. vintage, regardless of manufacturer.

    There are many factors that go into choosing a watch, but I wouldn't let specifications put me off one I liked — particularly with Rolex, whose movements are some of the most proven and durable in the industry. Decades of empirical evidence attests to the soundness of their design and construction.

    Also, the older movements offer more hands-on craftsmanship than the newer examples, and this holds true for almost every manufacturer. The skilled labour that went into watches designed and produced 40+ years ago just doesn't exist any more at a cost that's reasonable for a serial-production watch, so there's something special about the older ones.

    One personal note about the technical inferiority of the older models: looks generally trump specifications. Mechanical watches have been inherently obsolete ever since reliable quartz came on the scene, so it hasn't been entirely about technology for quite some time. I appreciate the refinements that go into a modern movement like Rolex's Cal. 4130, but I also consider the older 15XX movements to be some of the best examples of their period as well. And they still reliably keep good time on the wrist, which is the main point. The quality is definitely there, and Rolex will still be providing parts and service for the 1500-series calibres for at least a few more decades.

    It's a wearable connection to period of engineering history that won't be repeated; the same one that put men on the moon. The aeronautical masterpiece Boeing 747 was designed using similar techniques, and the basics were so solid that they continue to operate efficiently to this day without any plans of being phased out.

    [​IMG]
    (drafting the Rolex 1500-series movement)

    But I mostly just enjoy how the watch looks and wears:

    [​IMG]

    I wear it for the same activities I'd use a new watch for; swimming, skiing, cycling, travelling... I just don't stress about its technical inferiority.
     
  13. jgold47

    jgold47 Senior member

    Messages:
    1,629
    Likes Received:
    13
    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2008
    Location:
    The Mitten
    

    I see to keep adding them to my collection. up to three. 1 white, 1 black analog-ish one and 1 black all digital one. Good weekend/casual watch. Have no problem wearing it around the house doing projects, etc... for the price, its a great watch (however you measure such things....)
     
  14. in stitches

    in stitches Kung Joo Moderator

    Messages:
    68,895
    Likes Received:
    31,016
    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2010
    Location:
    Charm City
    newC, excellent conversation you bring up.

    i think that as far as straight aesthetics go, there are some vintage models i prefer and some current models i prefer. as far as movements go, ive never been a super expert in all that and dont really chase movements for the most part. i appreciate movements greatly, and sometimes aspects of a movement affect my decision, but i have never sought after a particular movement. ive never really been in the price point where that would be a decisive factor.

    as far as these huge value jumps in the vintage market, that is usually entirely dependent on some factor of or rarity or other cause for desirability. could be the fact clapton owned it for example. the PN daytona i think is objectively a gorgeous model, but the value there is really only due to its history and the uncertainty behind it. with things like that i guess there is always the possibility of a decline in value, and if one is buying one solely as an investment piece, its probably not the soundest investment out there.
     
  15. Kaplan

    Kaplan Senior member

    Messages:
    4,176
    Likes Received:
    2,661
    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2008
    Location:
    In Hedonic Decline
    
    It certainly looks like it, thanks.


    I've had similar thoughts about finding it hard to justify the prices of vintage Rolexes. But in my case it's not that I find them inferior to modern models (I think Belligero makes a good point above), but more a case of just finding them too costly. 22 years ago I bought a new Sub 14060 for about $1700. Now, I've since come to appreciate the aesthetics of a matte dial 5513, but paying 4 times the price I did for something used, only to get a minor cosmetic upgrade (coupled with my unnatural aversion to not being the first owner), makes it hard to justify. Also, I'm not the type who'd want several nearly identical watches, so there'd be no room for two subs and since I have history with my old 14060 having worn it from Greenland to New Zealand, it makes it even harder.

    Now, if I didn't have (almost) the Rolex I prefer, and if I was ok with their current pricing, I would almost certainly overcome my second hand phobia and go vintage as there's nothing in Rolex's current lineup I find value in.

    Btw, Belligero that GMT is beautiful :)
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

Styleforum is proudly sponsored by