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

[no frills]

Well, I was at Wempe today getting my Nautilus resized. One link out. Guess my left wrist lost weight or something.

Since I am in my "OMG I LOVE SUBS!" phase I tried on the ref 116619LB - all white gold blue cerachrom bezel, blue dial Submariner:

(You can really see how much I use my Nautilus in this pic hahaha)

There are a few things that make me think twice about a WG Sub. First, the PCLs will make it a bit of a scratch magnet (which is okay with me, but I would prefer a brushed finish for a watch I think of as a "tool watch"). But that can easily be changed by a competent jeweler.

More than that, the blue dial just appears so flat especially beside the Nautilus. Would probably have much preferred the blue sunburst dial that Rolex puts on the two tone Sub (ref 116613).

The other thing is that right off the bat you can get this BNIB for 25 off MSRP of $36,850 - even before you begin negotiating. I've seen this offered as low as $23-$25K, which is close to dealer cost (37.5 off MSRP). Suspiciously low demand for this model - perhaps given its price point?

So, combined with the fact that it's close to impossible to get a blue dial Patek 5711 these days without paying full retail of $26,700, comparing these two pieces side by side doesn't seem to be too unfair - even though one is all steel and one is all white gold!

So, TWAT brethren - left or right?

Also viewed this one. Cute little bugger. A bit much for $109K MSRP though:

 

[mimo]

Three blue dials as different as can be...

The "smurf" Sub took a massive hit in perceived value when Dino announced publicly that he didn't like it. Since then, Rolex have been trying to give them away as quickly as possible to the non TWAT-aware.

I don't hate it, but if I wanted an impractical white gold Rolex, I'd rather have the new GMTII...and as Subs go, your steel no-date is still the true love.

 

[SirGrotius]

Curious where you see the smurf with such a deep discount? It's usually thought of as a "grail" watch for Rolex fanboys, since they don't look outside the box. For those in the know, it's a powerful watch, for those not in the know, it's a fun, cool watch. I think it's great, and prefer it to the PP just because of the sportiness of it. I'm not feeling it w/ a fancy herringbone patterned shirt, for instance. I'd like it more with white. Go full-on smurf.

 

[no frills]



Curious where you see the smurf with such a deep discount? It's usually thought of as a "grail" watch for Rolex fanboys, since they don't look outside the box. For those in the know, it's a powerful watch, for those not in the know, it's a fun, cool watch. I think it's great, and prefer it to the PP just because of the sportiness of it. I'm not feeling it w/ a fancy herringbone patterned shirt, for instance. I'd like it more with white. Go full-on smurf.

I asked three of my dealers for their best price on the Smurf. Predictably Wempe offered the least - but they are an AD. My two other greys quoted 25 off right off the bat.

The fancy herringbone patterned shirt I was wearing went quite well with my schlubby Patek 5711.

 

[Newcomer]

They Pateks are easily the star of that show. I love the blue perp cal. That is one of my favorites, such a beautiful watch.

Honestly, between a Nautilus and a Smurf, the Nautilus is a no-brainer for me. Even if they were the same price. I think the smurf looks silly and a bit childish, especially for a $35k toy. I really don't like the blue that Rolex uses, except for the Yachtmaster (which i actually really enjoy).

By the way, Belli and Dino, the discussion on the bracelet stretch was mind blowing. Never realized all of that. I took the term strech at face value.

 

[Belligero]



there is nothing about this dial that bothers me.

I would never be able to un-see that crap office-computer typeface for any amount of time. It's just so wrong on every possible level. It's the exact design equivalent of Crocs with a suit. And not even real Crocs; they would be some type of badly-drawn knockoff Croc-a-likes if such a thing is even possible.

 

[mimo]

Nobody has ever accused Belli of equivocation.

 

[Hayward]

I don't see a problem with the font, but any reference to where the watch is made should be at the bottom of the dial. Looks like JLC is getting self-conscious. It's like their promo videos where they pronounce the name "Zhey-zher-Lay-Kooltruh!"

 

[sammy]



A strange thing with watches, I have lost thousands of pounds on watches that I have bought and sold over the years but on this one I have been offered three times the amount I bought it for but still do not want to part with it!

Beautiful Omega! Is that a Seamaster? What is the model number?

 

[in stitches]



I would never be able to un-see that crap office-computer typeface for any amount of time. It's just so wrong on every possible level. It's the exact design equivalent of Crocs with a suit. And not even real Crocs; they would be some type of badly-drawn knockoff Croc-a-likes if such a thing is even possible.

Well, beauty is always in the eye of the beholder, but this borders on shark jumping for me.

 

[Farhad19620]



Beautiful Omega! Is that a Seamaster? What is the model number?

Thank you, Not sure what the model is but the watch is from the late 50's !

 

[no frills]



Three blue dials as different as can be...

The "smurf" Sub took a massive hit in perceived value when Dino announced publicly that he didn't like it. Since then, Rolex have been trying to give them away as quickly as possible to the non TWAT-aware.

I don't hate it, but if I wanted an impractical white gold Rolex, I'd rather have the new GMTII...and as Subs go, your steel no-date is still the true love.

In that case, here you go, mimo.

No more of that "left or right" stuff. I didn't force myself to choose between these two, so I shouldn't impose the same on you.

 

[mimo]

On pure love, I still choose the Sub. Choosing both is indeed an achievement.

 

[Belligero]



I don't see a problem with the font, but any reference to where the watch is made should be at the bottom of the dial. Looks like JLC is getting self-conscious. It's like their promo videos where they pronounce the name "Zhey-zher-Lay-Kooltruh!"

Well, beauty is always in the eye of the beholder, but this borders on shark jumping for me.

Dudes, I see this as a legitimate issue when we're talking about decent watches, where every detail counts.

Clearly, I need to elaborate the problem.

Type selection is massively significant in watch design, regardless of whether the person at the CAD workstation is aware of it. In this case, they're definitely not.

I like the way screenfont.ca puts it. If you think I'm unequivocal (thanks, by the way!) wait until you get a load of this:

What’s wrong with Arial?

Essentially, you didn’t make a choice, presumably because you don’t know how. Arial is a sorry excuse for a grotesk.

"But the fonts we’re using are just fine with our customers."

Since this is essentially the same argument as “Comic Sans is just fine with our customers,” it’s difficult to take it seriously.

Arial is despised by expert designers. It’s a cut-rate knockoff of Helvetica; it’s inconsistent within itself, with some letters more reminiscent of humanist sansserifs; and it’s overused, chiefly by virtue of being associated with Microsoft Windows, which for many designers is a dealbreaker right there. If you’re going to use a grotesk, use a historically accurate and legitimate grotesk, not a clone.

We find that proponents of using Arial for captions and subtitles all but invariably say they “just” use Arial, rather demonstrating that they haven’t given it much thought. Or they’ve given it a tiny bit of thought (“Well, I obviously wouldn’t use Palatino”) but, through ignorance or through simple bad attitude, they don’t give the matter serious consideration. “I can read it and it doesn’t look too fancy” sums up this attitude.

We’re saying that captions and subtitles [and watch dials!] are a demanding, even high-performance application of typography. If you want people to actually read and understand words that display for an instant and then wink or scroll out of existence, you’ve got to be serious. You can’t just use whatever font’s installed on your commodity Windows box that you also happen to use in company printouts. (And did you actively choose Arial in that case, or did you just let Microsoft Word choose it for you?)

Without question the most important reason not to use Arial is because it makes you look like a rube.
​

Maybe Swiss watch companies are aware of the wackness of Arial use, and it's their idea of a joke. But it's more likely that whoever drafted it doesn't really know what he's doing.

It's not just that it's the lazy, depressing, default choice on lame computer stuff.
It's not just that the design it imitates is late-'50s-Modernist and is therefore entirely unsuited to an Art Deco watch.
It's not just that the uppercase "R" and "Q" in Arial, both of which appear here, are particularly terrible in a typeface that's unattractive in general.

The main thing for me is that it's a cheap, nasty excuse for a typeface that has no business on this watch. Its history is especially unsuited to a Swiss one, as it's a lower-quality ripoff of a legitimate (though overused) typeface that's even named after the country's Latin name of Confoederatio Helvetica, and only exists to dodge licensing fees.

I see no philosophical difference between the origins of Arial and a fake watch.

 

[no frills]

I don't see a problem with the font, but any reference to where the watch is made should be at the bottom of the dial. Looks like JLC is getting self-conscious. It's like their promo videos where they pronounce the name "Zhey-zher-Lay-Kooltruh!"

Well, beauty is always in the eye of the beholder, but this borders on shark jumping for me.

Dudes, I see this as a legitimate issue when we're talking about decent watches, where every detail counts.

Clearly, I need to elaborate the problem.

Type selection is massively significant in watch design, regardless of whether the person at the CAD workstation is aware of it. In this case, they're definitely not.

I like the way screenfont.ca puts it. If you think I'm unequivocal (thanks, by the way!) wait until you get a load of this:

What’s wrong with Arial?

Essentially, you didn’t make a choice, presumably because you don’t know how. Arial is a sorry excuse for a grotesk.

"But the fonts we’re using are just fine with our customers."

Since this is essentially the same argument as “Comic Sans is just fine with our customers,” it’s difficult to take it seriously.

Arial is despised by expert designers. It’s a cut-rate knockoff of Helvetica; it’s inconsistent within itself, with some letters more reminiscent of humanist sansserifs; and it’s overused, chiefly by virtue of being associated with Microsoft Windows, which for many designers is a dealbreaker right there. If you’re going to use a grotesk, use a historically accurate and legitimate grotesk, not a clone.

We find that proponents of using Arial for captions and subtitles all but invariably say they “just” use Arial, rather demonstrating that they haven’t given it much thought. Or they’ve given it a tiny bit of thought (“Well, I obviously wouldn’t use Palatino”) but, through ignorance or through simple bad attitude, they don’t give the matter serious consideration. “I can read it and it doesn’t look too fancy” sums up this attitude.

We’re saying that captions and subtitles [and watch dials!] are a demanding, even high-performance application of typography. If you want people to actually read and understand words that display for an instant and then wink or scroll out of existence, you’ve got to be serious. You can’t just use whatever font’s installed on your commodity Windows box that you also happen to use in company printouts. (And did you actively choose Arial in that case, or did you just let Microsoft Word choose it for you?)

Without question the most important reason not to use Arial is because it makes you look like a rube.
​

Maybe Swiss watch companies are aware of the wackness of Arial use, and it's their idea of a joke. But it's more likely that whoever drafted it doesn't really know what he's doing.

It's not just that it's the lazy, depressing, default choice on lame computer stuff.
It's not just that the design it imitates is late-'50s-Modernist and is therefore entirely unsuited to an Art Deco watch.
It's not just that the uppercase "R" and "Q" in Arial, both of which appear here, are particularly terrible in a typeface that's unattractive in general.

The main thing for me is that it's a cheap, nasty excuse for a typeface that has no business on this watch. Its history is especially unsuited to a Swiss one, as it's a lower-quality ripoff of a legitimate (though overused) typeface that's even named after the country's Latin name of Confoederatio Helvetica, and only exists to dodge licensing fees.

I see no philosophical difference between the origins of Arial and a fake watch.

But wait, Belli... Tell us how you really feel about Arial!