[Closed] Watch experts - assemble!

Grand Seiko.

IWC Portofino fits the bill

Something vintage and thus more original.

Q: What would experts on pricey watches know?

A: What they've been sold by the branding.

Tudor ?

Ooh, interesting. Some of those look very similar to my Aqua Terra, actually.

IWC Portuguese 7 Day reserve.

I'd find it hard to look past a Grand Seiko as well to be fair.

I do quite fancy this "poor mans" Aqua Terra though...

[img] [/img]

Something vintage and thus more original.

This is also very good advice.

I have a lovely vintage number that I inherited.
Every scratch, every mark, every imperfection is a part of the story of a truly marvellous man. I intend to wear it, love it, and pass it on to my son. One of his middle names is the name of the original owner.
[img] [/img]

1936ish, from the research I've done so far.

Something from Dornbluth & Sohn?

[img] [/img]

[img] [/img]

I'd say the AT you already own fits that bill.

Something from Bremont or Glashutte may suit and wont be too common either.

I'm an Omega fan too and have a Deville co-ax, I'd also like to try on a Blancpain.
I argue with a mate who likes Panerai's as I sometimes look at them in the same light as Rolex, Breitling, that could just be me though.

Grand Seiko or Citizen Chronomaster - both say you value quality and technology over simple name bling/rep.
An older Tudor would be a great call too - classy and high quality but NOT a Rolex.
Fwiw I'm no Omega fan and shouldn't say this but the older model quartz AT is way more appealing as a pick and go watch then I would like it to be!

not an 'expert' but I get to handle a lot of watches (some costing more than my flat) and visit a few manufacturers in Geneva. I think it's all about the movement or at very least that has to be a big part of it (for me)
What about Nomos? You will either instantly dismiss them on looks but if you like their style the new in-house movement is a big part of their appeal.
Rolex too bling? Again a top quality in-house movement and the oyster (in stainless) is quite understated, I'm about to get an Air-king as it's slightly smaller than the perpetual/date for my skinny wrists, understated and unlikely to lose any money

Something vintage and thus more original.

How is an older watch more original? I can understand that when you compare a homage to a previous watch like the Heuer cal18 or watches that have fake 'tropical' dials but modern watches are still works of art just because they are new doesn't mean they are less worthy than an old chrono with an off the shelf valjoux movement 😉

If a panerai floats your boat then go for it but for me they are more showy than a Rolex.
I recently went to Patek to shoot their new split seconds chrono before it was launched at Baselworld, it's stunning but probably £240k above your budget
Breitling now have their own B01 movement in the navitimer, bit 'sporty' for my tastes but nice timepieces.
For a completely off the wall suggestion what about a Schofield?

An older Tudor would be a great call too

SINN!

quartz

[img] [/img]

Hmmm... some interesting points there, will check them all out. Tough to say what got me looking at Panerais, but I think the presence and relative simplicity of the face makes it a bit of a statement, without the instantly recognisable Rolex design (for example), or the OTT visual complexity or brashness of something like a Hublot (not that I'd consider a Hublot).

Tudor is an intriguing one, I know of them, but not much of the lineup - the Black Flag looks... interesting. And Grand Seikos - very nice in a very understated way.

I bought a Longines Legend Diver with my long service award at work (~£1,250). It's a beautiful retro diving watch with mechanical movement, an internal bezal and two screw-in crowns. Quality is excellent with nice detailing and a lovely domed crystal glass. It's really comfortable on the black fabric strap it comes with and looks equally good with a suit or casual dress - not too bling and understated but feels 'special'.

I've also got a Sinn 556I which cost about half as much. It's more of a basic tool watch and is a really nice but I tend to wear the Legend Diver most of the time.

very nice in a very understated way.

Rather the point, isn't it?

If you want to show off, use a Mont Blanc pen, make sure your car keys are on the table (prestige marque, of course), flash some naff, but massive, cufflinks, etc.

Subtle is better. When my old watch (Above) pokes out from under a cuff, it's subtle. It doesn't shout, but, underneath, I know the meaning of it. Surely what you know and feel is more important than flashing it around?

Aside from pride of ownership and servicing [s]rip off[/s] costs, what are the actual differences in all these movements over quartz?

just have a look at the hodinkee website, if you can't find something within a few mins of browsing that makes you want to sell a kidney then stick to a quartz fashion watch from Argos

In the spirit of recommend what you've got http://ralftech.com/montre.php?modele=wrv_v_auto_77-volcano-auto lovely watches.

Don't get a Ti Panerai. I used to have a Pam 089 and the Ti was sooo soft, it picked up so many dings!!

I'd just go for a new 42mm Rolex Explorer or Submariner LV. A safe place to put your money.

Or a Grand Seiko Snowflake. Yum!!!!!

Lol MrSmith, no answer eh?

No answer to what? ❓

Love my SINN UX, it's COSC certified Quartz is far more accurate than my previous Omega Planet Ocean.
Plus I find the whole approach SINN use with materials, technology etc.. feeds my need to have something a bit different.

[URL= http://i48.photobucket.com/albums/f229/PSi3/265B8484-DD5D-4C0E-B204-35152CFFA63C_zpshrjwypd1.jp g" target="_blank">http://i48.photobucket.com/albums/f229/PSi3/265B8484-DD5D-4C0E-B204-35152CFFA63C_zpshrjwypd1.jp g"/> [/IMG][/URL]
[URL= http://i48.photobucket.com/albums/f229/PSi3/2B0ED146-3F37-4959-B8A3-2FBD216F372A_zpseni4wfep.jp g" target="_blank">http://i48.photobucket.com/albums/f229/PSi3/2B0ED146-3F37-4959-B8A3-2FBD216F372A_zpseni4wfep.jp g"/> [/IMG][/URL]

I quite like the look of the Zenith Captains. (however I have no idea if the movement/presitige/timekeeping etc are any good)

Quartz shock horror !

Buying of expensive automatic movement watch is a different thing from buying something nice to sit on your wrist to tell the time. I am not sure I understand it but have had the bug in the past. I have stepped away as I much prefer to spend any available cash on experiences, thing that lead to experiences...Bikes for example, but if I had money for both I would do both.

I bought my wife a Quartz Cartier, she simply would not have been bothered with a automatic, it is taken off and on all day and sometimes left for a week before it is worn again and just works when picked up again, she loves it.

I wear a Casio Mudman quartz day to day, I would have wrecked anything else, and I use the features a lot especially the light.

I don't agree with the OP about Rolex's being too bling sure they have some ugly flashy monstrosities for people with too much money, but their standard classic designs are.... well, classic.

I would have whole heartily agreed about Breitlings, but I can't as they make these which I like a lot.

[img] [/img]

Superocean Heritage.

I like Panerais, but they are enormous and scream "LOOK AT MY WATCH"
As mentioned, IWC are very grown up and they make some very nice stuff. I like the pilots.
[img] [/img]

I have one of these:
[img] [/img]

I also have an Omega De Ville, an early-ish Co-Axial model:
[img] [/img]
Extended movement performance between services, compared with a more conventional escapement. Quite understated, imo, although I typically prefer Arabic numerals.

I like some of the IWC and Jaeger range also, which may be worth a look.

Subtle is better. When my old watch (Above) pokes out from under a cuff, it's subtle. It doesn't shout, but, underneath, I know the meaning of it. Surely what you know and feel is more important than flashing it around?

Something from IWC or Bremont would fit the bill.

My Rolly Sub No-Date doesn't fit your description of Rollys; it's very subtle which is why I chose that model. The Rolex Milligaus(sp?) is also very easy on the eye.

I like (and will soon get):

[img] [/img]

😆 @mogrim!

I actually had an American colleague looking at my business card with envious eyes the other day. Life imitating art!

personally i wouldn’t buy anything over 1k that isn’t going to at least hold its value or have some value down the line. i just had a look at the hammer prices at a watch auction and theres an awful lot of gaudy watch bling that is worth peanuts and it’s usually the likes of omega/rolex/patek that hold their values. longines and other brands that suffered after the quartz crisis are worth bobbins.

irrelevent if you are unlikely to ever sell but those mid level watches like eterna, oris, tissot etc are never going to increase in value.

what is bling and showy about a stainless oyster/explorer/airking?

[img] [/img]

MrSmith - Member
No answer to what?

The question I asked.

My point is none of you would know if your £5K watch had a cheap quartz movement.

I'm not saying its wrong, just stop pretending its not about one up man ship of some form

My point is none of you would know if your £5K watch had a cheap quartz movement.

I'm not saying its wrong, just stop pretending its not about one up man ship of some form

thats crap. i would know exactly what movement i was buying. nothing wrong with a modified ETA or Valjoux even the fact they are owned by the swatch group doesn't bother me. yes there is something about an in-house movement and i like the fact that omega took the george daniels (british watchmaker) escapement and use it in their movements.

it’s only one-upmanship if you sit there showing your watch to other geeks, it’s about owning something well made and enjoying using it. i feel the same way about my Italian steel road bikes, my english made goodyear welted shoes, an opinel knife or my 60’s ercol coffee table. all things for my own enjoyment that are nicer than ikea furniture/plastic sweatshop trainers/giant/specialized/trek dull bikes.
what you or others think about those things doesn't enrich the experience of owning them.

[i] cynic-al - Member
My point is none of you would know if your £5K watch had a cheap quartz movement.

I'm not saying its wrong, just stop pretending its not about one up man ship of some form [/i]

I own both quartz, solar quartz and automatic. Yeah, I can tell the difference and no, I don't give a toss what anyone thinks about my watches, especially as I expect most folk don't even notice them.
And as such, it is in no way about "one up-manship" as I fully understand there are plenty of people about who are likely to be waaaaaay more wealthier than me, but who simply choose not to own Swiss watches or drive certain cars, etc, etc.

I've chosen to own the watches I have, for me, nobody else. All this "status" and "making a statement" rubbish is just that, rubbish. Its the same with my cars, I don't give a fig what anyone else thinks when they see any of my cars and more fool anyone who judges what type of person I might be on that basis. They'll most certainly be wrong.
In fact, in my experience, the folk who harp about the expensive watches (expensive being relative), cars, whatever other people choose to own, appear to me to be ever so slightly jealous.

Edit:
Yeah, and a bit of what Mr Smith posted, too ^^^

How would you know what movement is in a watch by looking at it? MrSmith seems to know his movements but what about the average punter who's just read about them on fora or been sold one by a dealer? Worse than the worst hifi tuning IMO!

Fair enough it's not always oneupmanship for everyone (snide "jealousy" comment noted) and I get that you have pleasure from owning the "better" movement, but what ACTUAL difference does it make in use? None.

Italian steel road bikes

Similar to the watch - it will ride the same as other steel bikes of same spec! (and IME Italian frames are the worst made I've seen)

my english made goodyear welted shoes

Different - that's about quality and durability (and perhaps style)

my 60’s ercol coffee table

A design statement - nothing in Ikea can match.

Yay, another thread derailed 🙄

[i] MrSmith seems to know his movements but what about the average punter who's just read about them on fora or been sold one by a dealer? Worse than the worst hifi tuning IMO![/i]

Fair enough, your point appears to be that by the numbers, there'll always be those among us with enough money to buy expensive items, but who may not understand or even value, the intangible, intrinsic, value of an item such as a hand built, steel road bike frame, the true value of which is literally brazed into the frame, produced by a true artisan and experienced frame builder.
Or a Swiss watch, some components of which are so small and delicate one would be forgiven for wondering how on earth such components were produced in the first place! Yet alone that as part of a movement, the thing keeps time.

So what I guess you're diverting this thread towards is the subject of "[i]taste[/i]". And the age old debate about those who seem to have it and those who might not, but whom have lots of cash.
Imo, the former, should they be in a position to do so, will appreciate owning items such as has been mentioned, for reasons of good taste, appreciating the true value of an item for it's intrinsic value, it's traits and, in some cases, for the shear wonderment at the craftsmanship required to produce that thing.
All points that are usually lost upon to those who know the price of anything and the value of nothing.

And that isn't a rebuke. Fair play to anyone who can stand up and declare that they've no idea what owning an automatic watch is really all about (and leave it at that, without criticizing) while they're happy enough owning a £25 quartz jobby.

How would you know what movement is in a watch by looking at it? MrSmith seems to know his movements but what about the average punter who's just read about them on fora or been sold one by a dealer? Worse than the worst hifi tuning IMO!

you can apply that to just about everything. some people are quite happy with the everyday and dont care what went into it or what it looks like or if there is something better out there.

Similar to the watch - it will ride the same as other steel bikes of same spec! (and IME Italian frames are the worst made I've seen)

some people like to have something different or own things that have an intrinsic value other than their pure functionality or monetary value, i think that should be celebrated not ridiculed.
anyway i’m off to look at a Kai Kristensen chest of drawers.

I know because mine's got a display back...... Nothing fancy at all, just a Stowa Flieger with an ETA movement. It has a few "extra" touches like an engraved rotor and blued screws. It was an emotional purchase though, bought as a kind of dual reward for a promotion at work and managing to make it to 30! I mess with irritating electronics all day and wanted something purely mechanical, I love wearing it and it always feels like the start of a weekend when I put it on. But geeky/sad but there you go. Would absolutely love a Submariner (no date) but will have to wait 'till 40 (more likely 50!) for one!