More obsessive wristwatch malarkey.

Just acquired one of these:

Ooooohhhh… (Sorry, I think I just came).

Nice.

I like.

Time’s wrong

No numbers, not for the likes of me!

wait a bit.

Time’s wrong

Fun Fact: watches are (almost) always shown at ten past ten, because it makes a tick and/or a happy smile.

It’s got 2 second hands. Is it a fake?

It’s second hand? No new ones available?

If i’d got more money than sense, one of these would be nice.

Don’t see the point in all this overpriced wrist watch malarkey. I guess I’m a bit of a heathen, but my Casio does the same job. I’m really not knocking it, but I’d love to hear why people spend so much money on them. Is it just that you’ve got so much that you can’t think of anything better to spend it on? Wish I was that flush :-/

Edit; appreciate that this has probably been said (and answered) before; nothing new under the sun and all that.

I keep meaning to get one of these.

The perfect singlespeeder’s watch?

…but my Casio does the same job.

Not if it doesn’t look the same, and make the wearer feel the same.

Watches aren’t just for telling the time.

Just like clothes aren’t just for covering up your arse . Otherwise we would all wear grey boiler suits.

Not so fun fact watches and clocks are traditionally displayed at ten past ten as the hands frame the makers name and the longer minute hand balances the “heavier” 10 on the dial. That’s what I was taught at horology in jewellery college anyway

Don’t see the point in all this overpriced wrist watch malarkey. I guess I’m a bit of a heathen, but my Casio does the same job. I’m really not knocking it, but I’d love to hear why people spend so much money on them. Is it just that you’ve got so much that you can’t think of anything better to spend it on? Wish I was that flush :-/

Just the same as bikes, cars, houses, clothes, etc. innit?
A simple 1 room wooden hut with a fireplace will likely keep you warm, dry and sheltered from the elements. A poverty-spec Tata will get you to and from work. A Halfords special will batter about the local canal paths without too much trouble. A £5 Casio will tell the time.

But if you have the cash and the inclination, why not buy a nice country pad, an Aston, a Santa Cruz, an Audemars Piguet? Variety is the spice of life and all that. And a well-made watch movement is a thing of wonder.

Is it just that you’ve got so much that you can’t think of anything better to spend it on?

So, this then. Fair enough, I guess.

I suppose it’s all relative. I can see the logic of spending fifty to a hundred quid on something that does everything you want, well. It must be that my hundred quid is another mans grand, five grand, relatively speaking. It really is just showing off though, if you’re honest. JUST like posh cars, houses not so much. Thing is, at least with the cars, the houses, the bikes (to a point at least) you get something really noticeably better. The watch is still just a watch at the end of the day; some of the really posh ones don’t even keep time all that well, or so I understand… 😯

I love nice watches.

However, I must have different taste to most, as so many of these threads here are full of bloody awful looking things, such as the Seiko 5 which gets so much love – I really don’t get it!

one of the ugliest watches I’ve seen to be frank..

Is it a ladies watch?

v8ninety – Member
Don’t see the point in all this overpriced wrist watch malarkey.

£89

Previous watch, had it for years, heavy/bulky and pins keep falling out of the strap and it got pretty scratched up:

so I thought it was time for some minimalism. The Bering feels a bit strange after looking at the over-decorated Seiko for all that time.

My new timepiece:

Bit too minimalist for me.
I quite like that Uno though.
🙂

These are great value, I keep meaning to get one as a birthday pressie:
Orient Bambino. About £80.00 from Creation last time I checked.

White or black faces, gold cases and different numeral styles availale if the blue doesn’t do it for you.

When Swatch started getting creative I had an all black one with a matte black dial and gloss black hands. No numbers.
Minimal!

Edit: you can still get them.

Another fun fact. If your watch has Roman numerals, the 4 had better be IIII not IV.

Why’s that eddie?

If your watch has Roman numerals, the 4 had better be IIII not IV.

por kwah?

Da core. Por kwah.

That Orient is bloody lovely and not very much money either, I can feel a treat to myself coming on…

Tradition. Just Google watch and clock faces. Probably to with predating subtractive notation. And visual symmetry. There’s a good piece about it on the Greenwich site.

Interesting.

According to this Fossil blog[/url], IIII was a construct of Louis the Fourteenth because he didn’t like the looks of XIV, so he insisted everyone use XIIII. French and Swiss watchmakers followed suit. British watchmakers continued to use IV as an insult to Louis.

Orient do make some lovely watches, especially their premium OrientStar ones. I think this Retrograde seconds one compares favourably to some more expensive, well known Swiss brands.

Watches are jewellery.

What does a necklace or pair of earrings *do* ? Nothing. But they look nice.

What does an expensive watch *do* (except tell the time) ? Nothing. But it looks nice.

Same same. People who bleat about £5 Casios being just as good are completely missing the point.

Same same. People who bleat about £5 Casios being just as good are completely missing the point.

They are better actually…at telling the time.

People who claim there is something better about them other than looks (subjective) or quality (not always easy to demonstrate, and in terms of the movement, meaningless) are kidding themselves.

They are better actually…at telling the time.

thats great. i guess you have to weigh up your options, be accurate to +/- 0.7 second a day or be accurate to -4/+6* and be a nice looking mechanical timepiece. thankfully for those that dont feel the need to know the time within .07 of a second there are plenty of options available at various price points.

*cosc certified standards for quartz and mechanical movements.

thing is nobody ever looked at a quartz movement and said “that looks amazing”

$250k Patek split seconds chronograph

You seem (yet again 🙄 ) to be arguing against me, but aren’t actually arguing against anything I have said.

thing is nobody ever looked at a quartz movement and said “that looks amazing”

I dunno MrSmith, some watch nerds might find the following pretty cool…

I’m not sure many people are claiming expensive watches are ‘better’ just that they like the look of them. Unless you spend huge sums, all watches are stamped out by the 1000’s.
I have a cheap Casio, and a few more expensive ones (low 100’s). The Casio is good for telling the time, the others I enjoy the look of.

MrSmith – Member
thing is nobody ever looked at a quartz movement and said “that looks amazing”

So very wrong.

Edit. And i’m pretty slow…

that looks like a science experiment kit you got for your 10th birthday.

You seem (yet again ) to be arguing against me, but aren’t actually arguing against anything I have said.

??? ❓ 😯

i was agreeing with you??? a digital casio is better at telling the time FACT

just saying there are other watches out there that if you don’t need to tell accurate time to .07 seconds per day offer other qualities than accurate timekeeping. dont worry i’m not looking to prove you wrong or make you admit i’m right so i feel better about myself or anything like that. i like watches (non digital) i’m not looking to make you like them too. is that O.K? 😐

This is mine, bought for myself after getting a work promotion a few years back.