Poor man's watch thread

[New Shoes1]

Thanks for pointing that out, didn't know about those. Do you have a good source for buying/information?

Chino Watch and Higuchi are two that get recommended frequently.

 

[Wright Watches]

It's not just that it's a 40 mm watch as it is the fact it is a 40mm watch that is all dial with a small bezel. For comparison purposes, look at the Nomos Orion, which is 38 mm with a small bezel and can look oversized on some wrists.

12 mm is also somewhat thick for that style of watch, but not too thick for a more casual or sporty watch.

I respect your opinion and your points! I can't argue on those points because i truly believe is a matter of taste/preference. Have a nice day/week

 

[MSchapiro]

Thanks for pointing that out, didn't know about those. Do you have a good source for buying/information?

I have had good experiences with Chino.

I really need to get some pictures up.

Speaking of watch size, the SARX019 is 40mm and doesn't look big on my small wrists, so it can be done with careful design. The SARX029 is my favorite.

 

[MSchapiro]

Would you be interested in a luxury dress watch? Or only into dive / pilot watches?

After looking at your watches, I really like the design and the enamaled dial.

My critique would be that, given the protruding lugs, it would be too big for someone with a smaller wrist.

So also offering a 36mm would be a great second option.

Also I like roman numerals, but would be great to have the option for arabic numbers as well.

 

[Neognosis]

Thanks for pointing that out, didn't know about those. Do you have a good source for buying/information?

I like seiya japan.

seiyajapan.com

 

[TheWraith]

The current trend is for oversized watches, but those such watches will look naff once that trend ends (as all fads do). If you want your dress watch to be timeless, at least in size, then it isn't just opinion per sé, but it's backed up by decades worth of dress watches that are the 'proper' size for that style of watch and fits the greatest amount of wrist sizes. Dress watches are meant to be subtle, small-ish, melt into the wrist practically. 38mm is really the largest a dress watch should ever be. Anything above that is casual/sport size.

 

[usctrojans31]



The current trend is for oversized watches, but those such watches will look naff once that trend ends (as all fads do). If you want your dress watch to be timeless, at least in size, then it isn't just opinion per sé, but it's backed up by decades worth of dress watches that are the 'proper' size for that style of watch and fits the greatest amount of wrist sizes. Dress watches are meant to be subtle, small-ish, melt into the wrist practically. 38mm is really the largest a dress watch should ever be. Anything above that is casual/sport size.

Agree for the most part. I've seen some exceptional pieces at 39mm that wear and look smaller, so I'd put that at the situationally dependent size. Anything larger is, as you noted, casual.

 

[TheWraith]

^ You're right, usc, 39mm is borderline but can still work depending on the watch.

 

[Astaroth]

The current trend is for oversized watches, but those such watches will look naff once that trend ends (as all fads do). If you want your dress watch to be timeless, at least in size, then it isn't just opinion per sé, but it's backed up by decades worth of dress watches that are the 'proper' size for that style of watch and fits the greatest amount of wrist sizes. Dress watches are meant to be subtle, small-ish, melt into the wrist practically. 38mm is really the largest a dress watch should ever be. Anything above that is casual/sport size.

The problem is that everything is a fad/trend and many of these things are cyclical. Accepted, some trends last longer than others but it doesnt mean what was on trend now (or more commonly "last year") was the "right" solution and that prior/future ones are wrong.

I personally think 38mm is the sweet spot for a dress watch but accept some watches appear larger and others smaller than their measurements would suggest so dont automatically rule out a 40mm if it appears smaller on the wrist.

On the flip side in the 1960s 38mm would have been considered far too big, a colleague is big on his vintage omegas and the largest case side he has is 34mm. To me they look stupidly small on his wrist (he's 6'5 and well over 250 lbs) but he thinks its how it should be and anything over 34mm is part of this oversized watch trend that will end as all fads do. So my, and your, preference for 38mm is as much a fad to him and his 60s upbringing as the 40-42mm trend of today is to us.

Having not seen the Wright Watches in the flesh I cannot comment on how they wear, but as per the now deleted thread, my bigger concern would be the 12mm thickness for a basic date watch which is extremely thick for a dress watch without a serious number of complications. I understand that the watch has been designed to a price point and miniaturisation costs money and thus to keep the price the thickness has to suffer but it would rule itself out for me on that point alone.

 

[Wright Watches]

The problem is that everything is a fad/trend and many of these things are cyclical. Accepted, some trends last longer than others but it doesnt mean what was on trend now (or more commonly "last year") was the "right" solution and that prior/future ones are wrong.

I personally think 38mm is the sweet spot for a dress watch but accept some watches appear larger and others smaller than their measurements would suggest so dont automatically rule out a 40mm if it appears smaller on the wrist.

On the flip side in the 1960s 38mm would have been considered far too big, a colleague is big on his vintage omegas and the largest case side he has is 34mm. To me they look stupidly small on his wrist (he's 6'5 and well over 250 lbs) but he thinks its how it should be and anything over 34mm is part of this oversized watch trend that will end as all fads do. So my, and your, preference for 38mm is as much a fad to him and his 60s upbringing as the 40-42mm trend of today is to us.

Having not seen the Wright Watches in the flesh I cannot comment on how they wear, but as per the now deleted thread, my bigger concern would be the 12mm thickness for a basic date watch which is extremely thick for a dress watch without a serious number of complications. I understand that the watch has been designed to a price point and miniaturisation costs money and thus to keep the price the thickness has to suffer but it would rule itself out for me on that point alone.

Hello,
All these are valid points and we can't argue with them. The deleted thread will come back. It's not actually deleted, it's invisible due to some matters we need to settle with the forum owners. Other than that we accept all the points you point out but we still believe that the 40mm watch we are offering looks fine and feels fine on the wrist. Not too big not too small. 12mm top to bottom again feels fine and not too big. Although we can keep arguing all day about it, let's agree to disagree! I am not trying to defend my brand or anything, it's just if the watch looked or felt too big we wouldn't have continued further with it. But it doesn't. At least to us. The miniaturisation is not something that we could have done due to the fact Miyota 8215 doesn't allow for anything thinner. Miyota 9015 allows for a 10mm but then again the customer would have to pay an extra 100-150$ on top to use that movement. I hope I was clear enough. Thanks

 

[Iyor]

The thickness along with the size look off to me. Vacheron and Breguet have 40 mm dress watches, but coupled with the thickness and almost no bezel, yours just doesn't look right. I understand the limitation of the movement, but you should then design the whole watch around it. The fact that 40mm dress watches looks ok doesn't mean that your design does.

 

[Wright Watches]

The thickness along with the size look off to me. Vacheron and Breguet have 40 mm dress watches, but coupled with the thickness and almost no bezel, yours just doesn't look right. I understand the limitation of the movement, but you should then design the whole watch around it. The fact that 40mm dress watches looks ok doesn't mean that your design does.

I understand. Unfortunately this is a risk we will have to take and proceed with the current design we have. Thanks for your feedback.

 

[Galix]

Regarding size, I do agree with some of the previously mentioned ideas that dress watches should be under 38 mm.

I have owned many watches in the past years, from mass produced watches to luxury watches, from obscure brands to vintage watches. I really love them.
But I have to say that my taste has deeply evolved from when I started collecting watches. My first "real" watches were big, very big. 42 mm for "dress" watches big. I still remember the first time I bought a vintage watch and my reaction when it arrived. It was a 34mm, 1950s watch. When I put it on I thought it looked so ridiculous that I gave it to my sister in law. I thought it looked like a woman's watch.
Some years forward, I still own more watches than I have use for. But I only have two watches in my rotation. Only two watches out of all I have that I use. One sports watch, a 37mm Grand Seiko and one dress watch, a 35mm Longines Conquest.
I don't know if my taste will continue to evolve, but for me my sweet spot is nowadays between 34 - 38 mm. Last time I tried one of my original watches, a 40mm "dress" watch, I thought it looked ridiculous

 

[New Shoes1]

Hello,
All these are valid points and we can't argue with them. The deleted thread will come back. It's not actually deleted, it's invisible due to some matters we need to settle with the forum owners. Other than that we accept all the points you point out but we still believe that the 40mm watch we are offering looks fine and feels fine on the wrist. Not too big not too small. 12mm top to bottom again feels fine and not too big. Although we can keep arguing all day about it, let's agree to disagree! I am not trying to defend my brand or anything, it's just if the watch looked or felt too big we wouldn't have continued further with it. But it doesn't. At least to us. The miniaturisation is not something that we could have done due to the fact Miyota 8215 doesn't allow for anything thinner. Miyota 9015 allows for a 10mm but then again the customer would have to pay an extra 100-150$ on top to use that movement. I hope I was clear enough. Thanks

This is what is really confusing to me. Who is your target customer? Seiko and Orient, among others, both make thinner mechanical dress watches for under $500. Christopher Ward is right around that price point as well, with its slimline models at 40 mm, roughly 8 mm thick and an ETA movement. As for the Miyota 9015, Kent Wang is offering dress watches with that movement for under $400. I hate to say it, but you appear to be entering into a segment of the watch industry that is already being served by competitors with better products and prices. Am I missing something? Is there a competitive differentiator for your watches that I fail to grasp?

 

[Wright Watches]

This is what is really confusing to me. Who is your target customer? Seiko and Orient, among others, both make thinner mechanical dress watches for under $500. Christopher Ward is right around that price point as well, with its slimline models at 40 mm, roughly 8 mm thick and an ETA movement. As for the Miyota 9015, Kent Wang is offering dress watches with that movement for under $400. I hate to say it, but you appear to be entering into a segment of the watch industry that is already being served by competitors with better products and prices. Am I missing something? Is there a competitive differentiator for your watches that I fail to grasp?

Hello.
You are talking about watches of 350-500$. We could have done that if we used 9015 and we kept the thickness at around 10mm. Although the price point we wanted was under 300$ and that was only possible with 8215 that doesnt allow for less than 12mm. I think i explained that previously (not sure). Also about the question "Who is your target customer?" Well the answer is every watch enthusiast who wants to enter the mechanical world but doesn't afford the 350$+ watches. We are not targeting watch freaks, enthusiasts because these people usually own relative expensive watches. We just want to target people who want to try an automatic without paying an arm and a leg. I never said that our watches are better than Seiko or Orient. I never mentioned any other brand on any of my posts. The difference to our watches? Is that for 200-250$ you can get a really good entry level automatic watch if you want to enter the mechanical world. At least that's the idea. Is that more clear? Thanks