The Watch Appreciation Thread - Part two (Rolex, Patek Philippe, Audemars Piguet, Jaeger LeCoultre,

[michaelvl]



Nice. Which PAM model is that?

Thanks, it is a PAM0027B (Tritium) from 1998.

The previous series (the A-series) was all Tritium, the series afterwards (the C-series) was all Luminova. The B-series was transitional, some came with Tritium dials, most with Luminova dials. The model was discontinued with the C-series in 1999. Only a few hundred were made over all series with T-dials around 800 and around 3000 with L-dials, so you don't see these very often. The exact number of watches made is not exactly clear because the A- and B-series shared their mile estimation with the PAM0028 (a similar model but then PVD coated and with hobnail dial).

 

[Dino944]

Hey dudes. Nice new thread you got here.

Confession time —I'm starting to think that I may have too many watches:

There's also a GMT II on permanent loan to my dad, an extra OP and OQ, plus a bunch of others that I don't get around to wearing much. But for now let's just focus on the pictured ones.

However, every watch person knows that's a ridiculous idea. It's near-impossible to cut back to a single one once you're hooked. And it's nice to have just the right thing, which is how this stuff starts.


So any thoughts from fellow watch addicts on what you'd keep/ditch and why?

Apropos has the correct line up IMHO. Seadweller, GMT, Daytona, OQ.

You've always been a GMT guy, so that's a keeper. You can nix the Explorer II, nice as it is, the GMT gives you all the same functions. Plus I prefer a Pepsi to any Polar Ex2 in terms of appearance.

Keep the Seadweller 4000. It is close in design and style to classic earlier SDs, and it is all the diving watch you could ever need without being as bulkie or top heavy, as the DSSD. Not to mention, since you have't worn the DSSD, you should get top dollar for it.

The Daytona, because its handsome, a bit sleeker than a GMT or SD, and if you have to, you can dress it up a bit more easily than a Pepsi or SD. In addition, it has one of the technologically best chronograph movements on the market. It also adds a bit of diversity to your Rolex collection.

The OQ, its quirky, often under appreciated, but very high quality, and its funky 70's styling is very cool. Its a watch that you can wear with suits, jeans, or for almost any occasion. It's a piece that even some newer Rolex fans have never seen, so it stands out a bit from the usual Datejusts. Not to mention its convenient to have a watch that you can have sitting in a drawer for weeks, and throw it on and not have to set the time if you are in a hurry.

I certainly understand feeling you have too many watches. Every now and then I consider that may be true for myself also. I found when I had 4 watches, I shifted through wearing them all far more frequently. Once I reached 6, I started to noticed I just didn't rotate through them as often as I used to (although, I'm not complaining). Like many collectors, its nice to have watches for certain occasions, and some of my watches were gifts or mark special accomplishments, so there is a reason my collection is roughly at its current size. Anyway, wishing you lots of luck with thinning out the herd.

This was my initial understanding, but I've seen it suggested that there are some T dials during the transition period (1998) that were luminova. The supposition being that Rolex had a few T dials left over when they started using luminova.

I vaguely recall some folks getting "T" marked dials that seemed to have Luminova around the time of the transition. That looks like Luminova to me. I have a few Tritium watches and exposing them to light isn't going to "Recharge" its lum and make it glow green like in your photo. (I even tried it with one of my watches this morning just for the heck of it and as I expected there was no change). Cheers!

My current line up;

And hoping to hear some opinions. I'm struggling to know which way to go.....steel or leather?

Steel. Sorry, I know there are folks here that love swapping bracelets and straps, but for me a sport/professional model Rolex always looks best on a steel Oyster bracelet. I find the strap with the thick white stitching to the right, detracts from the watch. I know people like the idea of "Tool watches" being on rugged looking straps, and I've seen that style of strap before and to me it always looks cheap (I'm sure its not, and I get the whole purpose/tool look thing...but that stitching below the lugs always looks like something that a person made at home). Rolex sold and presented your watch on a steel oyster and that's how it belongs. If you had to go with a strap, I'd go with something nicer looking. In the past a few guys with black dial watches had their watches on very dark brown straps and it was a nice contrast with the black dial (I think it might look nice with a vintage watch that has some patina), and the dark brown looked rich, but kept it from getting too dressy. I think one or two even had contrasting stitching down the sides of the strap. Good luck with whatever you decide.

I am in the market for a new watch and wanted SF's thoughts on the options below. I plan to wear it with navy/charcoal suits at work and also use it for casual wear. I am in my late 20's, working in finance in NYC and looking for something classy yet sleek/modern. My budget is ~$7,000, which is a limit not a goal (if no significant style/quality difference then I would go for the cheaper option).

I am deciding between the Rolex Oyster Perpetual and the Omega Aqua Terra. I am also including a trio of long shots in case they get some love: a Baume et Mercier (my 3rd option), a Tag Heuer and a Movado, which I like it but might be too casual and designed for younger people.


Which one would you prefer and why?

Rolex Oyster Perpetual (Rhodium)

Go with the Rolex Oyster Perpetual on an Oyster bracelet. Its clean, its sleek, its rugged, and you will have a watch that you can do anything with for decades. I have some that are 20 years old and they still look fresh and relevant. Keeping the budget in mind, my advice is buy they best watch that you can afford (and truly want). If you don't I think there is a strong likelihood that you will look back and either wish you bought the Rolex or you will end up buying one years from now anyway. A friend who works on Wallstreet always said, he wasn't a Rolex guy and didn't want to spend the money on one. He owned good watches from other brands, various Omegas, Zenith, Breitlings, etc...but after about 15 years of collecting he finally bought a Rolex. Amazingly, this former Anti-Rolex guy said his only regret about the Rolex was not buying one sooner when they were about half of what he spent.

If this were a race, the other watches you've posted are just in the category of "Also ran." The only Omega I've ever had much interest in owning is a classic Speedy Pro...the others just don't do anything for me at all. However, if I were buying one good watch, I'd probably want an automatic out of convenience, rather than a manual wind (Speedy Pro). My Walstreet pal owns a Speedy Pro, and it was his everyday piece when he was younger and had more time, but he said its a weekend watch now. He said with work, kids, and travel, he just doesn't want to have to wind a watch every day...he has more important things to do.

The other brands you mentioned are fine, but again, nothing significant and I certainly wouldn't choose any of those over the Oyster Perpetual. Get the Oyster Perpetual!

 

[Kaplan]

'

 

[apropos]



I am in the market for a new watch and wanted SF's thoughts on the options below. I plan to wear it with navy/charcoal suits at work and also use it for casual wear. I am in my late 20's, working in finance in NYC and looking for something classy yet sleek/modern. My budget is ~$7,000, which is a limit not a goal (if no significant style/quality difference then I would go for the cheaper option).

I am deciding between the Rolex Oyster Perpetual and the Omega Aqua Terra. I am also including a trio of long shots in case they get some love: a Baume et Mercier (my 3rd option), a Tag Heuer and a Movado, which I like it but might be too casual and designed for younger people.


Which one would you prefer and why?

Rolex Oyster Perpetual (Rhodium)

Movado and B&M are dead in the water. They are nice, not unattractive, and quirky in their own way but it's like comparing Amy Schumer to, I don't know, Gisele Bundchen or Gal Gadot. Or Kate Upton.

The Tag is Rebel Wilson. Enough said.

Rolex trumps Omega for SS time only or time + date watches IMO despite the latter marque's HEAVY advertising push in the last 5 years - they just feel better made (most noticeable in the bracelet & clasp), have a better story, more visible DNA compared to their vintage predecessors, and of course more resale value.

Oyster bracelet > jubilee for a business setting, though I am partial to the GMT-I on a jubilee. Not many people here know that back in the day dealers, especially European ones, were happy to do non kosher things like swap dials and bracelets to make a sale. Grey also > blue for a business setting and overall flexibility IMO.

 

[Texasmade]



I am deciding between the Rolex Oyster Perpetual and the Omega Aqua Terra. I am also including a trio of long shots in case they get some love: a Baume et Mercier (my 3rd option), a Tag Heuer and a Movado, which I like it but might be too casual and designed for younger people.

As more of an Omega guy I'd have to agree with Dino and go with the Rolex Oyster Perpetual (Rhodium). This looks better than all of the other watches posted. My #2 choice would be the Omega AT (Black)

 

[dcg]



I vaguely recall some folks getting "T" marked dials that seemed to have Luminova around the time of the transition.  That looks like Luminova to me.  I have a few Tritium watches and exposing them to light isn't going to "Recharge" its lum and make it glow green like in your photo.  (I even tried it with one of my watches this morning just for the heck of it and as I expected there was no change).   Cheers!

Dino, many thanks for the info, and especially for taking the time to confirm with your own watch. I've been running in circles the past day and a half trying to figure this out.

Have my heart set on tritium, so this one will be going back.

 

[forex]

Mimo, great job on the FAQ. I thought it would come out silly but it actually looks great!
Belli, all great watches. I justify my watch collection by telling myself I will pass them on to my kids, so maybe you should do that

My vote would go for SD4K ( I have it and love it, I had the DSSD but it wasn't very practical), GMT and OP.

 

[robw]

Buy what you like obviously, but the Rolex is the no-brainer here. It goes with everything, will keep its value well and pretty much never go out of style.

My first "good" watch was a blue dial datejust, and 20 something years and many watches later, it still gets wrist time. Like I say, a no-brainer.

Good luck.

...

 

[Dino944]

Dino, many thanks for the info, and especially for taking the time to confirm with your own watch. ....Have my heart set on tritium, so this one will be going back.

You're welcome. If you have a tritium preference for a more "Vintage look" I get that. I'm big into originality and a nice vintage dial can be very beautiful. However, from a practicality standpoint, most Tritium dials will offer little to no lum at this point in their lives (if that matters to you). I think the longest one of my tritium dials continued to glow at night was about 20 years old. It wasn't super bright, but still quite visible at night or in a dark room. If tritium is still visible, on a dial you will largely need your eyes to adjust to the darkness before you see anything. They don't recharge with exposure to light like superluminova or other lums (once its lum is dead, it stays that way). I have some vintage watches with tritium dials and some newer pieces with luminova & superluminova, and I like all of them. Good luck with whatever you decide.

 

[DLJr]

I still can't get past the contrast dots above the markers on the new OPs. Totally kills the watch for me.

 

[tigerpac]

@francisco_bt

I'd also take a look at the Rolex Explorer I. Similar to the OP but without the splashy color markers (and more shock protection)

The Omega AT is great, I had one, but it is a little thick for what it is and after awhile it got a bit cumbersome.

Here's mine during a recent trip to LA at the Getty Museum.

 

[Dino944]

Rolex ... more visible DNA compared to their vintage predecessors, and of course more resale value.

Not many people here know that back in the day dealers, especially European ones, were happy to do non kosher things like swap dials and bracelets to make a sale.

I agree completely on the Rolex DNA. For years one of my main issues with Omega was that (with the exception of the manual wind Speedy Pros), they scrapped their designs, and came up with completely new ones every few years. It made previous collections look very dated, and killed their resale value (although that was good if you like the old model and purchased it cheaply used, but it sucked if you bought it new).

While Rolex has moved slowly with their product lines. They were a brand where models aged and evolved, gaining numerous improvements over the years. It resulted in a model line up that remains strong today in terms of design heritage/DNA, and that helps translate to strong resale value. When you look at a model from the 1960,s 1970's, 1980's etc you can see evolutionary changes in models, but they were not drastic changes or a completely different look that leave a model stuck in the decade when the change happened (which is common of Omegas from the 1970's through the late 1990s...although that can be fun if a person really wants a vintage piece that says 1970's or 1990's Omega). I think Omega has gotten better and allowed their models to evolve rather than scrapping them every few years, which it time will lead to improved resale, but it still has a way to go.

In the US, you could get dealers to swap bracelets and dials on watches easily into about the early to mid 1990s. Then Rolex USA began to change, and restrict what US AD's and their inhouse service departments could do with watches that were in stock (largely by restricting parts availability).

 

[jamesryan123]

Anyone ever come across Jaquet Droz? Got offered one from an AD in the UK, while looking at a JLC, for half price which I thought was crazy discounting. It was rose gold and it was still £7000+ but even so. Hated it, not my style at all, but intrigued to know thoughts on them.

 

[Andy57]

I am in the market for a new watch and wanted SF's thoughts on the options below. I plan to wear it with navy/charcoal suits at work and also use it for casual wear. I am in my late 20's, working in finance in NYC and looking for something classy yet sleek/modern. My budget is ~$7,000, which is a limit not a goal (if no significant style/quality difference then I would go for the cheaper option).

Which one would you prefer and why?

Rolex Oyster Perpetual (Rhodium)
Rolex Oyster Perpetual (Blue)
Omega Seamaster Aqua Terra (Blue)
Omega Seamaster Aqua Terra (Black)
Omega Seamaster Aqua Terra (White)
Baume et Mercier Classisima
Carrera Calibre 16
Movado

I have the new Rolex Oyster Perpetual, the blue dial version. It's a superb watch, every inch a Rolex, understated, good looking, and rugged. You seek something classy yet sleek? Look no further than the Rolex. It's also, in my opinion, a huge bargain at less than $6K.

I'm also a big fan of Omega and I do like (but do not own) an Aqua Terra. The white one looks good to me. But, it is not a Rolex and I don't think the Aqua Terra is a watch that is in the same league as the OP. Now, if you were looking at a Speedy Pro or a new master coaxial Seamaster 300, well, that would be a much more difficult decision. Although for what you say you seek, the Rolex is exactly on point.

B&M, Movado, and TAG? No.

 

[Dino944]

Anyone ever come across Jaquet Droz? Got offered one from an AD in the UK, while looking at a JLC, for half price which I thought was crazy discounting. It was rose gold and it was still £7000+ but even so. Hated it, not my style at all, but intrigued to know thoughts on them.

Yes, I've tried them on at the behest of a friend/former AD for them and an acquaintance who knew I have a soft spot for wrist watches. Nicely finished, but not my taste. There are too many other good watches out there for the same money that I'd rather own. Since you also brought up JLC, I'd prefer some version of a Reverso to a Jacquet Droz. Cheers!