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

[Newcomer]



this was a very cool read, thanks, newc!

No problem broseph.

Nicolas over on TPP has some great articles. And the Geophysics / Jaeger Chronometers are some truly fascinating watches. The geophysic might have one of the greatest movements of all time. In fact, it is what Dufour based his simplicity upon.

 

[MattyThomo]

Am very much appreciating this thread, guys! I've been thinking of investing in my first serious watch for quite a while now, and am particularly interested in some of the older Rolex models. I've been looking around online quite a bit lately, and found some nice Rolex models here http://www.chrono24.co.nz/rolex/index.htm
Has anyone ever bought watches on websites like this? What should I be watching out for when shopping for watches online?

 

[no frills]

Thought I heard someone say "Rolex."

 

[kungapa]



If you had £5k to spend ($8300) and were 27, looking for a serious watch; what would it be? Have a steel tag already and rolex's just too common or too expensive for the uncommon ones. Slim wrists, so looking for something more leather strap and smaller face orientated. First thought was Lecoultre Master Moonphase ultra thin because you dont see too many of them about. 

Only looking for new really so no "you could pick up a patek on ebay for £5k on a good day" comments please. 

Check out Nomos - great inhouse movements, and rather different than a lot of other watches.

 

[bespoken pa]



Thought I heard someone say "Rolex."

Great watch, what are the specs on the SC?

 

[DerekS]



Thought I heard someone say "Rolex."

love that explorer frills. makes me miss mine.

 

[Dino944]

If you had £5k to spend ($8300) and were 27, looking for a serious watch; what would it be? Have a steel tag already and rolex's just too common or too expensive for the uncommon ones. Slim wrists, so looking for something more leather strap and smaller face orientated. First thought was Lecoultre Master Moonphase ultra thin because you dont see too many of them about.

Only looking for new really so no "you could pick up a patek on ebay for £5k on a good day" comments please.

If you aren't considering a Rolex, I'd say the JLC is probably your best bet. IWC has some interesting offerings, but JLC is a bit higher quality IMHO. If you like JLC, you can't go wrong with anything that they are offering. I generally prefer their Reverso line...but that Master series is a great watch and maybe a bit more versatile than a Reverso (which I generally see as dressy).

While not as common as Rolex, if you are concerned about having a watch that lots of other people have, that would pretty much rule out Omega, Breitling and a few others.

I would just ask if you see this as a long term watch, or just a first good watch. If you don't plan to keep it more than a few years...don't get something too obscure as you won't get much of your money out of it and you might have trouble finding a buyer. Rolex and other brands may seem common, but the upside is there are always people that want them and they have good resale value relative to other brands.

this sums up my feelings on teh matter.

Am very much appreciating this thread, guys! I've been thinking of investing in my first serious watch for quite a while now, and am particularly interested in some of the older Rolex models. I've been looking around online quite a bit lately, and found some nice Rolex models here http://www.chrono24.co.nz/rolex/index.htm
Has anyone ever bought watches on websites like this? What should I be watching out for when shopping for watches online?

You really need to do your research on the model/s that interest you. There are lots of fake or "franken-watches" that use parts of real Rolex watches that get cobbled into some sort of watch, and then there are modified pieces (that generally are not as valuable as a Rolex with real Rolex parts (some may have after market bezels, bracelets, etc) Then you need to be sure that the place you are buying from is legit. I'd be more apt to purchase in person so you can see what you are buying. However, sites such as watchnet.com have sections about good dealers and bad ones. Good luck.

love that explorer frills. makes me miss mine.

x 2. I feel the same way when I see pix of Frill's Explorer.
I'm giving the Oysterquartz some wrist time today



But I think tomorrow I'll go wear one of my older watches...like this 1996 Daytona with El Primero based movement.

 

[BostonHedonist]

Gentlemen, I need a quick bit of advice on a matter I'm stuck on. I am about to buy an Omega Speedmaster Professional for my first "serious" watch.

Now I'm stuck on a tough question, do I go with the traditional 3570 with the hesalite (acrylic) crystal, as close as it gets to the one worn on the moon?:




Or do I go with the more scratch proof and beautiful 3573, aka "sapphire sandwich" with the extra polished bits and display caseback for another $600.




It is a question of durability and heritage vs aesthetics and novelty. The hesalite with the steel caseback is the genuine "moonwatch." Hesalite scratches but can be polished back to original condition easily. Sapphire is virtually scratchproof, but is more expensive to replace and more prone to shattering/chipping. But the movements are nearly identical, so it isn't that much of a divergence of horological historical integrity.

Quite frankly, I'm dead stuck between the two. It certainly is a lovely movement to look at. I just wonder if, by getting the sapphire version, I'd feel more inclined to baby a watch that is really designed to be an tank of a precision sportswatch.

Thoughts?

 

[MZhammer]

Gentlemen, I need a quick bit of advice on a matter I'm stuck on. I am about to buy an Omega Speedmaster Professional for my first "serious" watch.

Now I'm stuck on a tough question, do I go with the traditional 3570 with the hesalite (acrylic) crystal, as close as it gets to the one worn on the moon?:




Or do I go with the more scratch proof and beautiful 3573, aka "sapphire sandwich" with the extra polished bits and display caseback for another $600.




It is a question of durability and heritage vs aesthetics and novelty. The hesalite with the steel caseback is the genuine "moonwatch." Hesalite scratches but can be polished back to original condition easily. Sapphire is virtually scratchproof, but is more expensive to replace and more prone to shattering/chipping. But the movements are nearly identical, so it isn't that much of a divergence of horological historical integrity.

Quite frankly, I'm dead stuck between the two. It certainly is a lovely movement to look at. I just wonder if, by getting the sapphire version, I'd feel more inclined to baby a watch that is really designed to be an tank of a precision sportswatch.

Thoughts?

For me it would be the sandwich for sure, I like the hesalite for history sake but that movement makes the sapphire almost a must for me. The history is take or leave from my viewpoint. I'm not sure why you'd need to "baby" the sapphire version. Most sports watches have sapphire in them nowadays and they aren't soft. I beat the heck out of my SMP and never worry about thh crystal.

 

[Gianni Cerutti]



Thought I heard someone say "Rolex."

beautiful buttonhole contrast ... and a nice Rolex and matching cufflinks.

 

[BostonHedonist]

For me it would be the sandwich for sure, I like the hesalite for history sake but that movement makes the sapphire almost a must for me. The history is take or leave from my viewpoint. I'm not sure why you'd need to "baby" the sapphire version. Most sports watches have sapphire in them nowadays and they aren't soft. I beat the heck out of my SMP and never worry about thh crystal.

Exactly what I was hoping to hear. My thanks.

 

[in stitches]

i cant imagine not being able to look at that movement.

 

[Dino944]

Gentlemen, I need a quick bit of advice on a matter I'm stuck on. I am about to buy an Omega Speedmaster Professional for my first "serious" watch.

Now I'm stuck on a tough question, do I go with the traditional 3570 with the hesalite (acrylic) crystal, as close as it gets to the one worn on the moon?:

It is a question of durability and heritage vs aesthetics and novelty. The hesalite with the steel caseback is the genuine "moonwatch." Hesalite scratches but can be polished back to original condition easily. Sapphire is virtually scratchproof, but is more expensive to replace and more prone to shattering/chipping. But the movements are nearly identical, so it isn't that much of a divergence of horological historical integrity.

Quite frankly, I'm dead stuck between the two. It certainly is a lovely movement to look at. I just wonder if, by getting the sapphire version, I'd feel more inclined to baby a watch that is really designed to be an tank of a precision sportswatch.

Thoughts?

The history is nice. However, you have to remember, the movement is actually different than the watch that has been worn to the moon, certain metal parts are now plastic. Now if you want the watch closest historically to what went to the moon, then go for the 3570. However, considering, neither watch is identical to what went to the moon, if you like being able to view the movement...then go for the model with the see through case back.

I'm not sure how tough you are on watches that you think you are going to be shattering and chipping your sapphire crystal on a watch. Synthetic sapphire crystals are pretty tough and have been used on a variety of tough sports watches from Omega, Rolex, IWC and others for a long time. Chances are if you are shattering synthetic sapphire crystals regularly, you would be breaking and replacing several hesalite acrylic crystals per year. IIRC hesalite was supposed to stay together so there would not be pieces of glass floating around the capsule if the crystal of the watch broke...but its not unbreakable. Remember, its one thing not to baby a watch, its another beat the sh$t out of it and expect it not to get damaged. If you are going to wear a watch for really high contact/extreme sports or activities...any watch you will wear it going to eventually look like sh$t and you will probably damage it on occasion. I would suggest for really high contact/extreme sports get a cheap watch you don't care about taking a beating. If you do that, your good watches,even if not babied will be something that will last a life time and you could pass it down to your future generations.

I tend to like and appreciate the history that goes with various watches, but I find the model with the sapphire crystal is still close enough to a 3570 (considering it differs from the original also) that I would not have a problem choosing it if I liked the see through back. Good luck with whatever you decide.

 

[Keith T]

I'm not a Speedy owner (yet?), but the hesalite vs. sapphire question really just comes down to personal preference, IMO.

That one's been debated for many years amongst watch lovers and will continue to rage on for many more. Some like the steel caseback with engraving, some like the visible movement. Both have their reasons.

There's truly no wrong answer. You purchase a Speedy, you win! Either way. You just have to make that "tough call" for yourself.

But I will say this: don't let the $600 premium make the decision for you. If you really want the sapphire version, then absolutely pay the difference and get it.

 

[BostonHedonist]

Main reason I worry about shatter is my motorcycle addiction. But I think you are right @Dino944 , any watch would get messed up if I went down wrist-first. I'll just wear something cheap while riding. And another good point re: the movement not being identical to the original anyways. If you're going to diverge from the original slightly, you may as well go for the additional beauty the sapphire provides.

@Keith T - Yes, we work hard to get what we want. Why settle for any less, eh?

I see a decision starting to fruit...