Watches - another OCD problem
-
I agree with @mclaincausey . Given the tolerances required to make tourbillons, bridges, etc, I don't see why the screws can't be timed.
-
To be clear, I'm strictly speaking of case-constructional screws, particularly if they are part of the watch's aesthetic, and to a lesser degree screw-down crowns. Movement screws being aligned? Not so much, I understand why that would be very difficult and not worth the effort.
-
Exactly–and to people who deride or dismiss this as a pointless conceit (as if a flying tourbillon is comparatively tame) or OCD (if they're highly visible in the case, why wouldn't you want them aligned?), we're talking about watches with highly, intricately decorated movements, oftentimes not even made visible through the case and dial, so not paying similar attention to exposed elements doesn't make sense to me. To others who say it's too labor-intensive or time-consuming to do it, that's a slap in the face to someone paying 5, 6, or even 7 figures for a timepiece.
Richard Mille's approach of a proprietary star-shaped screw is an interesting fix, reducing the visual jarring of independently-adjusted screws. Countersunk bolts is another way (Royal Oak) way to solve it that I find a bit goofy (why make it look like a screw when it's countersunk into a bezel and thus couldn't rotate in the first place?).
I'm a bit surprised given the attention to detail, precision, and general engineering achievement in the industry that no one has solved for this–at the least as a differentiator against the status quo, since novelty sells at all levels of horology.
-
Congratulations! That's a perfect watch for everyday IMO.
@neph93 the original had an acrylic bezel. When they rebooted it, they moved to a sapphire, lumed bezel that, as @Giles referenced, has the loudest, most solid and satisfying ratchet action in the biz. This to me is a perfect way to honor the design of the original, but to modernize it.
Well-played, Giles
-
@Giles amazing pickup. I tried a regular FF on not long ago and was blown away by it. Its on my list for sure.
I believe that edition was limited to 500? So great you got the grail you gave been after for a very long time.
Congrats!
Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
-
Lovely watch @Giles
-
Really fantastic. I'm happy you finally managed to get one, since you've lusted after it for years.
I'm looking forward to checking it out in person eventually…
-
Tag Heuer announced their fiftieth anniversary plans for the Monaco in Monaco last night. They'll be releasing a model for each decade of its life every three or four weeks. There'll be 169 of each released, making a total of 845 pieces.
The Seventies one was released yesterday, and it's already sold out. The differences to the standard model are that it's got a funky green dial and a solid caseback. The price is $6550, against $5900 for the regular model.
I think that Tag Heuer have missed an opportunity by not upgrading the movement to their Calibre 02, especially if they used their new carbon mainspring…
More at Calibre 11, Hodinkee, and Monochrome.
@Filthy the 1999 to 2009 model is going to have a black dial. If you want a Monaco to match your wardrobe, it might be worth putting in a preorder for one of those.
-
The local Omega boutique has just got the Seamaster 1948 Centre Seconds in, despite having told me a while back that it sold out last year. It's a lovely little watch and I'm very tempted.
There's also a platinum version, which looks almost identical, but is gorgeous. However, it's another $50K (Australian), and the differences are subtle. (It's the one on the brown, alligator strap.) For the money, I'd get a Patek Aquanaut Chronograph (if they'd sell me one), or the H. Moser & Cie Vantablack.
I also saw the titanium, tantalum, and Sedna gold Seamaster Diver, which I liked a lot more than I thought that I would.
It comes in a really cool box too.
-
@Graeme if you buy the Omega can I buy the box to use as an urn to put my ashes in?
