The (Less intimidating) Watch Thread
-
Glycine watches are an absolute bargain atm. I’d keep it if I were you.
For what it’s worth, I paid about $1700 for a similar model years ago…Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
That’s good to know. It was about $500 at Costco of all places.
Wow, I might need to pay mine a visit [emoji15]
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
Much better after swapping out the shell strap from my Seiko. I like NATO straps, but it’s odd to cover the skeleton back.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
It’ll be interesting how Glycine shakes out now that they’ve been bought by invicta
My expectations aren’t high…..
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
Monochrome's top five accessible watches of 2019.
https://monochrome-watches.com/best-of-2019-top-5-accessible-watches-buying-guide/
-
There isn't that much point to a mechanical watch altogether to be honest…
Quartz is more durable, more intrinsically accurate, and maintenance to a point is cheaper and faster.
The one thing about quartz is that when it finally shits the bed, you have to toss the entire module out, whereas in theory, you can swap out parts with a mechanical (although a poorly maintained mechanical can reach a point of no return as well) -
There isn't that much point to a mechanical watch altogether to be honest…
Quartz is more durable, more intrinsically accurate, and maintenance to a point is cheaper and faster.
The one thing about quartz is that when it finally shits the bed, you have to toss the entire module out, whereas in theory, you can swap out parts with a mechanical (although a poorly maintained mechanical can reach a point of no return as well)Ah! I hadn't considered the ability to switch out parts. That makes more sense. I'm guessing it would be wise to go with a more "popular," robust movement so that parts would be more readily available at watch repair shops, right? Would that also mitigate the service cost?
(Thank you, BTW)
-
Hamilton X Schott collaboration watch.
More info:
https://www.revolution.watch/hamilton-khaki-pilot-schott-nyc/
-
Agreed. I like watches to be between 40-44mm, but the length and angle of the lugs probably has a more substantial impact on the wearability of the watch. The INOX series are good looking, well built watches; I've liked them for a while.
Not loving that Hamilton, by the way. I've never liked the big minutes, small hours dials, though I understand it's an old flight watch style.
-
I agree with @Chris, the Hamilton leaves me a bit cold.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
I have 6.75” wrists and I prefer a lug to lug of less than 47.
What Chris said, the lug to lug is more important than the diameter. The height can make things weird too.
If it’s a tall watch with a small diameter it feels weird, like you’re balancing the watch on your wrist.
I’m on a small watch kick right now, less than 40mm for me unless it’s a diver.
You kind of need to try it on and decide for yourself. Sometimes a big watch makes it look like the watch is wearing you, not the other way around. Then again, there are folks that don’t care and just like big watches.
I’ve always liked the INOX watches, especially since I’m a Swiss Army knife devotee, they are overbuilt without looking like a metal turd on your wrist.
-
Thank you.
You brought up a good point: I'm not a fan of watches whose height is > than 13mm and I just noticed the Inox comes in at 13.6mm. I'll try and find a local dealer to try on for size.
If I'm being honest with myself, I've had my eye on the Khaki Aviation Pilot Pioneer Chrono for quite some time and, it's just been released in what I feel is a more appealing colourway. I've yet to be able to track down any figures concerning case height but, it doesn't appear to be overly thick.
-
Unless you're looking at quartz movements, finding a chrono under 13mm is going to be tough.
