The (Less intimidating) Watch Thread
-
I have an aversion to shiny gold things (or brass). I prefer shiny silver things
That's a fair point. The Nixon posted above (which I do own) has a brushed/matte type of finish so it's not a shiny/gawdy type of gold so I agree with you. That watch actually draws lots of compliments too….. and I'm with you, I love shiny silver things.
I can't quite put my finger on why I dislike gold or brass. Could be that they don't look good with my skin tone, which is partly why I can't wear yellow shirts. With belt buckles it technically doesn't matter since they'd be covered by my shirt anyways, but silver or nickel has always been a personal preference. The one exception i'd make for brass is for belt hooks/key fobs or whatever they're called, but I don't carry a back pocket wallet or use a rein so it's irrelevant
-
Oh I get it. I'm generally not a fan of yellow gold either and the only gold accessory I will wear is a gold watch. I think they can work great and stand out against the sea of silver watches worn by most. For some reason I only wear it in the winter and it really pops when worn with certain colors (black, burgundy, navy, white…)
-
I generally have an aversion to all shiny things, and jewelry in general… I don't even have a wedding ring.....
That's partly why I really like the look of the Hamilton Khaki Field line... Very understated, but can be dressed up or down. But, admittedly, my favorite has a polished bezel, whilst the rest of the case is brushed.
-
Gonna post this for three reasons:
- the "less intimidating" thread is now talking about Pateks. That madness just needs to stop.
Fake Texan keeping it real [emoji1]
@UnTucked and @manufc10 last posts contain some great looking watches that are more in my ballpark. While I understand the attraction of the watches Graeme compares, and it was a great post, I’m just not “there” yet. By that I mean that while I appreciate the beauty of the Patek I’m just not ready to spend that much IH money on a watch that I won’t appreciate in the way it deserves.
-
that watch is a beauty @Chris
i was a Seiko 5 whore for a moment and now I have suddenly decided I do not like watches with days & dates
(which is insane because i actually am one of the few folks who cannot bring a phone to work and so day and date function is useful for me) -
@UnTucked you really love your earth tones don't you
-
Steinhart…..
- I've promised myself that my next watch won't be bronze... But this piece is GORGEOUS!
https://www.steinhartwatches.de/en/marine-officer-bronze.html
–---The stainless model is beautiful, as well:
https://www.steinhartwatches.de/en/marine-watch/marine-officer-beige.html
-
I love watches and they are a mandatory accessory for me, I feel naked if I leave the house without one. With that being said I am by no means a watch "snob" and my knowledge regarding movements, etc… is nonexistent. So this thread is perfect for me. I'm a sucker for chronograph's, metal bands, and in the 42mm to 48mm range. Two brands I like that fall under the less intimidating category are Tissot and Nixon.
I rate Tissot, largely because of their success in chronometry competitions. These used to be run regularly, as a way of testing watch accuracy, but were killed off by development of quartz. They were revived in 2009, and have been run every two years after that.
There's a tourbillon category, which is full of the sort of watches that @Chris has banned me from mentioning in this thread, and a classic category, which has been won by Tissot in 2011, 2013, and 2015. (I don't know if there was a competition last year.)
In 2011, a Tissot Le Locle Chronometer won with 764 points out of 1000. The runner up, on 488 points, was an FP Journe Chronomètre Souverain, which is from a boutique brand run by one of the greatest living watchmakers.
Jack Forster, who writes for Hodinkee, asked whether the Tissot Le Locle was the world's most interesting watch. I'm inclined to agree with him, though I don't like the gold plating on that example.
-
Who makes nice bronze watches?
Oris offer the Carl Brashear limited edition. Hodinkee have a write up. The price listed on the website is CHF 2700, so I'd expect it to be around $2700.
Tudor do the Black Bay Bronze, but it's around $4000.
If you're looking for something cheaper, Gear Patrol and Watch Time have lists.
Whilst I don't know anything about the brand, I do like the Archimede Pilot in bronze, particularly the stripped-back no date model. It's available in two sizes (39mm and 42mm), and is based around an ETA movement, so should be pretty reliable and accurate.
-
Re: accuracy. If you want the absolute in accuracy, look at the watches that get a radio signal daily. You won't be able to beat that.
Re: Rolex. a couple of months ago I had a Submariner in hand and was about to purchase it to commemorate a new business venture. I gave it a solid look and looked down at my Omega SMPc and decided that the Omega was more for me. Plus it was the watch I wore while setting up the company, not just a commemoration of it.
Just some random thoughts about goals. Wound up not getting the Rolex.
-
Thanks - I was just looking at the Oris. It's the rare bronze dive watch that doesn't look like a 1/10th scale brutalist building. They tend to be … hmm ... lacking in subtlety.
I really like the Oris Divers Sixty-Five, which I think is the base for the bronze one.
If I was going for a bronze diver's watch I'd push the budget up and get the Tudor. My favourite piece in this material has to be the Montblanc 1858 Chronograph Tachymeter, just don't look at the price.
I'd agree with the brutalist comment. Most bronze watches are designed for diving, and so tend to be large, before having the case size bulked up another couple of millimetres, just because.
-
That Oris above is sexy as hell.
-
Holy crap, The movement on that Montblanc is fantastic looking. I think the watch would look better in a rose gold case, though. The oxidized bronze doesn't really mesh with the refined look the watch has overall, in my opinion.
)