/fa/ - Fashion

>>15322877
Oh....then no. lol Are you?

>>15302018
It's not just for the sticker. The internal components, the design and tech, the finishing, the regulation, everything is better in a Rolex than a Tudor. The entire purpose of Tudor as a brand was to make a Rolex that was less expensive so more people could buy them. The problem is (as I mentioned in the previous thread), mechanical watches are pure luxury items now, which means that the average-joe requirement of needing a mechanical watch for daily life isn't required anymore, and thus a lower-tier Rolex has no purpose.

That in fact is one of the reasons why Tudor has been branching off in terms of design away from the recognizable Rolex aesthetics; to separate itself and become something on its own. Unfortunately, it can't escape the original purpose that has been ingrained into society for the past 70 years.

The Tudor posted is inferior to the Rolex datejust in every single way while sharing a significant portion of the design lines to be mistaken for a Rolex by a man on a galloping horse. That's almost as problematic as wearing an overpriced replica.

>don't blame me for the ramifications of Rolex's own advertising campaigns...

>>13961948
>>13961951
The blued hands pop off the dial in pics and in person far more than the gold. Furthermore, the reason the blue is better in the long run is that the champagne dial is what reflects in low light situations, so you want contrasting hands to tell the time easily. e.g. With a black dial, you want white hands (think Speedmaster), and with a white dial, you want black hands. With the reflective face on this watch, you want darker hands to contrast, so go blue for the long run.

The Gold tends to look really good on the black face version. Is this the same Anon from last week?

>>13955671
1000 or less will be slightly below mid-range. Why not just wait for your wife to get you one?

If she's going higher than 1000, you'll probably be disappointed with the cheaper watch in time...so put that money towards your education or loan payoffs. Unless you're guaranteed a job in your field afterwards, you'll definitely need it.

>>13955687
I understand...it's symbolism that can be hurtful, especially if there are personal connections to it. When I see tourists in Berlin getting winter hats with East German flags and shit on it, I always get a momentary pain in my stomach because they have no fucking clue how bad it was.

>>13955690
Happy to help. There's over 100 pages on WUS on this subject, and what happened to me was that I found this watch on /wt/ (which back then was on /g/), found the discussion on WUS, and read through the whole damn thing until 3 in the morning and ordered as fast as I could because the website that had the one I wanted said they were down to their last 2 (!). Talk about impulse purchase.

HKED has a very good reputation, and apparently he tests the watches himself before they are shipped out to the customer, so if you get one from him it should be fine. If I didn't have the one I have now, I probably would have ordered one from him (I really like the black version....)

>>13675004
This is one of the most idiotic posts I've ever seen, even here. The Rolex failed the testing, so it was lower than the Omega WITH REGARD TO quality for EVA, extreme temperatures and humidity changes, and all the other rigors of space. That has nothing, NOTHING to do with wearing the watch on earth. Furthermore, I'm not telling Anon to save up and buy a 1960's Daytona. Modern ones are surprisingly just fine.

>>13675009
Fucks...what? Who doesn't enjoy the openness of that question...