/fa/ - Fashion

>>18096341
Get one. They're awesome watches if you like the clarity of design and purpose with rugged execution. Don't buy for the hype or the reputation though...then you'll end up selling it like all the other Speedy's on the secondary market.

Protip: try them on in store...the new 3861s fit almost identically to the older 1861s and 321s. If you like it, then try it on again another time when you're in a different mood. If you still like it, you win.

>>17930462
I'm a sucker for this one too, but it's because it has a great proportion for the dial vs. bezel, properly sized lume markers, a long-enough minute hand and a subtle date placement. It's a great and simple design, overlooked due to the company that makes it.

>>17930466
Impractical, but flex-worthy if you are in those circles.

>>17930496
This Anon >>17930505 is absolutely right. Just focus on what you want, do tonnes of research, save up, and buy what works for you. Make sure your financial priorities are in line, of course, and then you'll be happy with no regrets.

>>17930557
It can definitely be one-and-done. You'll probably want a very neutral-coloured dial for it to be truly one-and-done. I think though if you're looking for one and done, >>17930590 has the right idea; just get a Rolex OP and never look back.

>>17930665
The subject matter and the issue of wealth inequality.

>>17930696
Just make sure you try it on in person before pulling the trigger; I haven't seen it in stores, so I have no idea how it wears. Both watches are great, and Longines is a company worth considering since they actually take their vintage reissues seriously in terms of design and execution; they don't 'add one fucked up thing' like Omega does, and their movements are generally fine and reliable.

Alright, off again Frens. Be excellent to each other!

>>17906472
Here's how I'd think of it:
1) Which one wears better on your wrist? If you haven't tried them on yet, do so, as wearing a rectangle is surprisingly different to circles in terms of measurements and what your eyes decide is good/bad. Whichever one sings to you first is the first one you should get if you plan to get both.
2) Chronographs are useful if you need chronographs; they're quicker than phone timers, and can be used 'under the cuff' as opposed to whipping out your phone. I use two daily at work, and it's always better if I use them without being obvious about it. If you have never used a timer for anything (even for cooking or things like that), then you'd be buying the Omega for aesthetic value only. Nothing wrong with that, but it will be a higher cost to service in the future than a simple dress watch, so it's something to consider. The chronograph on the 57, incidentally, is more difficult to read accurately at a glance due to the 60-min. counter; the hash marks are closer together. If you need a ballpark figure (i.e. the chrono has been on for around 10 minutes), it's easy because it looks like a miniature clock...but if you want precise minutes, you need great eyesight and/or glasses. To make matters worse, the broad arrow hands will obscure the chrono subdial quite easily, so just be aware of this.
3. The leather strap on the JLC is good quality, so it won't degrade fast if you're not subjecting it to water and intense sweat (i.e. the gym). They use deployants as well, so the wear and tear is minimized; it should last at least until the next service (10 years) with regular use. 3ATM is good enough for everyone, as long as the gaskets are checked before submerging, so don't worry about that.

Other Anons made good points regarding cost; the Omega should ONLY be bought grey-market, and Japan usually is a safe bet as long as you calculate in shipping and duty. Same for the JLC actually, but look for the best price.

>>17886430
My life is not meaningless Anon; you've claimed it, many times, but I'm afraid it's simply not true. But something that is important to consider: 'meaning' in life is not the be-all, end-all of achieving happiness. It's just another component, and with others in place, it can make life happy. I've been very lucky that my presence in life helps others. That is not my purpose (or maybe it is, that's not for me to determine), but it is a component that seems to make a difference in a positive way to others. I don't need /wt/ to remember me; I do not ask for anything in return. That's the key, btw, to living a good life; give without expecting return. I know that /wt/ doesn't hate me...after all, someone used my Citizen as the OP pic for this thread...with a modification to the gentleman standing in the reflection, of course.

I'm glad you donated to your alma mater's library; that's a seriously useful and wonderful gift, which should benefit millions in the generations to come. Without 'sounding like an asshole', at least 3 of my books should reside therein.

>>17886433
There is no use obfuscating the challenges young men have today Anon; that would be wrong.

>>17886437
The real problem begins when they fight over me...

>>17852192
It's important to know this though. There are far more options available today than there used to be, and it's easy to get something because it is similar to what we actually want but might not be able to afford. The most important thing is to recognize when this is the case, as this will prevent a wastage of money.

GP is decent in person, but like GO, it's difficult to not see it as a cope for something else (like GO being a cope for ALS).

The great thing is that none of my watches are a cope for anything. They're just the best of what they can be.

>>17852188
I like my beat-up Speedy too Anon.

>>17837758
That's okay; what you have to watch out for is a few things:
1) Quality control: it's always shit, unless you're buying from HKED. Even mine was full of dust and shit. It will be better/worse but not necessarily predictable.
2) Make sure you take it to a trusted watchmaker to have them adjust it to be within a decent spec. Mine is running +0.5 seconds per day, but only because I had my watchmaker clean it and bring it up to par.

The movement (the old Venus 125? Can't remember the number) is a good, reliable movement, and was used in many watches of the period. So, the architecture isn't the problem. The problems come with dust, debris, poor assembly, etc. If you counter that issue by having it lightly serviced, then it's a fun watch.

I'd say don't worry. If you get it and it runs within say 10 seconds per day either way, you win. Wind it up, wear it, and enjoy the feel of a column wheel lateral-clutch chronograph. In it's working functions, it is similar to a Speedy 321, and that's not bad.

>>17836245
No. But time is important, and I stay in shape as best I can. Incidentally, I tried on the Bulova Lunar Pilot the other day...it isn't a Speedmaster replacement or place-holder. It's simply inferior.

I haven't been drunk in a long time. Getting half-drunk tonight. Just wanted to thank you all for being who you are.

Buy the watches you love, don't compromise or settle for second-best. If you can't afford it, save up and don't buy place-holders. Try on watches in person when you're happy and sad, or awake or tired, before pulling the trigger.

Finally, don't tell anyone. Your collection is your own, and only you must live with it. Buy what makes you happy, and fuck the rest.

That is all. I hope you all have good health, because that truly matters in the long run more than anything else in the world.

Thank you for being existant.

>>17818567
Correct, I get 'free' money. You can too, if you just believe in yourself.

>>17818568
Post some watches, and it'll revert to the mean.

Here's one:

>The old Speedmaster that makes the meme.

>>17596163
Likely bait, but I'm in a good mood.

1) 'Impressive' is contextual, so if you can't be impressed by realistic expectations, then you'll be unhappy with what is available in that price range.

2) A 50 dollar casio will not beat a 0100 over a couple of years. Don't you even HAQ? Also; even a mechanical can beat a 50$ casio; my Zenith 5011k is matching my 0100 in terms of accuracy over this past year (we're now in April..fuck, time flies fast). Granted, it's not a cheap pocket watch, but it's certainly not 40k and that's the point.

3) The movements can be impressive, within reason. Under 40k is available Lange, Patek, and AP, along with Roger Dubuis as well. Then you can also spend on some JLC (vintage 80s/90s can get you very high horology for that price), etc.

4) Agreed that the story of a model is meaningless, and that no Speedy available to the public has been on the moon. Mine, however, was actually made between 1965 and 1966, and is the same general reference (105.012) as the ones Buzz and Neil wore on Apollo 11, so suckit.
>pic related

5) Heritage only matters when buying vintage; I actually agree with this totally. I do disagree though that it's a cope; it actually helps to understand the context in terms of build quality, reliability, design of movements, and reliability in performance when comparing historical models. Further, it allows a buyer to find great deals on models from brands that today may not have cache but historically were among the top.

6) Build quality is not low across the board on sub 40k watches; it's like you've never done a Chrono24 search.

7) Define 'real' watch.

>>17596204
Why not get one of those wooden clock kits from UGEARS? I picked up the triple-axis tourbillon (with jumping hour) around Christmas...tonnes of fun to build, and though it still runs fast, it's fun to look at. Their wall clock is a pendulum model, and has a cool balloon thing that moves on the hour.

>>17596282
Awesome!

>>17579721
Pic related.

>>17579750
Pic related.

>>17579769
Good eve.

>>17579804
Looks good, but need to see one in the metal.

>>17579876
Sometimes you find winners in that category. Heck, even the Seagull 1963 is around 250$. Column-wheel chronograph with an historically reliable movement (though the Chinese quality control is mediocre at best in the modern iterations). For many, it's their first mechanical hand-wound chronograph. Also, all of the digitals and beater watches are in that category too. It's a gateway drug.

>>17579908
Evening.

>>17579913
Looks good. Is it a real Invicta?

>>17580022
Because the watch industry tells them to.

>>17580065
7/10?

>>17580184
They get just enough wrong with the aesthetic proportions to make the watch look ugly. If they did 1:1 for their price, then they'd get my respect.

>>17580212
Omega.

>>17580224
I do prefer the Sub, especially if it's to go with the Speedy. Different function and feel.

>>17580262
2 or 3, but most are in the drawer.

>>17580304
I feel the same about chronographs.

>>17580517
Pic related.

>>17580540
You should get a watchmaker to look at it. If it's stopping of its own accord, there might be issues you can take care of before more damage is done.

>>17580687
Nice!

>>17580890
Agreed; avoid like grim death.

>>17580927
How's it running PortAnon?

>>17580948
Fun, yet generic.

>>17564200
From your pic, it looks like you have the 3861 Sapphire and a 1861 (3570.50?). If my assumptions are correct, I'd ask the following:

1) Why would an 861/1969 be ideal if you already have an 1861? Are you thinking more about the vintage aspect of having a 145.022, with tritium dial, maybe a different caseback, etc.? Or are you looking for an actual transition 861 with the older style dial with the long indices and applied Omega logo?

2) If you want the vintage styling, then an old 145.022 would be great, as it's the least expensive option to get the look. But if you go that route, why not just bite the bullet and save up for a cal. 321 (145.012 or 105.012); these are the most affordable ones available and the most numerous. That way you win.

3) No matter what you do, if you go vintage, you should find a watchmaker that you trust ASAP. Buying watches that old usually means that they need to be serviced as soon as you get them. Part of my own process is not to trust any seller saying the watch has been 'recently serviced'. Too many times I've taken watches with that description to my watchmaker and he'd gently educate me on precisely why the last watchmaker to touch the movement was a gorilla. So, assume the watch needs servicing, and if you need parts, unless your watchmaker has an Omega parts account, the parts for the older 321 may be difficult to come by.

4) Biggest tip I can give you: check out Speedmaster101's website (by the same name), also his channel on youtube (I think it's called WilliamSpeedmaster101). It'll give you serious info about cal 321s and the early transitional Speedies.

5) You could also just go with other choices like Anons here have suggested. Triple dates are fun, Mark II, Mark III, Mark IV, and Mark 4.5s are great too. You could try the larger ones (44mm), the smaller ones (reduced, Schumacher, etc.), or even the modern co-axials which are fantastic (grey side of the moon, etc.). What do you think?