/fa/ - Fashion

>>13812720
What do you think of this Lorus Lumibrite watch?

>>13812731
CIA-tier

>>13812731
>Lorus Lumibrite
Well it's 30 bucks, I bought watch parts that were more expensive.

>>13812731
Are you going to start photoshoping that thing onto images like the tudor fag?

Fifth for daini Seiko haq

>>13812734

Which one should I get?

>>13812784
I'd take a hesalite speedmaster over the IWC.

>>13812737
$30?
Here the cheapest ones go for £40, which is amazing still in my mind.

>>13812786
I think that sapphire looks perfectly fine and don't care much for hesalite, so I think I'd pick that one

>>13812731
I love it, this variant is better though.

>>13812784
the speedmaster, it has more utility and more iconic

>>13812731
I nearly bought one but I already have too many watches

>>13812791
It's the milky ring, and the shape that kills it for me.

>>13812799

>>13812799
It's the solid caseback that kills it for me.

>>13812799
I don't really mind the ring in person, it's mostly visible on "staged" side by side pics.

I agree that it looks slightly worse but I heard bad things about the hesalite

>>13812797
>more utility
How so? it's manual wind and it slightly bothers me that it doesn't have a date.

>>13812805
Get a 3572.50 then.

>>13812809
it's not easy to find one at an AD, at least here

>>13812809
1861 just doesn't cut it. 1863 is finished as a caseback movement should be.

>>13812805
>>13812809
This, 3572.50 is the best 861-based speedmaster

Just pulled the trigger on a Christopher Ward C60 trident. Go ahead and tell me how you hate the new logo and lack of heritage goys. First swiss movement watch and first one with 8 ticks/sec so I'm happy either way

>>13812794

>>13812807
The only tradeoff with hesalite is that it scratches easier than sapphire (which is easy to polish out with polywatch). It won't shatter like sapphire though.

>>13812812
3572.50 has the 1863 too.

>>13812815
Meant to attach

>>13812821
Oh I see. Well the 3572.50 is old and worn by other people, I buy new and new only.

>>13812818
How many times have you heard of someone shattering their sapphire watch?

>>13812815
>>13812822
No, man. It's a perfectly fine watch. People dislike the new logo, which is really the only fault of Chr ward these days. I wish I liked the logo too, then I could buy their watches. But I don't, so I can't. Good for you, man.

>>13812818
I don't like dropping 5k on a watch and then have to polish it every month because it's made from inferior materials.

>>13812826
Never. It's just a meme told by people who are debating the pros and cons if you go into space with that watch. Which you won't.

>>13812815
>>13812822
> 600m
> Doesn't even meet ISO standards so can't put Diver on the dial

>>13812807
I meant the stopwatch

>>13812833
While the speedmaster did indeed have a crystal issue in space, it was the crystal popping off, not shattering. Sapphire shatters under impact or pressure, not vacuum.

>>13812833
Exactly. Now compare it to how easy it is to scratch the hesalite.

>>13812826
I've seen a few cracked sapphire crystals, but generally people with multi kilobuck watches try not to bang them around. That said if I'm not mistaken the sapphire speedy isn't certified for use in space missions because of that.

>>13812831
You really don't need to polish an acrylic crystal all that often unless you're a careless gorilla or something.

please estimate the percent chance that this watch is fake?

>>13812841
I actually would like to have the hesalite with the display caseback and the 1863 movement. It's just that it does not exist new anymore, and for me that is a dealbreaker. I'm not gonna buy some badly worn speedy. Not a chance. Anyway, the sapphire sandwich works fine for me honestly.

>>13812842
I've heard people say that they can't even go to an office job without it getting scratched.

>>13812836
Got an SKX already to scratch that itch (and as a back up timer for actual dives). CW would be desk diving only

why is there always a shitter in the OP pic

>>13812849
Somehow despite working at an office myself while wearing various watches with acrylic crystals they didn't get scratched up.

>>13812844
99%
The only reason someone makes this post is to see if people can tell whether it's fake or not, and then start larping about buying fake rolexes. I give 1% to that it's genuine because there is a small chance that you wanted to show off some fake rolex, but while doing so you chose the wrong pic and accidentally uploaded a genuine one.

>>13812844
This is the most overrated watch in the luxury category by a long ways, second only to le batman XD GMT master. The regular sub is just infinitely more elegant looking. The Pepsi and Coke GMT Masters are by far and a way better looking. Even the black GMT master is better.

>>13812836
pic related

>>13812784
wtf no love for the IWC? I love that version, with the blue on the hands

>>13812815
Are you the guy who was asking about the Sellita movement? For under a grand it's fine, wouldn't buy their more expensive stuff

>>13812807
Am I the only one who prefers no date window unless it's perpetual calendar?

>>13812863
Probably. You're also the only tripfag tho.

>>13812863
I hope you mean a real perpetual calendar

Do you like my custom f-91w?

>>13812863
I'm not that guy, also paid quite a bit under 1k, £625

>>13812874

>>13812874
>>13812880

>>13812863
He didn't. I asked about the sellita movement, at the same time as that other guy were asking about christopher ward. It's a coincident, but here the three of us are talking again just like last time. Shall we do a group hug?

>>13812874
>>13812880
>>13812881
cool

>>13812882
I'm not the 3rd guy either but up for a 4 way if you're up for it?

>>13812846
hahahahaha everything about this is shit

>>13812874
The back light is a nice upgrade but the rest is really lacking. Get a square shaped case and try to cover the white plastic parts, it makes it look super cheap.

>>13812784
Speedy 100% It's an iconic design.

>>13812838
>stopwatch

>>13812846
Holy shit, this is fucking atrocious.

>>13812784
Do you want a tachy or a pilot, fucking retard?

>>13812784
> pull the crown so you can set up your photo when the hands are where you want them
> pull the crown when the second hand is at 20
what were they thinking?

>>13812926
Speedy doesn't hack bro

>>13812933
Good thing >>13812926 isn't talking about the speedy then, huh?

>>13812954
he is or he's retarded

>>13812894
Yeah, I know the plastic module doesn't offer the best looks.
I went with a round case so I can have a sapphire crystal and stainless steel case.

Hello good evening sirs

>>13813014
Enhanced lume

I bought this recently but now I’m not quite sure if I like it

>>13813027
My dad has the same watch and had the same feeling. The more he wore it the gaudier he felt it was so he stopped wearing it. Gold requires a certain taste or personality I think. Either way I like it, I have the black dial/SS version.

>>13813036
That’s exactly it. It definitely feels gaudy and bold in a way that doesn’t fit my understated style as much as I thought it would

I think the gold is nice but I can only pair it with specific looks

>>13813057
Steel is always best.

So, I fondled a friends daytona the other day (posted it in here too) and I was very surprised at how shitty the winding felt. Would still love to own one, but wtf. On my semenmaster the winding feels ever so smooth and on the daytona it was not smooth at all, even my Hamilton feels better. Someone that knows shit about watches please tell me why this is.

I can’t get enough of this watch. It might be the best looking diver ever made.
Is there a way of getting similar by modding a much cheaper watch?

What does it mean when a watch is overhaulted?

>>13813062
Silver?

>>13813097
Silver and platinum looks nice and all, but they will scratch up and dent more easily. I think it's a meme, unless it's a very nice dress watch that you don't wear in your everyday life.

Steel or titanium is the only thing I'd go for personally. But that's just me.

>>13813103
I've never wore a titanium watch, I'd be interested to see if I like the massive weight reduction or not. I do like a bit of chunk on my wrist. But I agree, stainless steel is beautiful and I see no reason to stray from it unless buying a dedicated dress watch. Not to mention that there is more than one grade of stainless steel and some of them are quite desirable for their attractive look.

I currently have a SNK793, not sure which to get for my second. Should I get a SKX009 or a Bambino? Also, do most watch websites have sales on black friday?

IS HUBLOT A NIGGER BRAND!?

>>13813027
That style of watch is very formal, especially in gold. Doesn't really lend itself to casual wear. It would be most appropriate if you were wearing it with a suit. Still, it looks good from my point of view.

Yes or no?

>>13813128
>Should I get a SKX009 or a Bambino?

Well, do you want a diver or a dress watch?

>>13813138

>>13813128
The 793 has a more formal look, similar to the Bambino. The 009, with the "Pepsi" bezel, is more of a sports watch, for informal wear. The 009 would open you collection into a more broad and versatile direction. The Bambino would just duplicate the uses of the 793.

>>13813138
Oh boy I'm gonna start taking pics like this now just to trigger a/wt/ists

>>13813133
Are you talking Jewish niggers, 'Murican niggers, Euro Niggers, Mexi-Niggers, Asia niggers, white bois pretending to be a nigger-niggers, or are you using it in a more generic, wide spread use?

>>13813139
Well, brainlet, I was hoping someone could comment on which would be a better piece to get at the beginning.

>>13813162
The bambino has a more technically sophisticated movement, so you should get that.

>>13813091

Armida makes a nice one. There's also fiftyfour that makes a good one for around 300 with a pretty good warranty.

>>13813160
I'M TALKING ABOUT ANY TYPE OF NIGGER.

>>13813162
Get an Orient Mako or Ray and meet in the middle

Name a better Sub homage.

Protip: You can't.

>>13813186
https://www.longislandwatch.com/Orient_AA02009D_Mako_II_Dive_Watch_p/aa02009d.htm

Thoughts on Vincero watches?

>>13813187

>m'homage
>copy of a sub
I'd rather have a high quality replica. They look better than this and it's the same idea.

>>13813150
That's a good point. Thanks, I think I will pick up the 009 first.
>>13813169
Do you have one?
>>13813186
Haven't looked at those yet, thanks for the rec

What does it mean when a watch is overhauled?

>>13813202
Just another word for 'serviced' most of the time. It's worth asking if that includes refinishing the case.

>>13813202
Like a boomer overhauls his Camaro

>>13813201
>Do you have one?
of course not, neither of those are very good

>>13813212
anything in the $200-$300 you would look at??

>>13813190
The 4 o'clock date is truly an innovation.

>>13813220
In terms of modern watches, probably the 2801-powered Hamilton Khaki handwind

red pill me on buying a rolex on amazon

>>13813278
When I bought my rolex I drove to the store, tried it on, had them fit it to my wrist, and then paid and left. I only had to pay MSRP

Also I got free water and chocolate

Only downside is tax but now online stuff collects tax anyway

>>13813278
The only nice watch there is the black dial daytona.

>>13813278
no tax

Should I?

>>13813605
https://imgur.com/a/6CNO8

>>13813278
I wouldn't do it. It's probably best to go to an authorized dealer, that way you know it's real

>>13813133
No. Hublot is more of "rich sports player or racer" tier. Kind of an achievable RM tier watch that is kind of Bell and Ross-y. That kind of watch you mentioned is more Rolex yachtmaster 2's, gold datejusts, any AP watch with diamonds, or really anything diamond covered.

>>13813605
Not unless it costs $12 or less.

>>13813091
It looks good and it's probably the only Seiko I would own. It's not a money issue for me but a how the fuck can I justify having a $3800-5000 Seiko.

>>13813805
So I was thinking of buying top right for a friend who's an idiot and I just found out it's not a steel case but plastic?

>>13813909
Certain Grand Seiko I would drop money for but Seiko are delusional with the cost and poor finishing on a lot of their watches. Love the brand but naaah

>>13813928
Of course it's not steel. The bracelet is tho.

>>13813278
There's an insane amount of fake watches in "approved" amazon retailers or amazon itself.

What are your beaters or most worn?
Mako xl or steel "datejust" seiko for me. Cheap, but passable, not as bulky as my DW9600, not a heirloom like another, etc. etc.

>>13813091
How old are you?

>>13812439
both of these are gone now and the links lead to different sellers at much higher prices now
you fags actually bought them

I don't mean to start some sort of flame war but could someone explain in an easy way why modern watches are still kind of bad at keeping time? If we take automatics for example there are some COSC rated watches which run maybe +/- a second or two per day but for most watches upwards of 5-10spd is considered normal. Is it due to the laws of physics and the constraint of a small case or why is it that most non COSC watches aren't that accurate? The COSC classification is also something some manufacturers choose to omit due to high costs but that doesn't necessarily mean that they are worse, just that they aren't rated. I can understand that cost could be a factor in cheap Citizen, Seiko etc. but we're talking watches which retail for thousand of dollars and still differ several spd. He'll, not even Quartz is 100% accurate which is also weird seeing as it's digital.

tl;dr Timekeeping is certainly better than 50 or 100 years ago where +/- 30-60spd or more was common but why are modern watches not perfectly accurate?

>>13814059
32.
I’m quite into modding Seikos.

Thoughts? idk if i dig the gold but it looks nice.

How screwed am I if a screwdown crown has a stripped thread or something?

>>13814172
Ugly as fuck, kys, you have no taste.

>>13814050
Daily is Rolex Hulk and dress is a vintage two tone DJ

>>13813014
Ray Raven? Looks good

>>13814147
That hand is not 32 years old??

What are you wearing gents?
For me it's the Hamilton Pulsomatic.

>>13814304
This is not my photo and I don’t own this watch.

>>13814326
The same watch I wear every day pinky. My taste isn't broad enough for a collection.

Hey guys, I have no fucking clue about watches, but I saw this one and fell in love. Junghans Form C, Bauhaus-inspired. It costs 400 euro.

Do you have better alternatives, or is this good?

>>13814388
>chronoscope
wat

>>13814393
You tell me, lel.
As I said, I have no clue about watches.

>>13814388
Get a Feike chronoscope to try it out

>>13814388
junghans are good

>>13814388
>>13814400

>>13814404
>>13814400
The watches themselves look good, but i don't like silver armbands, they're scream for attention.

>>13814408
You can always change it to something better

What do you anons think of vintage watches? Such as the 1963 Omega Seamaster?

>>13814511
I'd like vintage watches more if there were people who could work on them.

>>13814122
Take as a benchmark a modern Rolex, which is rated 2spd. That's 99.9975% accuracy, across a variety of acceleration profiles and levels of torque, from a spring that has to fit in well under a square centimeter.

There aren't really a lot of systems that don't use electricity that are as precise. The real issue with wristwatches is positional, thermal, and isochronism variance. It's pretty doable to get a mechanical oscillator to work very precisely assuming a constant power input, constant acceleration, and constant temperature; wristwatches experience none of these.

Increasing amounts of manual labor can improve results. Even in the 1960s, the observatory chronometer trials at neuchatel saw mechanical watches that were easily an order of magnitude more precise than the finest modern production watches. But these were specially developed competition watches - selected as the very best and then hand-adjusted, often for years, often retested several times.

As for quartz, the major cause of variakce is temperature. Modern quartz watches use an xy-cut tuning-forked shaped crystal, which responds to temperature in a very predictable way. There's no real way around this, it's just the physics of how quartz behaves. Modern high-accuracy quartz watches use digital thermometers to measure the effect and compensate and are good to low single-digit seconds per year.

In the 1980s some manufacturers tried using AT-cut quartz crystals rather than the common xy-cut. This cut is much, much more thermoinsensitive, and were specced down to as little as 3spy.

A lot of the issues with wristwatch precision come down to space and constraints and unpredictable operating conditions.

>>13814511
60s omegas are absolutely fantastic watches. The cal 56x/60x/61x movement family is excellent.

>>13814536
How about the Omega Ranchero?

>>13814122
It's basically due to PHYSICS.
Watches are just a pendulum system, in an ideal situation any pendulum would swing freely through eternity, but the viscosity of air, other acting forces, disturb it and dampen or accelerate it.
To combat such things you can have many different mechanisms or materials which help the pendulum swing more harmonically/less dampened.
That said, it's incredibly hard to have a passive system that can achieve that with traditional components.
There's also the aspect of jewellery to watches as we know, so some materials and implementations are seen as "not aesthetic".
The Seiko spring drive is an interesting solution, as it it's not a quartz powered movement, but rather a mechanical movement that's dampened or compensated in real time by a quartz component. Some people don't consider it an aesthetic solution, some do.
Also, it's easy to see seconds as a big order of magnitude when you think about them as perceived (we usually don't count seconds beyond a minute in our heads) but the longer you count the harder it gets obviously.
So, just a few seconds in a mechanical movement in your hand is quite impressive. Even atomic clocks need calibration, and if we go further then there's the problem of time not being a static point of reference, even if the watch was perfect, just by wearing it on your hand would give you a time drift after a while from when you looked at it with your wrist raised up instead of it being at waist level swinging around.

Wanna know how to hate a watch you like or think of purchasing in the near future? Watch a fucking review on youtube.

>>13814536
Woah, that’s beautiful. How much does it cost?

>>13814548
They're fine. The rarity of the ranchero has made it into a collector piece gets priced far, far above its technical merits.

>>13814570
I paid just over 400usd for it which if you ask me is a steal. It's a ref 136.017 cal 613. That particular dial reference (with the stylized Arabic numerals) is pretty rare; it took me about a year of searching to find one. The plain stick indices version is much more common, shouldn't be hard to find one of those.

>>13814567
or just post it here and read the comments

>>13814556
>The Seiko spring drive is an interesting solution, as it it's not a quartz powered movement,
No watches are "powered" by quartz. They're powered by a mainspring, a silver-oxide battery, or some other more exotic solutions. The level of mental gymnastics people do with spring drive confused me. It is a quartz-regulated watch. It is just as accurate as any other non-high accuracy quartz regulated watch. It just uses a different escapement and energy source, but it's far from the only quartz watch that doesn't use a silver-oxide energy source and stepper motor escapement.

>>13814585
>They're fine. The rarity of the ranchero has made it into a collector piece gets priced far, far above its technical merits.

Didn't they use the same case for the Seamaster?

>>13814594
No watch is powered by quartz as it's just a crystal.
I'm with you and agree with what you said but from what I understand the idea and critique of the spring drive is that it's just a quartz regulated dampener which while clever is just not jewellery like, unlike a more complicated escapement or whatever. As in, you'd put a tourbillon in a display but the quartz dampener is just some uninteresting and not really visually appealing coils (though I think it could be neat, I mean, Bulovas did it).

>>13814589
Comments don't bother me, just like how I don't mind boomers posting "the wife finally gave the ok" "the wife doesn't need to know" kind of shit in watchuseek.
I guess it's the fact that if I read it, I just don't get a big clash of personality and item. But when I watch a video, the personality of the one reviewing is there to be seen. And they usually are just annoying. Common example is archieluxury but he's so grating it doesn't bother me, but the gentry whatever one is just mildly cringey and it bothers me too much.

watchuseek is the reddit of watch websites.

>>13814626
I'm not sure, my knowledge is mostly in 1960s to 1980s models. Here's what A Journey Through Time has on the rancheros. If I'm reading it right the Belgian ranchero is definitely based on a seamaster case (looks right to me); not sure specifically about the originals.

I'd be terrified of buying a 50s ranchero given their ridiculous prices and how easy it is to fake one with a redial.

>>13814632
What is this word salad

>>13814643
Watchuseek is worse.

>>13814660
>he doesn't know about gearfags in music
Also, reddit is reddit of watches. Not that /wt/ is any better.
>reddit
Seiko, orient, some boomers with luxury divers.
>watchuseek
Every brand, but everyone is a boomer, mostly divers too.
>/wt/
Seiko, casio, sometimes a random dude with mid or high end something. No boomers so far.
I do like the fact that some of you are into chronographs, which is rare in the other sites.

>>13814678
>some of you are into chronographs
huh? Aside from occasional discussions of the 321 vs 861 series, I hardly ever see chronograph discussions on wt. Chronographs and early American watches are two of the biggest knowledge holes on wt.

>>13814660
That picture is bullshit. Loads of people here and other places are terrible at watch collecting. Like that cunt who’s got 4 of the same dull Seiko in different colours. Or anyone with a submariner.

What is there to like about a watch that looks like a fucking screw? Am I missing something with those AP?

>>13814710

>>13814736
I'm glad I have a more balanced collection.

>>13814264
Mako USA II. My first mechanical movement. But thank you I appreciate it. I didn't like the arabics on the Mako or the dots on the Ray so I spent a little extra to get the look that I liked. Can't complain about sapphire and solid links though so I think it's money well spent.

>>13814388
Try to find a used one in good condition, 400 for a quartz bugs me

>>13814736
Jesus that is truly some shit collection.
>>13814751
At least yours has a theme even if I'm not into it.

What’s the best diver in the $3000-4000 range?
Pic related?

>>13814826

Are you saying the 4-presage man has no theme?

What is a reasonable price for this watch? I can buy it new for 550 euro's but I think that's too much.

>>13814678
4u

What are you wearing today?

>>13814956
200

>>13815025

What are anons opinions on redials and relumes, on vintage watches?

>>13815124
Don't. Getting a better original dial is better. And won't fuck with the watches worth as much.

>daylight savings

>>13815151
This.

Had a busted Tissot Seastar PR516 laying around that was beat to shit and needed to have something done with it, so decided to customise it with the GF and bring it back to working order with a custom handset and a hand painted dial that she did herself. I can post pics of the other dials she drew up but decided weren't a good enough fit for this project if anyone wants to see them

Still have the original dial, hands, etc if I ever wanted to convert it back, but it was a pretty fun thing to work on together, and I'll likely keep it as it is now permanently. Aligning hands makes me want to fucking kill myself though.

Know it's not to everyone's taste with a highly decorated dial, but rates would be appreciated Anons. I'll post some pics of my other watches later if anyone gives a shit.

>>13815085
Is that the hesalite version? Does it get scratched?

>>13815197
Pretty cool anon. I'd like it better with hour markers but I guess that'd be a pain in the ass to get right

>>13815212
It picks up light scratches fairly easily. I’ve owned this since July and just did my first polish which took 5 minutes and made it look pristine again.

>>13813138
noooo

>>13815233
how light are the scratches?

I really want one but I don't know about this

>>13815149
What about the relume anon? I mean it's an early 1960s Omega watch?

>>13815262
It’s great. It looks warmer and without the white ring and you can polish out pretty much any scratch. Nothing to worry about at all.
Saying that I would’ve gone for a sapphire sandwich if I could’ve found one in my price range.

>>13814408
Can you please explain why you don't think watch straps are changeable? I've seen tons of people who didn't know anything about watches who thought the same, and it confuses me. How is it not obvious? Why do you assume they are permanent? Not trying to be rude or anything just trying to figure out why

Thoughts on Skagen watches?

>>13815370
into the trash it goes

>>13815370
buy if you like

you won't impress a watch person, but why should you care

>>13814893
If this thing was 1500 I would be wearing it right now. I couldn't justify not getting a Planet Ocean for 2300 when I did compared to this at 4k +

>>13815223
Yeah, it's a total bitch to get them to line up. I was considering going down the route of fitting it with some anyway, but I kinda wanted the focus of the dial to be the artwork, and the markers may take away from that a little bit. Thanks though my dude.

>>13812863
>Am I the only one who prefers no date window unless it's perpetual calendar?

no, fellow reasonable human here. day/date complications are disgusting

sbbn033

should I get one? I've never felt this love before for a watch. at first I even hated it and thought it would be absurd to spend that much on one but for the past 4 months it's all that I have thought about.

how can you go for thinking something is ridiculously ugly to becoming infatuated by it?

is it worth the pricetag if it ends up being the last watch I will ever end up buying?

Why are there so few watches offering superb lume and more importantly lume on the entire dial.
This Lorus Lumibrite is one of the few ones.
I love the looks of this and the lumibrite.

>>13815197
Very cool. What material did you use for the dial?

>>13815419
I completely agree. I don’t get why Seiko wouldn’t make this at a lower level and sell for like £600 and sell hundreds of thousands of them. Do they not want to make money?!
I wonder if these will appreciate in value...

>>13815433
How big are your wrists?
I love these as I love distinctive watches.

>>13815442
what the fuck is this meme... why does this thread attract all the autists

>>13815304
I've never looked into it, couldn't say.
My gut tells me same move, it's a bad idea, especially if you get a shitty watchmaker to do it.

>>13815304
relumes are very hard to do properly. If someone has done a good job, it's fine, but ordinarily would stay away.

>>13815474
>>13815483
Can all of the lume be removed without a redial?

>>13815468
It's not a meme, just an honest wake up call for watch makers to amp up their lume game.

>>13815540
depends on the watch

>>13815468

I don't know but I'm tempted to buy a Lorus Lumibrite now.

How to make lume shine for the brightest and longest?

Thoughts on Vincero? I heard they make low tier watches, but for someone who isn't looking for a 1k+ watch that will outlive me, are they bad? I was thinking of buying this one, I currently own a Citizen watch that I also bought because it looks cool. https://vincerowatches.com/products/the-chrono-s-blue-steel

picked this up yesterday

>>13815447
First thing I did was find a donor dial in my parts bin that fit the case.
>Strip what was left of the paint off of the dial with thinners.
>Primed it with automotive primer.
>Painted it matte black, again, with automotive paint.
>Gf painted her design onto the dried dial with UNI Posca paint pens.
>I hit it with a clear coat of automotive lacquer, and then assembled the whole thing.

Was a pretty fun project. Here's some of the dial designs she did that we didn't use for this project, but we might use in future. She's never painted on anything this small before, so getting the design right was a real challenge.

>>13812731
I never owned a Lorus watch but everything I have heard of them is that they are the lowest tier of Seiko brands an pretty shit, also I think the bracelet looks disgusting.

>>13815565
It's an early 60s watch, so the lume might be radium?

>>13815682
You definitely picked the right design

>>13815701
Very unlikely, by the 60s very few watches were using radium (it was completely banned in '68 I believe)

>>13815703
Yeah, I think so too. I kinda liked the one with the purple water dragon of hers floating/suspended in the water, but I'm just not a huge fan of flat-blue or gloss-blue dials, and it wouldn't have worked as well on the black dial.

I think they're all pretty neat designs, but my favourites were the one we eventually went with, and the aforementioned one.

Pic of one of my other watches to keep the thread alive and watch related.

>>13814893
not even close

New diver, ma bois!!!

just bought off ebay

luch one hand

>>13815925
>>13815931
>>13815936
3 for 3 shitters.
Good job.

>>13815711
A less radioactive compound was used up into the 90s though

>>13816095
Assuming >>13815701 was concerned about radiation safety, tritium is completely harmless (and in a watch from the 60s, it's mostly gone at this point anyways)

>>13815676
KYS shill, any Citizen is better than that garbage

If i can't spend more than $100 on a watch right now should I just leave?

>>13816241
Go to yahoo jp and buy a seiko penisquartz

>>13816243
Is that not just a meme?

>>13816241
>If i can't spend more than $100 on a watch right now
>right now
Then save up a couple of hundreds and buy one for 300-500, and you'll be happier for it.

>>13815197
Great job

>>13814404
>>13814400
>$300
The chinese are nuts, 100 max

>>13816255
I love my Lord Quartz. It’s probably my favourite watch and This is my collection.

>>13815458
6.25 inches.

I'm wanting this to replace my skx007

>>13816538
Why?

>>13816543
Hell if I know.
I think it works with my style the best; it’s just such a generic, businessman timepiece.
Also it costed £60 so it’s by far the best value.

>>13816547
Put the bracelet from the lord quartz to that vintage omega and take a couple of shots please

>>13816549
No.

>>13816540
Crikey. What’s the diameter?

>>13816554
Go fuck yourself then

>>13816556
It would look shit. There saved us both time.

>>13816555
48mm but the lug to lug is like 46mm.

apparently they wear much smaller than the paper measurements let out.

>>13816574
That’s still a big diameter regardless if it overhangs the wrist. I want one but I’d need to try one on before buying.
Is that the mini tuna?

>>13816577
Anyone know any good watch shops that give free, no questions asked refunds?

>>13816616
Where are you?

>>13816554
What's that bracelet name tho? I want one for my shitter

What are some Seiko Divers which are 42mm or less?

>>13816641
U.K.

>>13816660
Okay.

I have never in my life used the chronograph on my watch
I'm thinking of buying a perpetual calender, though I have 0 experience with anything beyond the date windows you have to screw with every 2 months. Recommendations?

>>13816656
SKX007 and 009 are 42mm, though lugs are at 45mm.
SKX013 is smaller at 37mm I think, which imo makes it stand out more in a crowd of oversized divers.

>>13816744

>>13816744
What price point?
I assume entry level. Orient and Raketa offer cheap perpetual calendars.

>>13816774
Do Seiko make a single diver at the sweet spot of 40mm?!

>>13816744

>>13816782
no

>>13815409
I've heard of these 'watch' people, complete cunts I hear.

Is this awful?
I can’t decide if it looks nice or a bit cringe.

>>13815370
honest question from a newcomer
What's the difference between this and one of those 10 dollar ones at the nearest convenient store that looks exactly the same?

ok so I have owned my first mechanical watch for over a week now.

what perceived benefits am I supposed to be feeling right now?

>>13816813
Smugness and arrogance

>>13816811
A new band perhaps? I like it otherwise.

how do you guys feel about this pattern of national strap?

what do you think when you see one in public? that dude is dressed by the internet?

>>13816835
The one on the speedmaster above?

Metal strap > that

>>13816840
yeah but for that watch, just in general when you see those straps in public?

>>13816835
Depends.
If it's on a simple dress watch, I think it looks like the dude just did wore whatever american apparel was selling, and everyone who sported one was a twink pasty frat boy in shorts and boat shoes, in my mind at least.
On a diver it looks the part.
On a chronograph it's hard to say, I think it doesn't fit on a speedmaster, I'd rather see one in the usual shiny leather or bracelet.

>>13816848
To be honest, I've never seen one in public.

>>13816811
Yes

>>13816812
quality of materials, specifically in the movement

>>13816812
Nothing, that particular watch uses a cheap movement and the the quality of materials is garbage so if this guy >>13816905
is saying skagen offers better quality then he's retarded

>>13816782
There's the 39mm SKX031 (A.K.A. the Seiko Submariner), but the 100m of WR mean it's not a true diver.

I was thinking of getting a cheap chronograph so I was looking at Seikos like the SNDC81 and the SNAF09, instead of the usual 7A38 (due to boomers inflating the price).
That said, I read that the movements, 7T92 and 7T62 have a common issue of the chrono going mad after a battery change. Dunno if it's just people not following proper replacement procedure, or if they are just that problematic.
Anyone has any clue? As usual wus just has people complaining but not one posting followups on anything.

>>13815936
my next cop

>>13817004
That's actually a nice color combination, something a honorable man would wear.

>>13817006
>>13815936
Enjoy..

Good morning wt

What do you guys think about my new Swole O'Clock watch? It's my first watch.

>>13817072
Why is arm and hand same size why is watch bigger than arm hand?

>>13817082
Chad tier
Hope you are a super Chad, even though your wrist suggests otherwise

>a fucking g shock dw5600 costs 75€ in the faggot states of yurop
FUCK

>>13817149
Casio f-91w costs 24 € here in the cheapest local shop.
A crazy world we live in.

are there any watches that look good on bitchwrists or should I just not bother?
haven't been bothering so far but it does make me sad that I haven't found any watches I can pull off really well

>>13817149
>>13817153
You niggers just don't know where to cop. Use idealo or something like that.

>>13817193
Buy a swole like this anon>>13817082 and get a gym membership and get swole.

>>13817193
Anything sub-36mm will work fine. Anything larger will make you look like a fucking ayy.

>>13817242
BROTIP: wrist size is all about bone structure, so lifting won't change it.

Is this too big for my wrist? I’m thinking about trading it for a vintage omega which is 36mm.

>>13817271
Looks fine, but attitude is more important. How do you feel with it? Does it make you feel weird due to the size?

>>13817271
>vintage omega

Is pic related vintage? What do you anons think?

>>13812859
Id rather buy a stowa or laco flieger.

>>13817274
Nah I can rock it. I think I'm just used to small watches. The bracelet kinda sticks out too so it wears bigger on a bracelet compared with a strap.

>>13817279
That is very vintage. Vintage watches are generally 33-36mm whereas my Speedmaster is 42mm.

>>13814893
Want so bad, but the damn price. Might buy a sarb033 tho.

>>13817294
I saw one on eBay go for £2700 and thinking that almost worth it.
I wonder if they will go up in value given their limited numbers.

>>13817290
Unfortunately, there is a scratch on the crystal.

what do you guys think about Seiko SRP773K1?

>>13817306
It could be an acrylic crystal which means you'll easily be able to polish it out with enough time.

>>13817298
Id say so. Seiko will always have fans.

>>13817308
>SRP773K1
Cool watch imo, would prefer it to my skx007

>>13817310
Any recommendations on how or what to use, to remove the scratches? Also, does it look like a redial?

>>13817318
Polywatch, cotton wool and a lot of time and elbow grease.

Can get this for £1900.
What you think lads?

>>13817354
Why's it got the magnifying bit if theres no date visible?
Or am I just not seeing it from this angle

>>13817355
It's the angle.
The watch was serviced 18 months ago and the dial has been replaced at some point.
It's from the early 70s.

I'm actually leaning toward getting an 80s or 90s Datejust instead but they're a lot more blingy.

>>13817354
I wouldn't buy a Rolex without a bracelet. The hands don't look too good, either, which makes me worry that there's water damage. The dial might have been repainted since it doesn't seem damaged, and the movement might not be in great shape.

>>13817193
vostok amphibia

>>13812720
new thread
>>13817413
>>13817413
>>13817413

>>13817279
What's the price?

>>13817271
Not at all.

>>13812881
>>13812880
>>13812874
looks cool dude

>>13812720
Got myself a moonwatch today. I should have probably gone for the speedy reduced instead, or is the size ok for me?

>>13817841
Nice fake you pathetic skinny soiboi subhuman. Murder self!

>>13817841
looks fine

>>13816243
Any one have any tips on ordering from Yahoo JP? I can barely get a proper search done

>>13817951
>>13818070

>>13817153
>
can easily cop for US$11 here