/fa/ - Fashion

We don't need three concurrent watch generals fuck off

First for Archibald Chesterfield III

R8 my Sunday watch.

>>15300530
theres already another thread up....

>>15300538
>>15300556
My bad bros. I had my catalogue in reply count order. Didn't see the other thread.

Which is which, /wt/?

Best diver for 5K? don't care if new or used

>>15301747

Let’s put them on a timegrapher or submerge them for a sustained amount of time. Should be easy to find out pretty quickly.

How many jewels are in YOUR watch, anon?

>>15301747
Is it a trick and both are fake?

>>15301755

>>15301668

>>15301755
amphibia

>>15301755
Tudor Pelagos. BB is a nice alternative if you dont like the literal book on the watch.

>>15301773
Why is a woman wearing a watch like that?

>>15301764
I’m not workin hard, I’m workin SMART

>>15301766
Nope.
>>15301759
There's a really obvious tell, I should've shooped that one out, other than that I honestly can't tell from the pics.

>>15300525
Another BASED Oceanbro. We must unite to save some for the fishes.

>>15301755

62MAS rise up

>>15301747
Right is so hilariously fake. Didn't even need to examine it for longer than 0.5ms.

>>15301816
How can you tell?

NEW BULBASAUR

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GJAbNp-IW10

1st for the goat
FUCK TUDORS they're DOGS!!!

What do you guys think of Rolex Daydate Presidentials?

>>15301904
Love them. They're the only watch from Rolex I'd buy new, but honestly Anon, you have to try them on in person to know if it works for you or not. Are you thinking of getting one too?

>pic unrelated but just as beautiful.

Whaat should I offer for this watch? Seems to be in really shit condition.

Asking price is 750. Will post more pics

>>15301930
I'm thinking of getting one next week. I think I'll look good on me, I'm pretty lean but muscular.

is it a meme to buy watches for investment?

>>15301947

>>15301947
>>15301954
final pic.

>>15301947
It is in shit condition. Ask them for a pic of the movement as well before doing anything else. If it's waterdamaged or anything, you'll need to factor that into the cost of purchase.

>>15301948
Try it on first. You can't argue with the technology, prestige, or build quality. So the issue then becomes if it sings to you when you put it on. It did for me, and it's the only Rolex that ever has.

>pic unrelated but just as awesome.

>>15300530
That's nice. Hard to find gold watches that aren't obnoxious. Its either too loud or too formal.

posted my watch in the last thread. this is it on a suede leather strap. how is this? better?

>>15301999

v based

>>15301999
The strap is a good match for the watch. The watch unfortunately will always mean, 'I wanted a Rolex but couldn't afford one'. Sorry Anon, that's what Tudor represents. If you love the watch and wear it regularly, then ignore my comment.

>>15301999
Better, my friend.
Also, checked them.

>>15302007
>'I wanted a Rolex but couldn't afford one'
Faggot attitude, anyone with a job can afford a secondhand Rolex, not everyone wants to pay those prices for a fucking Rolex sticker

Buy Oris

Looking to buy this, is 42mm to big for this style of watch (50mm lug to lug). I have a 6.5 to 6.7 inch wrist.

>>15302021
It might be too big for your wrist, honestly.

>>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...

>>15302021
Don't buy big empty cases

>>15302026
>Rolex is better than Tudor

Holy shit bro that's an amazing insight

Hi!!

>>15302026
>>15302029
In my opinion, Tudor is fun while Rolex take themselves too damn seriously.

>>15302021
Yes, tool /flieger watches being a bit larger is ok, that kind of watch looks and feels better when smaller.

>>15302022
>>15302027

Just want to love it so much, many I'll look at Stowas white dial options.

>>15302029
You know what's even more amazing? That there are brands that make watches better than Rolex. Amazing, isn't it? The unfortunate situation with Tudor is that they share enough basic components to encourage direct comparison, and that's why Tudor is a poor-man's Rolex. You can't do the same thing comparing Oris with Rolex, or Omega with Rolex, or any other company like that.

Perception is everything in the luxury watch world because that's what causes people to buy these things in the first place, and to emotionally choose one over the other.

>>15302034
Older Tudors not so much, but newer ones are absolutely more adventurous in their aesthetic choices than standard Rolexes. Rolex however must take themselves 'seriously' because their brand is like gold; it's supposed to stay valuable over decades, and that means that if they choose aesthetics that change with the wind, the desirability goes down.

>then again, no one can explain to me why the Cellini line always looks like shit.

>>15302026
Nobody wants to deal with Rolex bullshit. If I want a quality stainless diver I'm not playing the buy 6 other watches and then maybe you'll get a dealer to offer you a sub. I'm not paying for artificial scarcity especially when most of their other models sit in the cases collecting dust

>>15302043
Tudor is a quality utilitarian watch, nobody thinks of it as luxury unless they're retarded

>>15302046
Funny, that's what Rolex used to be.

>>15301999
Yes, throw the other disgusting reddit strap in the trash and post pics. It looked like foam cut from a pool toy. Honest.

The bracelet is kind of weird, but otherwise I like it.

>>15302051
these are way too thick. the gmt is the worst offender.

>>15302054
Small wristed beta

>>15302031
Hey Lawyeranon. Love the watch and love the combo.

>>15302045
And yet Rolex continues to be just fine in terms of desirability in the general population who want a luxury watch. Just because you don't want to deal with Rolex's bullshit artificial scarcity doesn't mean that anyone else cares, because ultimately it's not about the way it's advertised, it's about what it means in the eyes of average people. You can get SS Submariners on the secondhand market no problem, it's getting them new from an AD that is a problem. You see, you can be the person who goes into a Rolex boutique, asks for a SS Submariner, and be told what you have to do to get put on the waiting list. If you put your nose in the air, and with a huff tell the nice lady behind the counter, 'fine, you've lost a customer', that's okay. But there will be 5 other people who will want your spot on the list. The artificial scarcity works, and just because it makes you mad doesn't change the effectiveness of it.

>>15302046
Any watch over 4$ is a luxury Anon. A tool watch is a fucking Casio or Seiko digital piece of shit that can take a pounding. The kinds of watches you see people in the armed forces wearing when they're on tour. All mechanical watches today are luxuries because they tell time less accurately than quartz, they require servicing more frequently and at a higher cost, and they use outdated materials and techniques that appeal to 'heritage' and 'prestige' rather than accurate timekeeping.

>>15302054
You need to work out Anon. That being said, Nato straps increase the height of the watch off the wrist, so the pic is misleading to a degree.

>>15302055
>>15302058
no actually my wrist anons. someone posted it here a while back and i thought it was funny so i saved it.

Can someone explain to me why a mechanical or automatic movement is more desirable to a quartz when it is generally seen as less accurate for time telling?

Not trying to be insulting or sarcastic, serious question

>>15302026

Tudors in-house movements are as good and sometimes more modern than Rolex’s these days.

>>15302064
Marketing to meme people into thinking mechanical watches have soul or some other spiritual bullshit. It worked.

>>15302031
I'll be honest, the watches are nice, but I feel second-hand embarrassment from the rings you wear. I cannot take you seriously. Not hating, just my opinion.

>>15302064

mechanical watches don’t require batteries that cannot withstand the rigors of the vacuum of space. batteries and electricity in general will also eventually be in low supply after ragnarok.

long term, mechanicals are a better bet.

this watch is sick

>>15302064
The desirability comes from a few different factors:
1) Men like mechanical devices, and while quartz watches are in some ways mechanical, they do not offer the immediate 'I can see how it works' situation that a mechanical watch offers (especially if you have a transparent back on the watch). In the same way that gas powered cars are simply more desirable than battery powered ones, even though the battery powered electric cars are becoming serious competitors and will soon outstrip them in performance.
2) The ability to tell time has extended into society and our general tools to the point that a wristwatch in the modern world is unnecessary. We can see the time on our computers, our phones, etc. Therefore, a mechanical watch is actually something worn 'in defiance' of this; that we are saying it's possible to calculate and measure time using gears and grease rather than satellites and microchips. The choice to buy and wear a mechanical watch is literally one that is done for the love of the technology and aesthetics, because there is no other reason logically if telling the time were the only reason.
3) When quartz first came out, it was far more desirable (and far more expensive) than mechanicals because of the achievements in accuracy over a long time span. Furthermore, the stop-seconds was an innovation and something special (which if you grew up after this era, it was something taken for granted and the opposite was true: a running smooth second hand was special, and stop-seconds were considered ordinary). Mechanicals are unusual today, and thus more desirable by merely existing.

Finally, mechanical movements are not bought and worn for their accuracy over time. They represent the culmination of centuries of intellectual and mathematical thought and innovation, combined with the technical expertise and execution which only experts could achieve. Marry those aspects to aesthetic beauty, and you have art. On your wrist.

>>15302058
>The kinds of watches you see people in the armed forces wearing when they're on tour.
You realize there are plenty of gear queers in the military too, right?
There are guys who will keep 20 cheap Casios in their bag at once so they can replace each watch as it breaks, sure, but there are also guys who go out in their $2000 dive watch with the hope that it won't break in the first place. Buy once cry once types.

Hell there's still a milspec standard for mechanical watches.

>>15302064
>>15302079
I'm assuming automatic watches have the same advantages of mechanical?

>>15302083
The future is yema

>>15302058
>5 other people are willing to eat shit so it doesn't matter if you aren't

Actually it does because the biggest killer of Rolex's business is secondhand Rolex, a market that would not be anywhere near as robust if it weren't for the artificial scarcity bullshit

>>15302091
you are talking to a huge rolex shill who defends them no matter what.

Recommend me something similar that still has prestige but isnt $15k

Yes I know it's cheesy but I still love the goddamn design.

>>15302089
Automatic IS mechanical.
There's a little weight inside that spins as you swing your arms which winds the spring so you don't have to.

>>15302064
the idea of being totally mechanical without soulless batteries is very romantic.

in a mechanical watch, the watch is powered by the wearer. Without the wearer the watch will die. You are the one giving the watch a "heartbeat" and "life".

and its much easier to appreciate the engineering and craftsmanship on a device with hundreds of tiny delicate parts.

>>15301999
I think brown would be better but its much better than that blue dive strap.

>>15302096
That is a doctor's watch, you can probably find vintage models from Hamilton or Gruen, Longines etc. for relatively cheap, 1 to 2k. Hamilton's was called the Seckron.

>>15302064
I hate being dependent on batteries for things I keep on my person or use every day.
I hate that most watch batteries are wastefully disposable rather than rechargeable
I hate that batteries rely on minerals and compounds collected from third-world hellholes with slave labor

>>15302099
when people differentiate mechanical is used to refer to hand wound only.

>>15302056
Thanks m8.

>>15302075
HAHAHA No problem, m8. I'm now in a phase in wich I can't take myself too seriously anymore, it's bittering. And the rings are part of me having so much fun now than ever before. Cheers!

>>15302114
I like the rings, they are fun

>>15302112
In the context of "mechanical vs quartz" automatic vs hand-wound are functionally the same.

>>15302110
>he thinks his mechanical watch parts are possible without slave labour in china

unless you go super luxury i dont think theres any escaping it

>>15302088
I'm sure there are, and I wasn't claiming that there aren't. But the point is that digital watches that tell the time either by quartz or by satellite relay are FAR more accurate and can be built more durably than mechanicals; to have a mechanical 'in the field' would be ridiculous from a practical standpoint in today's warfare.

>>15302091
>willing to eat shit.

How is making the choice to spend thousands of hard-earned cash on a luxury item considered 'eating shit'? No Anon, I can't agree with you here at all. Eating shit is being robbed at gunpoint and watching your loved ones raped and murdered before your very eyes, and then having a hand cut off as penance and a reminder not to look at that man on the corner of your neighborhood the wrong way ever again.

Regarding the second-hand Rolex market, it's robust because watches eventually get destroyed, like any other commodity that is being used. Artificial scarcity maintains the balance of what is available, therefore allowing the company to have a demand for their product at the prices they command. It's not rocket science, it's a proven and successful business strategy.

>>15302094
No, he's simply being schooled by someone who is right.

>>15302096
How do you define 'Prestige'? And to which social circle do you hope to be perceived as having prestige from? That directly affects what you buy and what pricepoint you're looking at.

>>15302123
>No, he's simply being schooled by someone who is right.
lol

>>15302122
sweatshop labor in China is bad but not the same thing as slave labor in a lithium mine

>>15302096
Cartier tank.

>>15302129
but lithium is used everywhere

handphones, laptops, cameras, wireless devices..
theres no escaping it in the modern world
out of sight out of mind

>>15302133
The Cartier tank is expensive as fuck though. And if you're going to spend a ton of money you might as well just get a Reverso.

>>15302064
imagine thinking there are no automatic quartz watches

>>15302150
there's also the seiko kinetic watches which are literally quartz watches that run on a charge generated by a kinetic weight

how do you guys feel about decoratively engraved watches?

beaut or kitsch?

>>15302160
it's cool but engraving such an ornate design on something like a milgauss feels like it's defeating the point

>>15302160
I love that style of engraving but it looks awful on a watch. That shit is for shotguns or lighters or cigarette cases.

>>15302160

>>15302160
Awesome, but >>15302162 is dead on. Why a fucking Milgauss?

>>15302160
Engraving is beautiful but doing more than the case is too much imo

>>15302160

that would look tacky on anyone who isn’t an ancient aztec vampire. i can’t believe anyone would do that to a watch.

>>15302054
on a fucking nato anything is

does Seiko do any quartz divers anymore that aren't tunas?

like is there something similar to the skx007 but quartz? or do you need to spend hundreds on a old ass vintage one?

>>15302160
It might look decent at first, but imagine seeing it after being worn for a couple of months with grease and dead skin cells stuck inside all the grooves and crevices.

>>15302160
rich boomer in hawaiian shirt core

>>15302241
just get a citizen pro diver desu

>>15302241

If it’s the SKX specific look that you want, no. Seiko has been going all in on that prospex logo shit.

If it’s price/value, just get a Citizen

>>15302160
I've got big boners for enameled guilloche

>>15302160
It's a nice watch, I'll give you that. But the engraving gives you no tactical advantage whatsoever.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xGgWGNfAHiE

>>15302259
any recommendations?

what watch is that in the pic. don't care if it's prospex just as long as it looks good and is a quartz

>>15302271
>what watch is that in the pic

SBCM023


Any of these are fine

https://seikousa.com/collections/prospex#Solar+Solar%20Diver

>>15302133
That picture reminds me of a square/rectangular shaped Tag Heuer with a blue crocodile leather band my dad has, although the dial was completely different from what I remember, and I don't think it was gold. Titanium? I hope I can wear it on my wrist and take a picture for you lads someday. It's been a while since I saw it. Anyone want to see my mom's Tag Heuer instead? The battery is dead, but I actually want to take a look at it, and it would give me an excuse to post pics. I never really see female watches posted here.

It's an oddball in Rolex's lineup and it's been inconsistent over the years. I probably payed more than it's really worth and it doesn't make much sense compared to it's competition like JLC or A. Lange & Söhne, but I liked it so I bought it.

>>15302299
>buying a cellini

>>15302302
I liked it so I bought it. Hoes mad

>>15302285 (Me)
Yeah, I didn't really expect anyone to care, but it's real. It's been sitting for quite a while. I'm going to convince her take it to get serviced and get a new battery, don't worry.

>>15302285

>>15302334
Holy cow that is an ugly watch

>>15302335
Oh, I wish. It 100% came with a crocodile leather band, though. I don't really know if that matters on the model. I'm really curious what exactly my dad has.
>>15302339
The watch is so small that it's hard to take a decent picture of it on my cell phone. It looks a lot better in person compared to my shitty picture, I promise.

>>15302299
I like it, how much did you pay for it?

>>15302339
I tried taking a better picture, but it's just not working in this shitty lighting. I could post a much better one in the actual sunlight tomorrow, if you'd like. It's so small it seems ridiculous to me. She has a Nixon watch she says she would rather wear because of that...

>>15302341
No dude, that watch is a design mess and probably from Tag's mall shitter era where they were putting out Fossil-quality trash. Buy your mom a better watch. You can get 100 dollar Citizen watches that look and are made better than that shitty Tag.

>>15302356
I'll get both of her watches working, and she can wear whichever she prefers. I don't know why you would assume it's shit, maybe it isn't one of their high-end watches, but it's still a Tag Heuer.

>>15301747
>>15301816
Left is fake. Dial is washed out af (black lustre is gone), text is thin, bezel #s are thin, crown isn't proper size, pearl is disgustingly uncentered compared to right (far too low). The open circle at cannon pinion is also obvious. Too many fakes going around.

>>15302360
>but it's still a Tag Heuer.
Yeah? And? Do you think they can't make a shitty watch? Do you know anything about Tag Heuer? They were the butt of jokes for years because they have been putting out total shitters until recently. That watch is a shitter.

>>15302353
ladies watches were tiny af in the past

this (exceedingly rare now apparently) soviet "Chaika caliber 1200" is only 9x13 mm

>>15302385
You keep saying that, but what's even bad about it? It's a little woman's watch.
>>15302391
Neat, but at that size it seems even more like a novelty.

>>15302394
i think it was also a flex by watchmakers to see who can make such tiny watches

this is a 1930s rolex ladies

>>15302399
Interesting, that makes sense just to show off.

>>15302394
Look at the fucking watch you imbecile.
>ugly bracelet with tacky branding
>drab colorway
>confused bezel design with badly done lume pip
>horrifically executed cyclops
>uninspired Mercedes hands
>indices are a poorly thought out mix of bars and triangles with the triangles pointing outwards for some reason and nothing has any coherence with the hands

What are some other watches with dials like this for <$6k?

>>15302334
that's probably a fake.

i would get it checked out by an AD, but honestly if its been sitting with a ded battey that watch is junk,

quartz watches have printed circuit boards in them like electronics

once those get saturated with battery acid the circuits stop working

and unless its something rare and sough after it wont be worth fixing

>>15302391
Chaika! On the watch face!

>>15302402
chill mang you sound like the watch murdered your mom or smtg

>>15302334
i mean that thing is so fucked,

what i would to try to make it loo better is to remove the cyclops with a lighter, since the adhesive in it is clearly clouding, and seems misaligned,

i'd remove and throw away the band, remove the bezel and MYABE look into PVD coating it or brushing it and getting the case bushed .

but i mean for all that work to make it looks decent...plus the fact the movement is proably fucked i'd ust leave it in her jewelry box and let her keep it as a keepsake

>>15302026
>Unfortunately, it can't escape the original purpose that has been ingrained into society for the past 70 years.
>ingrained into society
fun fact:
99.99% of soiciety have never heard of Tudor and don't care about it originally being a cheaper version of Rolex. If anything, they'll consider it as a more fancier version of an ICE watch. Those fucking fake rolexes (but in colorful) are fucking everywere, and virtually no one (besides watch autists like me) cares about it.

>>15302413
Though, I gotta say, I kinda dig the shitty color options, but there's no way I'm gonna wear such a shitter.

>>15302415
Mostly girls watches, it seems, but quite a few guys apparently also wear them.

>>15302419
Are there any respectable brands (besides Casio building their "classics" in all kinds of colors) that do that
>everything in on color
thing?

>>15302419
What's the target audience here?
People who like Baby G-Shocks but also Rolex clones?

>>15302402
It's an absolutely SHIT picture, and I really didn't do it justice. I'll admit that. I understand if you don't like it, but how about I take a proper picture of it in the sunlight tomorrow, and post it here? I don't know if it's my camera, but it looks so bad in those pictures compared to real life that I almost want to just delete them.
>>15302407
Thank you for your concern, but it was purchased by my father and I assure you it is NOT a fake. I will try to take a better picture tomorrow. If it's ruined for whatever reason like you claim it is, that sucks, but I'll get it checked out by someone.

Maybe it's just a "basic" Tag Heuer. I'm not here to bullshit you guys, it's my mom's fucking watch.
>>15302412
Are you drunk or something? I'll just post a better picture tomorrow, sheesh.

>>15302423
But anyways, if I'd buy a ripoff-rolex, I might as well go directly to the Chinese source. And get me some
>muh soul! Spinny gears!!!
instead of the cheapest quartz there is.

>>15302123
Eating shit as in buying 7 watches you don't really want to get offered the 1 watch you actually do want

>>15302415
These are so awful I audibly choked, thanks.

>>15302435
hehehe anus

>>15302351
Like 13k? Had another dealer asking 17k but I know that these things are hard for them to offload So I pressed for a better deal.

Anyone into Panerais?

>>15302408

>>15302466
Who homaged who?

>>15302471
imagine being

>>15302471
>not printing multiple frames so it animates when you flip through
What a missed opportunity

>>15302477
just imagine

>>15302471
What a waste of paper

>>15302513
but he thought so clever of himself having that custom printed

>>15301755
Omega SMP 300m

>>15302040
Stowa marine 36mm roman numerals will most likely be my next purchase.

>>15302384
>Left is fake. Dial is washed out af
Looks like just reflection to me.

>>15302043
>>15302058
>>15302087
>>15302099
>>15302123
Stop fucking avatarfagging you nasty piece of shit.

>>15302624
Bruh, he's posting pictures of watches in a watch thread.

>>15302487
Yeah i know.
î just thought it was crazy for how much they can go these days.
i know a guy in signapure who sells these serviced for around 500USD. GS for a grand.
i'll either get lucky finding one that i like on eBay or Yahoo or maybe hit him up to source me one, when i've exhausted my possibilities.

I really like the 45 for the screw down caseback, medallion and obviously its beatrate.

>>15301747
Text is wonky on the left.

>>15302624
I was illustrating the rotor in an automatic mechanical watch you schizo faggot fuck off.

>>15302633
No, he's avatarfagging and multiquoting and replying to every single post ITT with some irrelevant bullshit that no one gives a shit about because he doesn't have real friends and likes shitting up threads. I haven't read one single post by that guy that contributed to the discussion, he just likes seeing himself type.

>>15302624
get a grip

>>15302640
multi quoting is the correct thing to do, wtf? you rather someone reply 5 different times instead of doing it all in one post?

>>15302640
It's common to reply to multiple posts in general threads. Just ignore him if you are so mad.

>>15301747
Bracelet makes it pretty obvious

>>15302114
>I'm now in a phase in wich I can't take myself too seriously anymore
based

>>15302160
i like it but for a milgauss? come on

>>15302647
Which one? How?

>>15301788
Because big ass steel tool watches in women are sexy af. Faggot.
>>15301755
16610 if you can find a good deal. It'll be a bit battered, but who cares. Semenmaster, Tudor bb, SKX and save a bunch of money for something else like a new Sub. Tudor 75190 is still kinda underrated if you don't mind it being a little smaller. The Seiko reissues of their old shit are nice, but a bit expensive imo.
>>15301947
Polished to shit. Look at those lugs. Run away.
>>15301999
Find an oyster bracelet. I don't fuck with the fluted bezels, but nice watch. Also, don't listen to >>15302007, Tudor is a great watch and the only people that see it as a poor man's Rolex are people you'd want nothing to do with anyway.
>>15302160
When well done they look good.
>>15302175
Probably because at one point they almost gave them away as nobody wanted them. If you're gonna mod a Rolex might as well buy whatever is the cheapest at an ad/grey dealer.
>>15302260
That's pure porn. 11/10
>>15302299
Too big 4 me, but I like them. >>15302466
If your wrists aren't big they look shitty.

>>15302046
>Tudor is a quality utilitarian watch, nobody thinks of it as luxury unless they're retarded
On what fucking planet do you life? Here on earth, watches that cost multiple thousands of a non-shit currency are a fucking luxury! Even in wealthy countries!
some bog-standard Casio or Seiko or Citizen is an utilitarian watch, but the days of Tudor (or Rolex, for that matter) being used as a tool (and priced as such) are long, long gone.

>>15302660
Yah bruh.
>>15302635
Kinda.
>>15302466
Oof.
>>15302424
Trannies.
>>15302110
Solar dude.
>>15302031
Sick bruh.
>>15301897
lmfao le boomer
>>15300530
OP
>>15301999
It's ok.
>>15302054
UFO tier.
>>15302391
Cute.
>>15302399
^
>>15302473
Hard to tell.
>>15302667
Lol poorfag.
>>15302638
Ok.

Anyone know what model number this Timex Ironman is that I just got? I cant find it on Google & I want to try and find an original strap.

>>15302640
He's posting watch pictures in a watch thread that never runs into the image limit anyways.
It however does run into the bump limit, so mutliquoting is a very considerate thing to to. And he's not one of the annoying fuck that quite literally EVERYONE in the thread.
And while I don't agree on every his statements and their not all high-quality posts, they're on topic and OK. Unlike you, this guy at least tries to make a contribution.
So…
fuck off!
>btw, pic not related, but hey, it's a watch! (that you can't afford)

>>15301747
Left is fake, lume pip on the bezel isn't centred correctly, the pinion hole where the second hand attaches isn't right (for some reason that's always the case with BB fakes), crown protrudes by too much, the dial doesn't look quite right though it's hard to quantify.
Unless it's a ruse and both are fake, in which case the one on the right is a very good one.

>>15302672
Oh, someone is mad!

>>15302684
>t however does run into the bump limit, so mutliquoting is a very considerate thing to to.
/fa/ is a slow board. These threads will last for days after bump limit, or they would if you didn't keep making new threads the second someone even remembers autosage exists.

Can anyone reccomend me an ana-digi watch with
>Dive/timing bezel
>Alarm
>Stopwatch
>Waterproof
>Robus
That's not fuckhuge like pic related and not fuckexpensive? Also, what's the difference between the snj027 snj025?
Because I actually need such a thing as a tool for work.

>>15302688
does it even matter..? you seem so triggered by minute things that dont matter. You can still read old threads in the archive

>>15302695
Casio AMW340? Don't think you can buy them new anymore though.

>>15302713
You are missing the point.
Spamming new threads before the old one is on page 10 is poor etiquette. Half the time there are 3 concurrent watch generals, sometimes they're even all on the front page at once.

>>15302602
I thought about this but I think it should be slimmer, the 36mm small seconds versus is 2mm thinner. The romans is the nicest dial tho.

>>15302160
Fuck yeah, if I ever had Rolex money that'd be what I'd get. Engraved steel is the only kind of bling for double whitey that's even half legit.

Question. How well do haute horologie timepieces actually keep time? Do complications like triple axis tourbillions and dual escapement differentials actually make a difference when an ETA movement can be +-2spd?

>>15302714
Damn, that's ugly! And a useless compass bezel to boot! But it would do the job. Gotta see if I can find one, but other suggestions are welcome.
Theoretically, some pilot-chrono would also work, but they're too expensive (except for the HKED homage, but I already have a ST19 watch) and not really waterproof. Don't plan on taking them diving, but I'm taking samples from rivers and fast flowing streams, so I'd really prefer a screwdown crown.

>>15302782
But seems like my best bet would be to go retro, but I'm afraid most are either total shitters (with aged gaskets to boot, so good bye 100m WR) or rather rare and expensive.

>>15302786
Also, while I'm all for mechanical watch autism (and with a dive bezel, an analog dial actually has a functional benefit!), mechanical chronos suck, compared to a digital one.
I guess I could simply buy pic related, but it doesn't have any water resistance (not much water in space), so I'll skip that and keep my money.

>>15302083
no it isn't. less is more

>>15302686
Wow never seen that pic before much le humor so funneh.plz post again so I can lulz to it

>>15302797
don't have it a second time, but maybe this one will make you lulz too?

>>15302800
oh my god that is so funny i literally rofl-ed (rolling on the floor laughing)

>>15302814
Good boy!

>>15302695
Seiko H556 (Baby Arnie)?

>>15302787
what excuse is there for omega to not put 100m resistance on this thing?

>>15300543
When he’s “on”, Archie is one of the funniest people on the planet. He could be a big name comedian or actor if he wasn’t such a fuckup.

>>15302695
Citizen makes one that looks nice.

>>15302913
>looks nice

>>15302913
What's that on the left.

Which one? I know they are big watches, they are about the same money (44mm left, 43mm right).

>daily beater
>strap monster
>wear it in good health
>grail
>MOTFM

>>15302913
>vintage Citizen and Seiko design
soul
>modern Citizen and Seiko design
soulless

>>15302960
k

>>15302635
Japanese Yahoo auctions would be a good bet, if you want to get a great deal, though you probably have to spend a lot of time to find it. It's very likely that whatever you find needs a service, though. In the end, might still be worth it to just spend a bit more and buy it from a professional.

>>15302918
Depth gauge.

>>15302999
>Depth gauge.
Thank you and checked.

>>15302957
What does MOTFM stand for again?

>>15302781
Haute Horlogerie (not horologie) is mostly just masturbation, looking for ways to reinvent the wheel, the need to fill everything possible into a limited space of a small or thin watch case. Complicating things for the sake of complication. We went over this in the last thread, only very few companies, or individuals are actual "watchmakers", some companies come with new tech now and then, but that is a combined effort.

At the end of the day, speaking strictly in utility, a quartz/solar seiko/casio/citizen will blow any COSC mechanical out of the water and will feature more gizmos, likely weigh less and will stay accurate while running for years.

But muh soul and all that jazz. If you want a very precise mechanical, nothing wrong with ETA Top models.
If you want excellent finishing, look elsewhere. Like the avatar anon wrote, mechanical "tool watches" are an anachronism.

tl;dr Id wager they would want to be COSC certified chronometres at those price ranges, but who knows, really

Buy and wear what you want.

>>15303024
mom's overcooked the fucking meat

>>15303024
man on the fucking moon aka speedy

>>15302165
This. Despite my love of acanthus scrollwork / filigree it just looks shit on watches

>>15302950
right (unless you really want a chrono) since it has the newer master chronometer movement

>>15302950
Neither. Get an AT instead

>>15302787
breitling cockpit
It's actually got water resistance (100m)
You can use the compass bezel as a timing bezel with a little brainpower.
A year or two old used one will probably sell for half of retail or less. But it's still too expensive.

>>15303093
Completley uneornable fdnt on evertyhning.

>>15302695

>>15302890
>H556
Good idea, but kinda hard to get.

>>15303138

based stroke anon

>>15302891
Apparently, it has an 80 decibel or so alarm, and the caseback is its resonance body.
Plus, water isn't a problem in space.
But for real, how many of those are actually used for their intended "purpose" and how many are used by normal people, back on earth, where there is water? Oh well…

>>15303175
Interesting, but I can't even find a price for one anywhere. So I guess it's way beyond toolwatch prices. And probably same with >>15303093 Breitling really does have over 9000 variants of everything.

>>15301747
left is fake, spotted it easily with minutehand and lume pipe.

you'd also be able to tell by examing movement and the bumps on clasp.

>>15302602
nice, we don't have women in here often. welcome!

>>15303085
>>15303086

I have a chronos so the gmt would be a better fit, I was planning on using this as my daily. I cook alot so it would get handy to have the chrono and bezel. Gmt is small tho and would fit me better (have tried it on) but not the PO chrono yet due virus.

I wear my Rolex on the left wrist to show off and my Casio on the right wrist so I can actually know what time it is haha

>>15303208
Yeah i found one used one on chrono 24, it's listed for a little more than half of retail, so too much. There are some others on there if you search breitling digital that are in the $1k-$2k range that might be worth researching.

>>15303262
Why do people like chrono24? Everything on there is overpriced.

>>15303208
Visibility on the digital display kind of sucks unfortunately

>>15303260
Haha based

>>15303282
I have seen some good prices on there. It depends on the listing, i was just looking for someone selling that particular model used online so I went there.

Oh fucking kek the breitling cockpit has some kind of plug in charging situation. Fuck that lol.
>>15303093
>>15303262

>>15303282
How is it overpriced? It's a fair reflection of grey market watch prices.

Is a Stowa 36 hand-wound the closest one can get to a modern version of a 6B/159 RAF pilots watch? The LongJeans heritage remake can go fuck itself.

>>15303334

really exemplifies how and why smart watches are not in the same realm of traditional watches in regards to utilitarianism.

imagine going on a trip and forgetting the charger for your watch.

>>15303384
closest ive seen m8. that smiths guy might make one but he's a cunt so i wouldnt buy from him

Why are nato straps "doubled up"?
Whats the purpose of having two straps under the watch? Zulus don't have them (but round buckles, so pic related is a nato-zulu?)
And why do they bulk up the watch so much on the wrist? Waht is this magic? It's like 1 mm of cheap fabric, how can that shit be so bulky?

>>15303442
it's so that the watch doesn't fall off if one springbar breaks.

>>15302781
There is very little data regarding real-world performance of watches by Daniels, Journe, et al, but the assumption is that because they are created and personally regulated by the maker, they can achieve performance rates within standard deviations by mass manufacturers. The best Daniels pocket watches could achieve near 0.0 over months on end, but his escape mechanism is quite different from the traditional lever escape that the vast majority of watchmakers use. Dual escapements, if used in conjunction for sympathetic vibration synchronizing, can achieve a very stable rate, though that rate has to then be adjusted again in order to achieve an ideal. Tourbillons (as opposed to 'tourbill-ions' do not in any way improve the positional variance concerns of a wristwatch because wristwatches are always moving until they're stored overnight, so think of them as a shiny complication to look at when you're enjoying a morning espresso.

There's not much information either on Pateks or Vacheron Constantins in terms of performance; I've read anything from +2/-2 (same as Rolex) to +4/-4 in terms of real-world performance, but ultimately it seems that owners of Pateks don't want to broadcast to anyone that their watch isn't keeping good time. I can't imagine why. That being said, most owners in that price range aren't timing their watches for positional variance; they're wearing a luxury item that has status but keeping to the second isn't a concern for them.

Unless you're going into new escapements (i.e. Zenith Defy Labs), you can get a traditional lever escapement from ETA or even Seagull to perform well within +2/-2 over 5 positions; the question becomes who does the regulation, how much does it cost, etc. Personally, I'm very curious to see how Omega's "Master Chronometer" functions in the coming years; they haven't been around long enough to prove if they're actually better than the standard Rolex movement in terms of mass production vs. performance.

>>15303455
Instead of unsubstantiated guesses, you could also provide facts.

>>15303469
>yes the watch we tested immediately after regulating is super accurate
id be more interested in getting numbers after a watch has been worn for a significant amount of time

>>15302950
There are advantages to both.
The Seamaster chronograph is one of the only chronograph watches in the world that can be used at depth, so using the pushers won't flood the casing. This particular co-axial has been around for about a decade or so, so the bugs have been shaken out of it. Legible, and comfortable on the wrist if you have a big wrist; if your wrist is small, it bangs into the bones.

The GMT is in my view one of the most useless complications, and only if you travel a shittonne does it become worth having. As the Anon above mentioned, the new Master Chronometer is an advantage as far as we know in terms of testing and performance, but we don't know how that goes for the long run. Legibility is great on this watch as well, but it suffers the same issues of wearability if your wrist is small.

Try both on, and see which one sings to you the most. If I had to choose right now, I'd go with the chronograph because that's what I'd use it for the most (and I dive).

>>15303282
You have to be specific regarding which watches you are looking at. The classic pre-owned watch to compare is an Omega Speedmaster Cal. 321, which is sought-after on the grey market and holds the same value as a standard Rolex Submariner in terms of desirability. They have stayed in the 7-10k range for at least a decade (I know, because I've been watching the market), and this coincides with what I've seen in vintage boutiques (London UK, near Piccadilly Circus) as well as Ebay final prices when auctions are over. Furthermore, it's common to see sellers list the same watch on Ebay as a 'buy it now' price and Chrono24 as their standard price. Perhaps 6 years ago things were different and Chrono24 was just a place to scam unsuspecting buyers, but the market has rooted them out for the most part, and due to their escrow service, they're as reputable as anyone else as long as the buyer does their due diligence.

>>15303448
But it would not fall off without the double fabric either.

>>15303485
lolno

>>15303442
>And why do they bulk up the watch so much on the wrist? Waht is this magic? It's like 1 mm of cheap fabric, how can that shit be so bulky?
It have practical purpose for those who need it, i.e keep the watch attached to the wrist in extreme environments such as diving. And that's where these ugly fucking things should stay. Bulky nasty garbage mostly used by faggots who think clown colours are fun.

>>15303508
I liek klaun colours, but I is heterosex.

>>15303469
My own Seagull 1963 is at +0.5/day, and my Seamaster from the mid-90's (uses the ETA) is running -2 on the wrist, +2 flat over night, so realistically day to day it's 0. I've owned ETA movements for decades, and their performance (if we're talking chronometer calibre) is better than +2/-2 that Rolex has for their Superlative (this also compared with the Rolex GMT that my brother owned a decade ago). The Daniels information comes from his writings (see Watchmaking, 2011, p239) and lectures, and I mentioned the lack of data regarding Patek, VC, and others in terms of real-world performance. You're welcome to either buy one and talk about it or find someone who does. I haven't found anyone who owns one that actually cares.

You can look up Zenith Defy as well; their movements are remarkable, but their watches are still ugly. I'm not sure what else you have a problem with. I don't guess about this shit unless I state so.

>>15303478
This.

My vintage tropic strap broke. Rec me a strap made from vulcanized rubber and thin (<3.5mm). I don't want to pay $80 for the new tropic. I don't like TPU & silicone.

>>15303485
Yea I think in leaning to the chrono, I need to try it and see, I just have 1 AD were I live so it's hard sometimes. I have 6.5-7 inch wrist so I know it will be a stretch. I like that's it's a bulletproof chrono.

>>15303442
The extra ring on the strap keeps the watch from moving up and down with use. An extra layer of fabric is necessary for that.

It's also nice in that there's a near-contiguous loop of fabric on your wrist, uninterrupted by the spring bar spots.

Zulu straps are for the pearl bracelet kinda fags, always wanting more crap on their wrist. Straight nato is fine for red-blooded heterosexuals, oorah.

>>15303542
Watchgecko has one made out of NBR rubber. I've read a lot of praise for uncle seiko's tropics but I don't remember what rubber they're made out of specifically.

>>15303534
lol ok buddy enjoy thinking modern chronometer-grade ETAs are better adjusted than modern Rolexes.

>>15303508
I've no idea why RAF straps aren't more popular, they provide the exact same look and function and you don't have to have that ridiculous load of excess strap sticking out, plus the watch sits flatter to your wrist.

>>15303508
>new money has no taste

BREAKING NEWS

>>15303550
Both watches are as bulletproof as you need in the real world, and keep in mind that the first Seamaster Chronograph iteration from the 90's (it's the Bond seamaster, but chronograph) was in fact the first chronograph with waterproof pushers. They've been bulletproof since the mid-90s, and the Valjoux movement it runs on is also Chronometer spec. Awesome watches, and undervalued for what they provide in terms of engineering and performance.

Ultimately though, you have to try on these watches. Watches can look awesome or ugly as shit in pics, and the same goes for in real life. For a long time I wanted a Reverso until I tried one on in person and hated it. They're still iconic watches that look beautiful, but they look awful on my wrist, no matter the sizing. Such is life.

>>15303566
In performance, they 'can' be. Rolexes, in turn, 'can' perform better than Pateks. We haven't even talked about the silence regarding the performance of Langes or JLC or AP or any of the others. They don't advertise their performance at all, and even Rolex keeps theirs mum (and the +2/-2 is a figure that I can only get from dealers, but not in writing).

When you deal with these watches in real life, there will be variance; this is the reality of owning a mechanical timepiece. The advertised rates (or even ones out of testing) do not stay the same over the course of the day, the month, the year, or anything else in the watches life. You buy these things because of their aesthetic beauty, the intellectual thought that went into the technology, and the fun of hearing it tick. To think that an individual watch from a brand that makes many is a be-all-end-all statement about the performance of every watch in that category is ludicrous. Be real Anon.

>pic for the haters

>>15303485
>The GMT is in my view one of the most useless complications
GMT is great if you have coworkers all around the world

>>15303485
>GMT is useless
You sure are retarded

Rolex standards for rate, positional variance, and isochronism

>>15303608

>>15303613

>>15303617

>>15303601
I can see that, for sure.

15303606
No, (((U))).

>>15303608
>>15303613
>>15303617
Now THAT is awesome shit. Where did you get that stuff? (is it given to service techs?) I've never seen that before.

>>15302672
Well done you added nothing to this thread

>>15303534
Page 239 talks about double-wheel escapement arrangement. It talks about a pocket watch that was worn for a month, laid still each night, and upon returning the watch was one second slow.

Is this anecdote what you meant?

>>15303633
Yup; also he talks about that anecdote and a few others on the documentaries you can find on YouTube.

It's an awesome book, and the documentation about the mathematics behind his co-axial discovery are breathtaking. Still waiting to pick up A Journey Through Time though, but I think Omega is thinking of publishing a new edition without all the errors.

>>15303622
I take horology seriously and seek out facts. I got them from a service contact.

>>15303652
NICE!

>>15303659
That guy is doing something while you avatarfag with watches and post bullshit to hear yourself talk

>>15302435
Based oceANUS poster

>>15303554
>Zulu straps are for the pearl bracelet kinda fags, always wanting more crap on their wrist. Straight nato is fine for red-blooded heterosexuals
But isn't a Zulu less stuff on the wrist? Only one layer of fabric under the watch, instead of the two layers on the nato?

>>15303617

313x calibre is absolutely fucking based. how did those mountain jews from the 80’s do it?

>>15303608
>Dial up or down is indicated with a little wart on the drawing
that's a 'kek' from me. Now I finally know what those abominations are there for.

>>15303668
So, reality check.

1) My claim about the 4 second variance range is confirmed by the recommended numbers from Rolex for servicing.

2) My citation of Daniels' book in hand is confirmed.

I contribute ideas and information here, and I learn from others who have data I don't.

What seems to be your boggle?

>>15303703
You seem emotionally fragile. Someone asks for facts and you instantly get passive-aggressive. Couldn't even back them up, someone did it for you without any drama.
You really do just like hearing yourself

New thread!!
>>>15300494
>>>15300494
>>>15300494
Thread new!

>>15303721
…just kidding.

Report this faggot >>15303721

Rate my quartz shitter. Inb4 fat. I know I'm sorry :(

>>15303743

looks fine

>>15303508
#1 cringe trend in watches for me, cant wait until the put le quirky nato on it phase dies out. Yes it can save a watch If a springbar fails but it also puts more stress on them in the first place if the entire watch wasn't designed with a nato in mind.

>>15303753

How does it put more stress on the bars? I'm kinda indifferent to this "trend". somtimes it looks good, sometimes it doesn't, but no reason to get all autistic about it.

>>15303587
Rolex does advertise the +2/-2 on their website, pic related comes up when you scroll down after you pick a specific model. Works on the English site as well.

>>15303743
Agreed with >>15303746; looks fine. Do you like wearing it?

>>15303753
Funny thing about natos: my understanding is that the military watches had soldered bars instead of springbars, so the only thing that could fail (and thus lose the watch) was the nato strap. I wonder though if a modern nato puts any more stress on the springbars than a normal leather strap. Why would the downward pressure towards the skin be any different or have a different amount of force?

>>15303768
Awesome! I haven't been to their website in years. Certainly helps potential buyers now; I do wonder if they did this in response to Omega continuing to push into their territory (in price and performance). Thanks Anon!

>>15303768
seagull anon just shouting misinformation and lies, as usual.

>>15303753
5 ring Zulus can solve that problem

>>15303718
stop being a cunt he posts nice pictures so what. youre more annoying shitting thing up desu

>>15303792
he posts the same dozen pictures in every thread for years, and still manages to have no idea what he's talking about.

>>15303792
he is a useless bloviating faggot who spams the same pics ad nauseum

>>15303508
tiny ass wrists, extra long strap, or both.
looks horrendous.

>>15303834
That's how natos are supposed to look, is this bait?

>>15303783
>so the only thing that could fail
Murphy's law I suppose, anything that can go wrong will go wrong.

I like really small watches. How small of a watch can I get away with?

>>15303875
34mm is about as small as you can get away with unless you're an actual gril.

>>15303761
>>15303783
To my knowledge the added material under the watch case can lead to additional downward tension on the spring bar instead of the classic outside "pull". Especially in a watch there the lugs and springbars aren't flish with the case bottom.
This has been a controversial discussion over at the Rolex forums but in essence it does make your watch safer unless you already have shitty spring bars and/or wear your strap too tight.
(pic unrelated)

>>15303879
you can probably get away with some vintage 60's watches too, they tend to be between 31 and 34mm. I have a vintage Universal Geneve that is about 32mm, but I also have a small babby wrist. >>15303875

https://youtu.be/mCjU9lZ_bNA?list=FL8rI4r8mSlQ3k6b-VwHJbIg

>the Chinese are now making fake Seagull 1963s

>>15303875
yep, I'd also say 34 mm and if you're equipped with manly wrists that is already pushing it. 36 mm is universally heralded as the perfect "midsize" diameter for an everyday watch.

>>15303889
Are they actually fake, or an explicit second source for the movement? China's got a history of the latter w/ the tongji "chinese standard" movement.

>not wearing >30mm women's watches on your tiny toddler wrist
do you guys even try lmao

>>15303901
I have no idea. They probably use the same movement

Here's a decent shot of that women's Tag Heuer, the WH1312-K1

>>15303455
> There's not much information either on Pateks or Vacheron Constantins in terms of performance
That's bullshit. The ratings listed on their websites is what they guarantee. If you buy a Patek and it's not within spec, usually the -1/+3 with their latest movements, they'll take it back and readjust for free. I will say that most HH watch owners I've met don't get anal about how accurate their pieces are.

Yes you can service an ETA to -/+1 spd but that takes a lot of time and effort by someone who knows what they are doing and even then it may not stay within that tolerance for a long period. No manufacture is going to do that in some mass produced shitters.

From personal experience the most accurate watches I've worn as dailys is a Rolex Day Date Cal 3255, a Patek Calatrave 5227 which are both under -/+2spd but the most accurate of all is a serviced 1960's DateJust which keeps better than -/+0.5 spd and has done for years.

>>15303924
looks fake to me

NEW >>15303966
NEW >>15303966
NEW >>15303966
NEW >>15303966

>>15303891
>>15303879
>>15303875
It also depends on the watch as some wear larger than others, Rolex for example.

>>15303942
Are you surprised this attention whore who just makes shit up is wrong?

>>15303959
It's real, it's just a ~15 year old watch. I have the papers from the Tag Heuer dealer it was purchased from.

>>15303959
Tags from that era almost universally look like absolute shit. That's just how they are.

>>15303986
It looks much better in person.

>>15303924
It looks like a submariner and JLC kryos rape baby.

>>15303994
i doubt it

>>15303997
ok

>>15301891
any alternatives for a poorfags for a similar looking watch?

>>15304028
There's this, but it was a limited edition

>>15303508
Why so serious?
Have some fun in life, man. Throw your Breguet on a rainbow nato.

>>15303875
I posted my little 32mm chrono earlier in the thread. You could go as small as 28mm depending on the watch. The proportions are just as important as the case size. Do you like the way it looks? Yes? Then wear it. A 31mm Oystercase Rolex will look good on an average wrist. If you're a big dude with big wrists 34mm will still look good. Look at pics of peak arnold, he wore 36mm daydates and they looked fine.

>>15302259
how does a perpetual calendar that only has a date window work? how do you know what month youre setting it to?

>>15304304
most quartz perpetual calendars indicate the month and year with the hands while you're setting the date.

>>15303839
Probably, though that blue/orange one is crimped badly.

>>15302989
yeah im rather planing on buying an already serviced one that has not been polished to shit.

MAAAAAAANNN

>>15305237