/fa/ - Fashion

Fuck the mods and jannies

this watch has an ETA movement and it costs $3000.

>>15856232
Is the dial calculating the trajectory of Jerome's penis into its owners wife's vaginal cavity?

I want one so bad.

>>15856237
COME ON GET DOWN WITH THE THICKNESS

>>15856243

>>15856232
Fortis really have made some ugly shit.

>>15856248
this might have been cool if the fucking date window wasn't there

the more i get into watches the more i roll my eyes at date windows

>>15856249
Yeah, especially on watches that aren't every day wear kind of watches, there just doesn't seem to be a need and it's even worse when it's on some quirky watch and looks incongruous. Obviously market research must show that dateless watches sell less well and are almost universally a must.

>>15856221
there are already 2 watch threads up you nigger, use the search function

>>15856245
love me barrel case

why don't zoomers/millennials like this brand?

>>15856274
Doesn't have cache with "influencers" like the Royal Oak and it's not a well-known status symbol like Patek.
Several rappers that are into watches wear them though and reference them in their songs

>>15856274
>why don't zoomers/millennials like this?
the answer is always that it's too expensive. does not matter if it's watches, cars, restaurants, home ownership,

>>15856274
Thank god they don't.

>>15856274
how can I get a trad wife who wears VC?

>>15856271
no, that other thread was started at a retard at 200 posts in the previous-previous thread

this is the true thread

>>15856274
NAZI CROSS REEEEEEEEEEEE

>>15856295
Shouldnt be a problem if you can afford a watch like that for your wife

>>15856274
I'm sorry anon but, date window just kills the watch for me, it looks straight from Bostok

>>15856283
>Several rappers that are into watches wear them though and reference them in their songs
Vacheron?
I'm having a real hard time believing this.

>>15856274
I’m a millennial and prefer VC over Patek and AP. Their retail prices are spiraling out of control though (just like Patek) so I don’t know why you wouldn’t just buy Lange, which gets you probably a better watch at a lower price.

>>15856274
I really hate the name. It sounds like all the generic vaguely aristocratic poser european brands out there. Might as well call it Ferdinand Debonair or something.

>Vacheron posting

Don't mind me, just posting the superior brand.

(Girls will suck your dick for Patek, btw.)

>>15856351
> Girls will suck your dick for Patek, btw
Patek yes but not that watch. It's the worst Calatrava you could have picked.

>>15856351
>(Girls will suck your dick for Patek, btw.)

>>15856351
>>15856364
Hardly any of them knows what Patek is lmao. The females who know what Patek is are either really old or rich enough to own it themselves.

Rolex and Hublot are the gold digger watches.

>>15856316
Not that anon but I've heard Rick Ross and T.I. mention the brand.

Vacheron is more understated than the AP and RM which are confirmed jogger watches that nobody with any class would buy

morning guys
can't believe it's back to work tomorrow, gay ass shit

Suggest a Watch? I have 2k USD to burn and am open to anything

> Your budget
around 2k, but willing to go slightly higher
> Watch type, e.g. dress, diver, pilot
Don't care, but I prefer tool watches. Been looking at fliegers for a while. Saw pic related that I liked. Mostly looking for a "vacation" watch thats not as flashy that beaners/nogs won't hit me over the head for.
> Movement, e.g. automatic, hand wound, quartz
Auto/manual. No Quartz.
> Desired features, e.g. water resistance, day/date, 2nd time zone
Don't Care
> Preferred strap option, e.g. leather, nylon, bracelet
Doesn't matter, but i like bracelets
> Wrist size or desired watch size
40-45 mm, I have 7.5 inch wrists and anything smaller than 38mm looks stupid on me

>>15856437
Zodiac Super Sea Wolf 53

>>15856437
My current collection, plus a bunch of seikos/micros.

Was looking at tudor, but the printed crown logo seemed super cheap to me when I saw it in person

>>15856221
I have really small wrists lads what can a wristlet like me do? Can't get any metal straps to fit me

>>15856343
Frederique Constantin

Can wee get some Omega fans in here!

>>15856424
The small seconds version is amazing, shame the fucked the display back up.

>>15856442
The beauty of being a wristlet is that there are tons of relatively cheap 36mm rolex datejusts available online. If thats out of your price range, check out vintage JLC, or omega. You can get vintage omega seamasters for like $300

>>15856442
Eat more pusy

>>15856351
That's an unflattering photo.

>>15856441
Appreciate the suggestion friend. Zodiac seems hard to get though. I've only seen them on hodinkee and they are overpriced there.

>>15856442
Go vintage.
Can't go wrong with a UG Polerouter

>>15856454
Try chrono24, better selection and better prices

>>15856382
>>15856382
Think of how many beautiful watches have been nighafied in the past ten years with diamonds

>>15856351
Nice jomashop pic.

Very few girls would know the name, and even those that do, don't know what one actually looks like cause they just hear it in rap songs.

>>15856449
>>15856455
Where is a good place to find vintage watches?

Regulated my watch on Friday, first time trying something like that.
It’s a 2824-2 clone.
It always comes as a surprise to me how small the movement is when I open it up, but I managed to turn the screw in the + direction.
Before regulation it was around -8 a day, for now it’s +7.
I’ll wait and see if anything changes. If I want to get more precise, I’ll need some magnifying first, because I did feel like I was working blindly, but I can certainly live with +7

>>15856274
Zoomers are finding them. AP got too popular, so they went to Patek. Patek is mainstream now, and the forerunners are finding VC. Thats why the price is shooting up.

Just wait til they find and start icing out Lange & Sohnes

>>15856464
See >>15856459

>>15856232
>>15856248
It seems like the entire market for these are wealthy math professors with a taste for quirky watches, doesn't exactly seem like a huge money maker for fortis.

>>15856437

I own a similar collection to yours and went through the same thought process. I ended up just going for quartz but I was real close to buying a Glashutte Muhle SAR Rescue Timer

https://www.muehle-glashuette.de/en/wristwatches/functional-wristwatches/sar-rescue-timer/

>>15856464
Also a rule of thumb try to buy from reputable dealers in trustworthy countries, avoid buying from places like India, eastern Europe, etc or you're gonna have a bad time

>>15856221
What kind of batteries would a rolex take?

>>15856351
I have never met a girl who has heard of Patek, or anything more expensive than Rolex for that matter. I guess some gold diggers might know AP.

Women also have no concept of how much a watch actually costs. They think Rolex costs $1k.

>>15856446
kek exactly

>spending more than $200 on a watch

If you have 1000s to burn why not put it into more enriching things like reforestation funds or charity for the homeless.

>>15856485
>Women also have no concept of how much a watch actually costs.

This is true.

Women are used to men buying them everything, so they have no idea things are expensive.

They're only knowledge of cost is the cost of makeup to coverup their hideous faces.

>>15856500
>If you have 1000s to burn why not put it into more enriching things like reforestation funds

I work at the worlds largest and most influential non-profit organization and I can assure you, your money would be wasted. It’s literally a scam.

>>15856437
Sinn 903 is the Pilot's chronograph to have if you can't afford the breitling version of it.

>>15856511
Your NPO might be but some actually has accountability and gives you video evidence something is happening.

>>15856437
That watch looks absolutely amazing. Does Sinn look this epic in real life too or do they look like cheap shit (because of bead finish) or what?

>>15856440
Nice, now stick it up your asshole.

>>15856538
Sinns look great but I'm pretty sure that watch is also thick as hell

>>15856545
Yes they all are, unfortunately that's the only reason I don't have one as my one and only watch and I'm forced to spend twice as much on a watch that I don't even like. Shit sucks.

>>15856552
>>15856545
The new U50 diver is thin. Same great stark Sinn looks, 11mm tall.

Clearly it’s this watch you boomerfags

IT'S UP! NEW TEDDY!

https://youtu.be/MOexUhMJisU

Bros I fucking love this thing. How do I reconcile the fact it’s a glorified ETA shitter?

This is probably the only Sinn watch I seriously considered wanting.

Not only is it spec for rescue missions it is also modular and you can take it apart and clean it.

>>15856591
It looks awful bro that snowflake hand is really hamfisted.

I'd rather get the north flag or this Asia-only model if you're on the dressier side.

>>15856600
I’d rather have a North Flag but I’m the king of wristlets and 45mm lug to lug is the absolute highest I can go.

>>15856591
Just get an OP faggot.

>>15856591
Yeah, how awful to have one of the most reliable and widely used movements in the world which can be repaired and serviced down the corner instead of having to send it to Switzerland.

>>15856442
>Can't get any metal straps to fit me
Milanese.

>>15856594
>PulsRotor

>>15856609
I like the OP too but it’s almost too austere. I like that the BB36 is a little wonky and less serious.

>>15856611
B-but Archie would make fun of me.

>>15856591
ETA doesn't mean a watch is a shitter, I like the BB36

>>15856594
Module action

>>15856591
All toolwatches should have workhorse movements, it makes no sense in house movements, you need something reliable and easy to repair/replace.

Why can't yuppies stick with their daydate or datejusts. I'm just a simple forklift operator

>>15856632
All toolwatches should be quartz and shockproof not these faux toolwatches H E R I T A G E itwentonmounteverestwoah.

>>15856591
Not anymore, Tudor started making them with Sellita movements.

>>15856626
>>15856594
Looks like shit unlike most Sinn watches which look great, so I guess you just have shit taste.

And the "modular action" just means that you can take off the bezel lmfao?

>>15856583
Dumb video, $5k is barely enough for one watch, there's no sense whatsoever in buying more than one (unless it's a used Speedy + a G-Shock).

>>15856698
Most Sinn watches are typically german and boring. This is the only one where they went out of the box so it is special and sticks out. You have poor mainstream taste and probably soulless in every choice you make.

>>15856686
Are you joking? Where are the proofs?

>>15856712
They aren't boring, they have a really cool stark appearance. It's the best of German autistic design.

>>15856712
>>Most Sinn watches are typically german and boring.
LMFAO what?

>>15856730
You are posting photos from the same line I am so you are proving me right.

>>15856750
lmao imagine thinking this company with their offbrand german daniel wellington seamaster 300m is worth anything

>>15856501
Can you make it anymore obvious that you're an incel?
Women know exactly how expensive a birkin bag or dior bracelet is, they just dont care about watches at all. Most guys dont know the price of swiss watches either, recently I was talking to friends of mine about luxury watches and they thought a Rolex costs 1k, and these are guys that could easily afford a Rolex if they wanted to.

>>15856479
This watch is based

>plastic
>quartz
>$462
Wtf? Why?

Bros I've come round to the 38 Speedmaster round sub dials variant with its date, bezel notches, sapphire, closed caseback and lady size. I had wrestled with the watch being too thick for dress and having aspects that aren't true to the original. None of that matters.

Looking at this as a column wheel chrono tool watch with date function and Omega's tech in a slightly larger than classic mid size ... I think it is great!

This just isn't a watch most women would wear. It isn't a dress watch. None of the standard models are really true to the original even if you would actually want that. So, once you get past that it is a cool tool watch.

Am I completely lost for thinking this?

>>15856852
Luminox uses tritium lume and might be swiss army rated.

Other than that just typical swiss overpricing.

>>15856863
I always disliked it because of the bezel and the movement. Now that the "real one" is also co-axial one of these problems is basically mitigated. I can see how the 38 could make sense now.

>>15856863
Personally I would be too conscious of wearing a lady's watch. But I have to admit looking at the picture before I knew it was I thought it looks good.

>>15856852
Tacticool LARP, but even some G-Shocks cost more and this is a bit more serious in looks.

>>15856852
Luminox is literally Jewish

>>15856652
This desu

I want a grand seiko snowflake so bad bros.

>>15856878
Isn't tritium forbidden in most countries for health concerns?

>>15856534
lol

>>15856907
why?

>>15856913
You're thinking of Radium.

>>15856917
What the fuck, that looks awful, I thought Seiko made nice dials.

>>15856907
they are enormous fat bastards

>>15856652
Based

>>15856600
>Asia-only model
Not anymore

>>15856924
Can you show me?

>>15856939
go try one on but they are over 40mm and 13mm thick

Legitimately low IQ poster: >>15856921

>>15856924

>>15856713
Look at the website it says caliber T600 which is Sellita w200, top grade AND apparently without any other work on the movement by tudor like they did on the ETA movement.

https://www.watchuseek.com/threads/tudor-sellita-database-not-a-debate.5257374/

>>15856994
Fucking mountain Jews.

>>15856730
I love Sinn, they're doing some really cool things (Steel hardening, diamond bearing jewels, U-boat steel divers)
There's so much variety in their lineup too. Basically if they make a watch targeted for a specific purpose it excels at it without compromise.

>>15856249
>the more i get into watches the more i roll my eyes at date windows
based

>>15856351
>>15856364
>>15856381
Do girls even care what watch you wear?
I thought wearing luxury watches was about making yourself feel better?

>>15856237
>>15856245
Mogged.

>>15857079
women care about men's watches like men care about women's handbags

>>15857083
But if I see a woman with a Birkin bag I'll know it's worth my time to go down on her.

>>15857027
Mogged^2

>>15856591
>Rotor
>Self-winding

>>15856795
That's what a Rolex should cost so not surprising.

>>15856994
damn so guess that means my eta bb36 is now suddenly more valuable

>>15857086
>he recognizes handbags
>he eats pussy
end yourself

>>15856591
mogged

>>15856863
mogged

>>15856852
mogged

>>15857096

Incels are beyond cringe.

What's a decent price range for a JDM Lordmatic from the 70s? Assume a good shape, someone last thread was saying that 200-300 is too high and is Grand Seiko tier but the GS I'm finding seem to be way higher even and most of the LM are around the former price range.

>>15857103
Has shit lume though

>>15857123
pull the hands off and give them a few thicc coats of C3. It'll glow longer than any watch you can buy

>>15857119
That price you mentioned is more for KS than LM, sort of. The better the condition the more it will cost. A serviced, very good condition KS will go for more than that now. Better start looking at vintage omegas, my man.

>>15856795
>Most guys dont know the price of swiss watches either, recently I was talking to friends of mine about luxury watches and they thought a Rolex costs 1k, and these are guys that could easily afford a Rolex if they wanted to.
What was the reaction when you told them the actual prices, why doesn't anyone elaborate on these discussions?

>>15857128
Fuck off

>>15857144
Not him but I've had these discussions and it always ends in "woooow that's ridiculous, I'd pay like $2000 for it" etc. It's not like you can go very far with these discussions, just laugh at how overpriced watches are and move on.

>>15856795
>Women know exactly how expensive a birkin bag or dior
Tell that to my sister and she will answer what the fuck is a birking bag and that she does not now nothing about Dior except that is a fashion brand,not every girl is into fashion. The same for guys and watches and my male friends, they don't nothing about watches, one of them was about to get married, asked me for some recs about watches, ended getting a citizen eco drive chronograph,watch that was out of my recs since I was saying him to buy something mechanical in the 1k-2k range,hamilton,longines...something decent for an important event.

>>15856274
mogged

>>15857096
You just never been with a girl with a perfect pussy

>>15857161
>me, be anything other than a consoomer?
>take matters into my own hands?
>nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

>>15857183
>> Tell that to my sister and she will answer what the fuck is a birking bag and that she does not now nothing about Dior except that is a fashion brand,not every girl is into fashion.
A/S/L and marriage status of sister please.

>>15857131
This is being bid on right now for ~100, I could probably be alright with this one.
Besides aesthetically, it seems somewhat like a lower end LM. The LM special was recommended to me last thread, but if ~330 for it was overpriced then I dunno what to do.

>>15856479
>>15856483
One of the few decent jewelers carries this brand and i was actually impressed with their shit. very minimalist but not bauhaus.

>>15856517
Honestly dont like the navitimer clone (or the original). Too busy.

>>15856538>>15856545
Thanks. Its 11mm which is thick, but my breitling superocean is 14mm thick and still wearable.

>>15856541
Sounds like someones a poorfag

>>15857183
sounds like you're a incel piece of shit and a bad friend, but maybe that's just how you come across when you're trying to write in english

>>15857201
>Sounds like someones a poorfag
Did you stick it up so far shit's coming out of your mouth?

>>15856591
ETA is a good movement. What pushed me off was the printed logo on the crown. Seemed cheap to me

>>15856600
The `style` model, despite the tacky name, is a good usa equivalent.

>>15856621
One of the few good two tones

>>15856730
Best tool watch aesthetic

>>15856863
Speedy variants are where its at. Why pay 1k extra just for no one to be able to tell the difference

>>15857214
lol what you mad about then? lets work through your daddy issues, poorfag

>>15857219
no u

>>15857205
Don't get triggered, not everyone follow a lavish lifestyle, not everyone is into fashion and expensive brands.

>>15857217
the logo on the crown is raised not printed

>>15857221
I'm not mad at all lol. I've got a beauty collection and money in the bank. I've was away 4 hours and I get back and you're still waiting here. So, what you mad about?

>>15857223
Maybe on new ones, but last year it wasnt.

>>15857225
>>15857221

>>15857222
not everyone tells a friend to spend two thousand on a watch they'll never care about. only very bad people

>>15857231
kk then, poorfag

>>15857233
But he cared, was really proud about his Citizen, but is more an apple smartwatch user.

>>15856232
So in other words just like a Tudor?

>>15856591
Just get a modded sekio version of it

>>15856632
>All toolwatches should have workhorse movements, it makes no sense...

But this isnt a tool watch unless you redefine it to simply mean minimalistic. Its a sportier dress watch

>>15856591
It's so boring and generic and not worth what they are asking, just looks like a fake chinese watch. They could have went with a new dial design but they decided to go with this lazy diver dial in a non diver mess. Its only saving grace would be the nice Oyster case shape, except it's thicker than even a vintage Rolex. For $2k you can get an automatic chronograph and it will be way more fun than that shitter.

>>15857295
Sounds like you're just another poorfag.

anyone has the PDF of this or a similar book? I don't really want to spend 250€ for a book

Which watch is this? And alternately, which watch would you recommend to a boomer who looks pretty much like that except bald.

>>15857306
No one would care about the BB36/41 if it wasn't marketed as a cheaper and available OP.
Makes me wonder who is the poorfag in this conversation.

>>15857321
it's a Giuliano Mazzuoli, similar to the one in the pic, worth like 1/2k€

>>15857295
it's extremely easy and quick to read, great for telling the time even in the dark

>>15857328
>worth like 1/2k€
Must be nice to be ultrarich so you can slum it with watches like that.

>>15857321
You can't be a proud fat boomer without a two-tones Datejust or an homage to this.

Alternatively, some kind of chronograph.

>>15857336
new to watches? I own 5k€ shitters and I consider myself medium class
anyway Russel Crowe has watches worth hundreds of thousands of euros so this is like a casio for him

>>15857332
So is a Seiko SRPE. Doesn't make them less ugly.

bros I'm thinking of getting my first real watch, this Tag Formula 1.. its worth about 1k what do

>>15857340
>anyway Russel Crowe has watches worth hundreds of thousands of euros so this is like a casio for him
That's exactly what I said, shame money can't buy brains.

>>15857325
>cheaper and available OP.
No, its a cheaper, SMALLER and AVAILABLE Rolex explorer. If you want the best Explorer you must go used/vintage because the new ones are extremely big, and if you go vintage they have some weird lume.

The only bad thing about the bb36 is that weird crown. For a fraction of the Rolex Explorer you have a perfectly fine watch that keeps the time.

>>15857342
the proportions on those dinner plate seikos are all wrong and the hands don't read as fast

>>15856351
This watch literally looks like a cheap-ass Timex

>>15857348
the worst thing about the bb36 is that gay "rotor self-winding" text

Anyone here have experience with Grand Seiko divers? Looking to get one to wear with my casual wear and when travelling.

>>15857360
you are weird. i would say it is the 19mm lugs

>>15857362
yeah fucked one when your mom was smuggling it in herr ass hole

>>15856274
nice pick anon

>>15857363
how is that weird? that's a valid reason. that text is retarded. it's a stupid thing to use instead of "automatic" and it's shaped like a fucking watermelon for some reason rather than written normally, too. tudor always fucks up with text like how the new pelagos has a novel on the dial to the point where the bottom text is nearly touching the 6 o' clock index, and it looks fucking stupid.

>>15856451
not even close
>date
>no seconds

>>15857345
The definition of a SHITTER, anon. It’s fucking quartz and not even respectable quartz like Grand Seiko or Breitling.

>>15857369
it's charming but up to personal taste, hard to say that it's the worst thing about it

>>15857345
No dude for a quartz to be worth getting it has to be 5-10k like a GS or Breitling otherwise it's a shitter despite being exactly the same as those.

>>15857345
What ever you do, don't buy that.

>>15857385
If you actually think the GS 9F quartz is the same as whatever cut-rate shit they’re using in that F1 you have lost the fucking plot.

>>15857379
>>15857385
>>15857389
alright, do you know any specific models with similar aesthetics and price range (1-2k), like >>15856591 ?

I'm a tourist on this board but worked at a high end watch store so only know brands, not movements

>>15857395
>alright, do you know any specific models with similar aesthetics and price range (1-2k), like >>15856591 ?
No, if you want a respectable watch especially a steel sports, it will cost you from $5-10k, that's the entry level luxury range, sorry you're poor, and no you're not getting a Rolex for that, you have to settle for some poorfag equivalent

>>15856229
based

>>15856237
>19.5 mm thicc

>>15857082
mogged

>>15857405
>No, if you want a respectable watch especially a steel sports, it will cost you from $5-10k, that's the entry level luxury range, sorry you're poor, and no you're not getting a Rolex for that, you have to settle for some poorfag equivalent
kek im a biz tourist, so while I can afford it, I dont want to spend $5-10k on a watch just yet. Thanks for the faggy non answer though I guess

>>15856863
You're not lost. While mine is around the same size, I wanted it due to the complications long before I was in the position to purchase. I just like the look of the complexity mixed with legibility. The new 38s are excellent movements, far better than the stacked chronograph modules used on the old reduced. Go for it if the price is right.

>>15857295
This, most people don't know what Tudor is. Might as well say bagelsport as far as normies are concerned.

>>15857369
>it's a stupid thing to use instead of "automatic"

What about Oyster for waterproof and Perpetual for automatic?

>>15857436
Normie recognition is not something you should be catering your watch collection to. If you do you’ll really be limited to RAAAAAWLEKS and maybe, just maybe Tag Heuer. Omega for newer Bond fans and AP/PP for celebrity worshippers. Honestly you’d get the most recognition from some quartz disaster from Chanel or Versace.

>>15857476
that's stupid too bro I don't know what gotcha games you're trying to play

How much would it be to get the crystal replaced on this?
Feels like acrylic to me honestly

>>15857487
That's why I'm getting a TAG Heuer and calling it a day, I don't really need anything else and I think it will be just fine for the rest of my short life since I'll be 40 soon and don't really see myself living to 50 due to health issues.

>>15857496
Just keep the acrylic crystal m8. Keep some polywatch in the closet whenever needed, or if you really want find a NOS crystal just to have a backup.

>>15857488
What I'm trying to say is that rotor self winding is pretty descriptive, and it comes from old times, watchmakers put descriptive things on the dial, shockproof, antimagnetic, the number of jewels... in essence having that rotor selfwinding is the same as having automatic on the dial.

>>15857514
rotor self-winding sounds stupid and they should use automatic like everyone else. they are intentionally using retarded language to be different but it's just stupid, like those kids in high school who wear fedoras and shit.

>>15857506
If that's all it needs then that's great, thanks anon

>>15856863
Thanks to all that read my post. Especially those that replied.
>>15856879
>>15856880
>>15857101 yes, even you
>>15857217
>>15857435
I've got a G square that is my actual tool / beater / work watch. Eventually I'd like to get a dress watch when the time comes and I have saved up. A new Rolex OP (or used DJ) is a great all around watch but it just isn't a dress watch or the most fun business casual watch around. Frankly, I don't like the current colours and lack of something between 36 and 41.

I've had a 36.5 and a 40mm watch which taught me around 38mm is ideal. Another consideration is that bracelet comfort really matters. Omega has an Aqua Terra and a Seamaster that are around 38 and titanium which might work out.

My next step is to try the 38 on at an AD to really see how comfortable it is.

Last point to share regarding Grand Seiko, Breitling and Tudor - I can see the appeal but Rolex and Omega just seem to hit the right balance. I also like G Shocks because they do what they do really well.

>>15857502
Bear in mind that buying a luxury watch is absolutely not about 'what you need'; it's about what you're passionate about. If you're not passionate about the watch you're about to buy, then it's not worth buying. If a TAG doesn't make your heart beat faster, then why bother?

Regarding not living to 50; be advised too that any of us could be gone tomorrow in a car accident...or in a month due to a sudden attack of the Covids. That's actually more reason to buy only what you love, and if you don't love it, don't buy it, and if you can't afford it, then save.

>pic makes me smile like a kid when I look at it. Your watch should do the same.

>>15857514
My understanding is that 'self-winding rotor' was a serious improvement at the time; it was unique in the watchworld for a brief time. It's like how cars that had automatic transmission would have 'automatic' on the back of the trunk.

It's just their lingo.

>>15857487
I one-time made the mistake of saying "swatch group watches" in front of some normie that just video games, juuls and gets tats and he went off on some tangent about rolex watches and other swiss brands etc etc ain't "no swatch bro ain't no swatch bro" and started getting all pissed

Then I was like yeah you're not going to like volkswagen lambos

>>15856237

I hope you at least go for the 7750 version. SW300 is garbage and it's hilarious how badly Sinn was cucked into using it. Like they're doing their hardest not to mention it in all their specs.

>>15857521
>>Regarding not living to 50; be advised too that any of us could be gone tomorrow in a car accident
You first hopefully.

>>15856852
mall cop watch
mall cop brand
>>15856994
>literally just a sellita plonked inside
lmaooo
>There don't appear to be any material modifications other than a branded rotor. They may perform some regulation to ensure these are operating at a very tight accuracy tolerance.
loooooooooooooool

>>15857517
You know, the self winding term was how the automatic watches were called when they were invented.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Harwood_(watchmaker)

>>15857541
it's not the 1920s anymore
we use automatic now
almost everyone uses automatic, tudor is just being hipster faggots

>>15857520
>dress watch
Then the question becomes 'what functions do you plan to wear it to' and 'what functions do you need the watch to perform'?

Also, do consider seriously vintage. Vintage Omegas from the 60s have excellent mechanical movements and are a steal on the secondary market (i.e. under 1000$) for simple dress watches. Look for the Constellations. They're simple and are usual time-only, maybe with a numerical date window or even day-date (it'll be a little more expensive). Also, anyone can service them, and they're in the size range you mention.

Definitely go to an AD to try on watches though; don't buy one you've never tried on, because seeing it on your wrist and feeling the weight (or lack thereof) is a very serious consideration to how you will feel about the watch emotionally.

>>15857529
Thanks.
>pic related just for you.

>>15857546
>it's not the 1920s anymore
>we're talking about mechanical wristwatches that are less accurate than our mobile phones.
Where do you think you are?

>>15857546
Welcome to horology world, where heritage is just that, old things. Tudor has that, other brands do not have anything similar and must go with the souless automatic. If heritage is so bad why every brand is milking old models and designs.

>>15857566
why aren't you using a pocketwatch then, gaylord fauntleroy?

>>15857566

This Anon 15857546 probably doesn't know what faux-patina lume is.


>pic unrelated

>>15857568
If it helps..I do, regularly.

>>15857395
Seiko SPB051J1

Hope you see this fren.

It probably costs the same as well.

>>15857487
Not that anon but it’s also worth noting that even among people who are in the hobby and can appreciate brands Tudor still gives a negative - couldn’t afford a Rolex vibe - particularly for those models which try and ape Rolex ones

>>15857574
This looks great, how much is it?

>>15857630
Right not these are going for 25k on the open market, but I'd suspect this particular watch is not going to be for sale until the owner dies. The condition is immaculate, and it's nearly impossible to find in this condition. So, with premium this watch on the open market would be around 35k or more.

That being said, the market right now is severely depressed for everything except Rolex and Patek because of what Covid did to the world economy. Most people right now are selling, so it's a great time to buy if you know your watch prices.

These are growing on me are they an absolute meme?

>>15857642
forgot pic

>>15857638
>>Right not these are going for 25k on the open market
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH AHAHAHAHHAH

yeah ok lmao

>>15857429
ignore that dude
you can get a certina DS/mido ocean star/seiko marinemaster for $1k or abouts.

if you dont care that much about brands (you shouldnt, really..a good watch is a good watch) you can get nice microbrand watches for well under that price range as well. (Zelos, Baltic Aquascaphe etc)

>>15857648
https://www.chrono24.com/search/index.htm?query=omega+holy+grail&dosearch=true&searchexplain=false&watchTypes=&accessoryTypes=

The price is due to two factors: it's one of the rarest versions of this movement fitted to a Speedmaster case, and it was dubbed 'Holy Grail' by Maddox in the 90s and ever since then Speedy collectors have increased the desirability of the watch.

Rarity + Desirability. It's the same reason why Rolex Stainless Steel sports models gain value after they're bought.

good night watch thread
may this week pass really quickly

>>15857663
Sleep tight Hamilton Bro.

>>15856343
>sounds like all the generic vaguely aristocratic poser european brands
It's almost as if those brands are trying to pose as VC.

>>15857654
>Rarity
>rolex

>>15856221
>66 tritium tubes
>mogs your lume
hnnnggggg

>>15857673
Yes. Rolex controls the availability of watches from the ADs, and therefore it is difficult to buy a stainless steel sports watch from them at the recommended Rolex price. If you're a 'preferred client', then it's different, but the vast majority of people are not. Therefore, a new one at Rolex price is indeed rare.

The actual numbers are not, of course, but given the heavy desirability due to brand recognition, the numbers still work out.

If you consider that a Roger Dubuis 1-of-28 can be had for under 10K on the secondary market, precious metals, double certification, and all, but a Rolex Stainless Steel unfinished Submariner will be at least twice the price, then you will understand the word 'rarity'.

>the open watchmarket is what determines rarity, not the production numbers alone. Desirability is a factor

>>15857689
then thats not rarity, just the difficulty of procuring them, its 2 entirely different things.

obviously a "1 of 28" piece is far far rarer than something produced in the hundreds of thousands.
its the same reason why the ultra rich gravitate towards independents and more obscure HH brands.

Rec me a watch before I buy the blue Orient Maestro and replace the bracelet with a leather strap. My first watch and beater seiko 5 that I got for ~$60 just died -- something loose in the automatic function and second hand rarely ticks. Not sure what the options are, but I was looking at bambino, then realized maestro is the better watch. I like the simplicity in design, the color, the open back, and would need to replace with a good leather strap. I'm curious what the other budget alternatives are like this. more details follow:


> Your budget
around $200 USD or less
> Watch type, e.g. dress, diver, pilot
Not too dressy but more than a beater. goal: impress a date with a nice looking accessory, but don't need to signal status or anything.
> Movement, e.g. automatic, hand wound, quartz
automatic
> Desired features, e.g. water resistance, day/date, 2nd time zone
aesthetic > all else
> Preferred strap option, e.g. leather, nylon, bracelet
n/a. I prefer leather but would be ok without the stock strap
> Wrist size or desired watch size
n/a. I like the large bauhaus style that are popular but feel like it'd look poorly on me.

JLC is fucking based.

>>15857701
Just get that

I would like to purchase a Vostok Anphibia from Meranom however they are asking for £20 delivery price for a £50 wristwatch

Is this normal? I also hear that the watch takes 2 months usually to deliver, so why is the price so high?

>>15857706
thanks. as a default i tend to assume i have shit taste and better options exist if I were just more aware. the fact that this appeals to me is probably reason enough to get it.

>>15857696
I can't agree with you, at least on the watch market. The difficulty in procuring something is precisely what can make it rare. Rarity is not a single factor, it's a combination of what it is and how many want them. This is why the term 'comparatively rare' is used so often, especially with goods. Water is not rare, but it's rare in the desert.

I chose Dubuis specifically because they are high quality watches, but at the moment in our current economic situation there are many who are wanting to sell (to free up funds) but very few who are willing to buy. So you have tonnes of them on the open market. They were rare...when people wanted them. Now they're not.

Perhaps we're just arguing over semantics though. My contention is that desirable Rolexes are hard to find and you have to pay inflated prices for them on the open market because ADs won't sell these watches to the common person who walks in the store. Therefore the ability to get one is restricted, and it's a 'rare' occurrence to the common man. You're perhaps looking at it the other way, which is that Rolex manufactures thousands of watches a year, and therefore they're not 'rare' by the sheer number of them produced. If price and desirability were not taken into account, then I'd agree.

Lord only knows how many two-tone date-justs there are on Chrono24 that people are desperate to offload. Ugly as sin watches. Those are not rare in any sense of the word, using either definition.

>>15857719
Please learn the word scarce and stop talking

>>15857701
>40mm case size
it -will- be a huge bauhaus dinnerplate, if thats what you want
ditch the auto meme and get a timex marlin 34
yes its a total shitter but its a nice simple classy looking watch
or at least consider the bambino 36

>>15857701
I'd second what >>15857706 said, but also for the most practical issue here.

A mechanical watch will cost you around 150-200 to service if it gives trouble down the road, so what you're buying at 200USD or less is essentially a disposable watch (unless you buy some tools and try servicing it yourself). If it breaks, you'll simply have to buy another one, since servicing will be the cost of the watch.

You have options though if you save up a bit; aim for the range of 1000USD or less, and all of a sudden many things open up to you (like fliegers from Stowa or vintage pieces from Omega). Those will last longer and be worth servicing, though the trade-off is that you might get tired/bored of the aesthetic and want to move on.

>pic related is my Seagull 1963 which costs less than a service...when it dies, it dies.

>>15857719
well, maybe its the difference in environment
i live in singapore, rolexes and the like are...not really a big deal here. Im tired of seeing them. I rather look at some obscure shitter thats fresh, meh.

>>15857725
Scarcity applies, no doubt, but rarity also applies as I've stated. Considering the number of watches made and worn worldwide, Rolex numbers are not considered 'common'.

Or perhaps I'd ask you; what is the threshold that you would consider a watch to be rare? 1 of 10? 1 of 1? 1 of 100? Is 1 piece in 1000 considered rare?

>>15857727
this is what i'm afraid of. I'd be ordering to try on and return if I don't like it of course. In terms of the bauhaus design, the sternglas in the same general price range have a similar if not cleaner appeal. Ultimately don't know what kind of watch I like. I do think my seiko5 37mm is good, but on the smaller side of good.

>>15857730
as far as automatic vs. quartz, the open back of the seiko5 is what got me into the hobby at all. There's a sort of analog, mechanical sexuality to it all. I don't want to wear a sterile watch

>>15857340
>*had* watches
He sold a lot during his Ard of Divorce auction

https://youtu.be/xc2G6GaG-4I
To add, here is Sly selling his Richard Milles and Panerais and keeping a golden rollie kek.

https://youtu.be/oVii8oH5o2g

>>15857514
Only gaudy shit has descriptions on the dials. Leave it for the caseback or inside of the caseback.
Writing specs on the dial is marketig and catering to normos.

>>15857739
Believe me, it's not that I don't agree with you; in certain parts of the world, or certain strata of society, Rolexes are more 'common' to be found on the wrists than Longines...or Breitling...or Omega. What I'm saying is that if someone decided, 'I've saved 12,000$ and I'm gonna walk into a Rolex Authorized Dealer or Boutique and buy a Stainless Steel Rolex Submariner', then they'd be shit out of luck. That's the reality of the system. They'd have to fork out 18-20K on the secondary market to get the same watch, which is absurd but can be explained due to the desirability within the watch market for this very shiny bracelet.

I can understand why you're tired of seeing them; in some ways I share that sentiment. Remember too that you're dealing with not only the authentic or genuine Rolexes but also with all the knockoffs and superfakes that are being churned out in China. It's a serious business, and there are loads of them out there. So the genuine product plus the fakes contribute to the observation of too many, common submariners.

When I was living in London UK, I didn't see nearly as many Rolexes as I did Omegas (probably due to the James Bond connection), and not just the Seamasters either...you could ride the Tube and see tonnes of Speedmasters as well. But that's only London and only the social circles I swam in. Who knows what people wear across the pond in Paris.

>>15857747
That's one reason I don't wear quartz watches at all...I like the 'machine' clicking along without requiring any electronic interference, but that's just me. But I've also bought so many low-end watches that no longer get worn that I would advise considering saving a bit more for something in a higher range that is better build quality or has a better movement. It's worth saving up, and if you keep an eye on watches on the secondary market, then you can get a good deal, especially now.

>>15857689
>Yes. Rolex controls the availability of watches from the ADs, and therefore it is difficult to buy a stainless steel sports watch from them at the recommended Rolex price. If you're a 'preferred client', then it's different, but the vast majority of people are not. Therefore, a new one at Rolex price is indeed rare.
Or you could just go to any Asian country and see literally hundreds of them at any major store.

>>15857740
Dude just stop posting in this thread you're literally the most annoying poster there is.

>>15857777
no u

>>15857768
With the "death" of my seiko5(I still wear it even if doesn't click), I want a new watch to split the difference, with the seiko taking beater status. This would be my 2nd watch so I'm not looking to break the bank, it might help to consider how far along in this hobby I am, compared to you. I'm ultimately unwilling to break from automatic, because this is a hobby afterall. The aesthetic supercedes any functionality.

In your view, what budget would be required for a "quality" watch? and what kind of watch would that be?

>>15857771
The specificity is the key here; Rolex is happy to sell Cellinis or two-tone watches to anyone who will look at them. It's the Stainless-Steel sports models that are rare. As for the 'hundreds' in a major store, are they genuine?

>>15857777
Your quarts don't lie.....but you didn't answer my question. What is the threshold for 'rarity' in luxury watches? Or perhaps more specifically: what is YOUR threshold for 'rarity'?

>>15857780
Thanks.

>>15857784
There are serious problems with an answer to your question, so I'll do that in another post. The Nomos is cool too...I don't know if it's in your price range or not though......

>>15857747
You can go 10 years without servicing. People say 5 years but that's being overly cautious with modern movements and lubes. $200 in 10 years is not a big deal. And by then you may decide to get new watch anyway.

>>15857792
I wear my broken seiko5 still though, doesn't bother me at all. I can still flip it over to spin the back and women think its neat. It might even be within the 3 year warranty too. I need to find out if I can send it in.

A battery lacks that appeal.

>>15857803
jesus christ, do you not have anyone in your life that can loan you a hundred dollars to buy a new one?

>>15857784
I'll be as honest as I can be, though it may piss of a poster or two here.

1) To me, buying and wearing watches isn't a hobby; it's pure consumerism. So I think you should look at it that way; what does a watch cost, what does it do, how is it made, how desirable is it, etc. Then ask if the watch is an extension of your personality, or if it serves a function (like being accurate to the second so you can catch a train or if it's beautiful so you can wear it with a tuxedo and 'fit in'). So, the two things you first compare are function vs. form and determine what price you're willing to pay for that.

2) Automatic wind mechanical movements are expensive to buy and maintain, and generally the more expensive the movement, the better it can perform if regulated and serviced. This adage works for the 1.00$ - 1000$ range, but after that things get very weird. Reliable ETA movements pulled into regulation should be around 500$ or so, and you can get reliable Chinese movements for less (hence the Seagull 1963 which for me is 0.5 seconds fast per day...wonderful). But when you factor in that servicing a watch from a watchmaker is between 150$ and 300$ (depending on the complications of the watch), the question becomes 'is it worth servicing if the service is the cost of the watch'.
So, once you go into the 700-1000 range, you get watches wherein more money can be spent by the manufacturer on the case, the aesthetics, the finishing, and so forth. But under 500 or so, most of it must be spent on the movement if the movement is going to be good, or you get the combo of a shitty movement with better aesthetics and finishing.

3) In order to determine what you precisely want in a 'quality' watch (and therefore to decide budget and what it can do), I'd need to know what the purpose of the watch is for. Do you want to swim regularly with the watch? Do you attend formal dinners and gala events regularly? cont.

>>15857803
The point is dont worry too much about servicing

>>15857784
>>15857809
cont. Do you want a watch that is easily legible in bad lighting situations? Do you want a watch that has complications (i.e. a date function, a chronograph, a power reserve indicator, etc.). Do you want a watch in precious metals (gold/white gold, etc.), or do you want it in stainless steel or perhaps a combination of the two? Do you want a circular watch or something different (rectangle, square, oblong, etc.)?

Then we have to ask 'are you anal about accuracy to the second'? Because if you were, then I'd suggest going back to quartz or going the pocket-watch route, because pocket watches are far less expensive and can be regulated into remarkably tight tolerances of +/-.

There are a lot of things to consider here.

>>15857803
>I need to find out if I can send it in.
yea do that

or you can just use it as a modding project.
a brand new nh36 can be gotten for $50, its a upgrade to the movement...you can watch tuts on YT on how to do it and try it yourself if you are interested in such mechanical things
you can swap hands and dial as well, there are custom dials too, it'll be fun.

>>15857804
I have a well paying job, but I'm also a renter, so any "personal" purchase comes out of the alternative future downpayment on a house. I have a lot saved up but not ready to buy yet.

>>15857809
I think the line between wanting a high quality product on your wrist, and luxury consumerism is a very fine line. Impressing a date MATTERS. I absolutely will pay for that.

But i don't need $1000 of impression on my wrist. I would only consider a watch <$500 and in that case, if it only lasts a few years, thats kind of ok by me. Hopefully in a few years I have a serious partner, and my cost/benefit tradeoff has changed. I just don't value a quartz watch because I have a phone in my pocket that tells the time. The mechanical aspect of an automatic watch is something I can appreciate in and of its own right. I would not be swimming or telling the time with it. I would be wearing it to the office, dates, casual and formal functions as a fashion item.

>>15857811
I don't need any features -- glo, dive, date, chronograph, gold, accuracy, etc. I want something classy and sophisticated with tiny mechanics that go whirr when I take it off and show it to someone.

>>15857826
Fair enough, then why not a Rotary?

https://www.rotarywatches.com/en/the-rotary-collection/timepieces-watches/gb05210-06

They've been a low entry level mechanical for a long time though I almost never see them here on the forums. There are lots of options, but a skeleton would be great for your purpose. Then you wouldn't have to turn it over to impress anyone, and for what it's worth, women like shiny things that move.

>pic is almost a copy of the first Rotary I bought decades ago...the first mechanical I ever owned.

>>15857833
>https://www.rotarywatches.com/en/the-rotary-collection/timepieces-watches/gb05210-06

at risk of outing myself, I didn't know that this was a thing, and you may have just convinced me to spend even more on this cash-sucking hobby. Do they last years without problems, or should I expect things to break down? $550 is still kinda pricy, especially at work events with alcohol. The wind up analog mechanics are incredibly satisfying though.

>>15857846
Well, there are lots of options on the website, but as far as I know, they used to use Japanese movements (Miyota mainly), and those are as reliable as any other in the price point. What you have to understand about these things is that they're reasonably well made, and the movements do what they should, but you should not be expecting accuracy of -4/+6 seconds per day...it's usually a much larger range (-5/+15) or so.

Regarding the 'lasting years without problems', I've found that my Rotary did well with daily use (though when I got it it was running +22 seconds per day fast), and I wore it for 2 years straight. I still have it in my drawer, and wind it up once in a while for nostalgia. I wouldn't expect it to break down, but just keep in mind that factory recommended servicing intervals for 'luxury' timepieces is from 5-8 years, sometimes 10 depending on the company, so the idea is that you should get it serviced maybe every 6 years or so.

What you have to understand about servicing is that a mechanical watch movement has a lot of impacting zones as well as areas of friction that are normally cushioned by the use of lubricants. As the lubricants get redestributed or dry out, the friction becomes metal on metal which can result in microscopic bits of metal flying around the movement. If these bits of metal 'dust' get caught by the lubricant, then the lubricant is no longer a lubricant but an abrasive paste (like toothpaste or Polywatch), and this serves to accelerate the wear and tear.

That's why servicing is an issue, but it's also why if you buy a watch for 300$ or less, then you're at a pricepoint where watches are disposable, and since there is no point to servicing them, you almost might as well go for the cheapest one you can possibly get.

The ability for a watch to last over the years is dependent upon the build quality and the movement, and both of those elements are directly tied to the money you put in. Unless you go quartz.

>>15857645
>dude what if we made the gmt master 2 but worse
What’re they fucking smoking?
The GS 9F GMT whatever reference it is mogs the fuck out of this.

>>15857826
>Impressing a date MATTERS. I absolutely will pay for that.
>
>But i don't need $1000 of impression on my wrist.
Kek you're not going to impress a date with a $1k shitter holy fuck how delusional are you.

>>15857846
>>15857855
To put it another way: your request for the watch to be a mechanical automatic wind movement with a display back means that you've put yourself into a category of watches that leaves you with two options:

1) Below 500$ - the movements will be Chinese or Japanese, perform reasonably well, but will have average finishing. The aesthetic designs of the watches will be average, and the casing will be average as well. Nothing will be refined, but many things will be hinted at.

2) Over 500$ - You can now get better movements (some swiss), so the performance will be better. You might have some finishing on the movement, so it looks more beautiful. You might get a nicer case, nicer dial and hands, and the 'feel' of the watch will be nicer on your wrist or in your hand.

If you went quartz, you'd be able to circumvent the problems related to cost that plague a mechanical movement; in other words, you could start at 200 with a very beautiful quartz watch, and by 500 you could even get one from a watchmaker like Omega (albeit vintage, but still Omega). You'd leapfrog the cost and have more visual aspect on your wrist for less money.

I'm not trying to say you should go quartz, I'm just saying that the mechanical watch movement is part of the problem of your cost concern.

I disagree with >>15857862 totally. How else can you explain the survival of a company like Diesel?

>>15857862
>thinking women know anything about watches
that teddy video showed many of them know jack shit about watches and their pricing
if you need an expensive watch to impress a woman then thats not a date, thats a gold digger

>>15857855
I'm absolutely ok with that. I don't mind winding up for even daily use. I get that maintenance is expensive but if maintenance comes AFTER i pay $50+k to get a mortgage on a house, thats a totally different thing than paying $1k +maintenance for a watch before I've done that.

There's also the whole thing about if houses are so expensive, should i just keep on renting and keep that $50k in the market for when housing eventually collapses? I dont' fucking know

also pic related looks like a steampunk fedora tipping cuck. gonna have to stay on the right side of that line.

>>15857826
You need to drop the autism and be more chill

>>15857862
Seriously >>15857869 this.
Do you really think women know the value of watches? Women think your $300 quartz shitter is $20. a $300 automatic shitter though? That has some appeal. Definitely some showmanship there.

A woman sees your $2000 watch and thinks its worth 2-4% that amount

>>15857872
What do you mean by that? I recognize that you're probably right but in a dating market women see: culture, salary, and assets in that order. A quartz watch just doesnt provide any value to me and isn't a good investment either. A mechanical watch improves my image and provides a conversation topic, at the very least.

>>15857880
Not him but I highly doubt people will be able to tell a dollar store quartz from, say, a patak calatrava. You people don't realize the extent to which people outside the bubble are unaware about watches.

>>15857880
>A mechanical watch improves my image
nobody will care
just get the watches you like
are you going to corner the woman in the lift and scream at her to look at your watch

>>15857871
If you're weighing saving for a house vs. buying a watch, then I'd say immediately to forget the watch and get the house ASAP. You can always buy a watch later on, and with the current trends in the secondary market as they are, you won't have difficulty in getting something nice in a year or two from now.

If you buy a house, the issue is usually determined most by the area; as long as you can find a place that is in an area that is desirable (to a moderate degree) then it's likely not to devalue unless a disaster hits. I'm not convinced that there will be a housing market collapse at all. There may be a dip, but a house that costs 1million in a good area will likely cost the same or more in 2 years. You're not going to see a devaluation to what housing prices were 20 years ago.

Pic related worked for me when I was in uni 20 years ago. But that's just me. lol That being said, I like gears and shit and it worked with my personality. Rule no. 1 of watches is 'wear what you love'. Anything else is a waste of time (see the pun?).

>>15857876
Women know the value of reputation though. I've told this story here before, but in short when I was at a house party in Amsterdam given by a friend of mine, I tried to be nice and polite to everyone because I was the visitor (the foreigner). I talked with everyone, made polite conversation, etc. Half-way through the night, this one girl all of a sudden was all over me, and for a moment I couldn't figure out why until I noticed she was eying the Seamaster I was wearing. I kid you not...her eyes kept on going to it and then back up to me. Yet she wasn't all over me when she stood at a distance earlier in the night as we talked across the counter. Maybe it wasn't the seamaster...but I really think it was. Women recognize expensive shit, and if they know Omega or Rolex, then the word can open legs. And doors.

>>15857890
Correction; I meant the pic you posted of the skeleton Rotary that worked for me 20 years ago in Uni...the Seamaster was what worked in Amsterdam.

>>15857880
I would be careful about a watch as an 'investment'. No watch will appreciate over time guaranteed except a Rolex. Even prices for Pateks are now soft due to the economic crisis of Covid, but Rolexes remain a safe bet. Just remember that a 500$ watch will be 500$ immediately lost and not able to be regained. See it the same way you'd see food or any other consumable.

>>15857885
>>15857886
Ok so you are right on that, except that an automatic watch is something you can actually show. Look at vinyl records. There's a sexuality to physical/mechanical/analogue media. If you cant show it, it's useless. You shouldn't be an autist about your watch, but I have had countless comments on my shitter seiko5 and I've always taken it off to show the mechanical components. It always goes over well, and leads to more natural conversation, which is the goal of any approach.

>>15857890
>>15857899
I absolutely hear you that quality is apparent. What i want to caution about, is women being able to tell what things cost. She may have been admiring, but she has no clue what the expense of the seamaster actually is. I lived in tokyo for years, and women will compliment anything you're wearing if they already want to sleep with you. You might have been interesting due to your foreign status, and she was admiring the aesthetic appeal that your expensive watch added to your fit. Rather than admiring you for your wealth, as expressed through the watch.

>>15857901
I just did a google search for 'open-heart' watches...these might also be up your alley. To other Anons, forgive the shit here:

https://timetransformed.com/2018/07/19/top-10-open-heart-watches/

These are within your pricerange, and they tend to do what you're asking for. They look expensive, they have moving parts that people can look at, and they could be a conversation starter.

The 'Open-Heart' design is one where you can see the balance wheel rock back and forth from the front; it's like the Skeleton, but instead of seeing the whole movement you only see the balance wheel. Maybe that's something to consider.

A more expensive option would be to get a Seagull Tourbillon; Sugess makes one that is around 700$. It's without a doubt the cheapest tourbillon on the planet (normal tourbillons start around 25K).

https://www.amazon.ca/Seagull-Tourbillon-HandWind-Mechanical-Business/dp/B07LBPF686/ref=sr_1_5?dchild=1&keywords=sugess+tourbillon&qid=1610342205&s=watch&sr=1-5

If you're looking for mechanical bling, you've got options for sure.

>>15856917
Wow it really does look like snow

>>15857345
Get a certina DS Action quartz for $400 on jomashop instead

Whats typical watch value/ salary for you guys?

My boss has some Submariner or Yachtmaster that looks as cliche as it gets and he deals with ~4 million a year.

I make ~50k/yr and my most expensive watch is a Nixon Canon but wear a thrift store Bulova regularly and have a few cheap Casios

>>15857914
>>15857345
metal bracelets are groce.

Get a seiko5 and replace with a $50 quality leather strap

>>15857880
AAAHAAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAAHAHHAAHAAAHAHH INCLUDE ME IN THE SCREENSHOT

>>15857907
For sure, this is a possibility, and since she was a genetic opposite of me, I'm hoping it is as you describe (i.e. my mysterious foreign-ness rather than my display of obvious wealth). Still...it was odd that this change occurred as soon as she got a good look at the watch. It didn't happen before, and after she couldn't let go of me (lest any of the other women wanted to talk to me). The wonders of the past.

Regarding the tourbillon: Apologies for the random review channel, but here's the point:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tg4dt2j_11k

At 700$ it's more than your pricepoint, but still low enough to be considered a disposable watch. But it will definitely impress the ladies because it's cool to watch.

You're in a tough spot man, I won't lie. 500 isn't enough for real quality, and by spending that low you're guaranteeing to throw the money away. There comes a point where you should just save up for something nice and special which you can wear for a lifetime and service once in a while. Under 500 you don't have many options for that if you go mechanical.

>>15857920
Personally I have none, but I don't fit the regular profile. I look at it this way:

1) What watch do I want to own?
2) Can I save for it if I put in some money into an account every month?
3) When the money has finally accumulated, I pull the trigger.

It's not a matter of value per salary (like an engagement ring which is supposed to be 3 months salary according to DeBeers)...it's a matter of what you love. That's all. A watch, after you buy it, only requires servicing. Depending on the watch and who services it, it can be anywhere from 150 - 1000 or more. So you factor in those costs too. But ultimately, buying watches is NOT about looking for value. The best value watch is your iPhone.

>Watches that cost more than 4.99$ are pure luxury. Treat it as such, and don't try to justify it as anything else. If you see it as a pure luxury, then you'll be happier.

>>15857395
get the tag and make that your only watch

What's the next (under 1 or 2k) best bracelet under Damasko?

>>15857876
For reals. Some think a Rollie goes for $500, tops. Most wouldn't be able to tell the difference between a Walmart kids watch, a Timex Time Teller and that Patek Swiss cheese shit you cucks fantasize over.
If you can't swoon a girl over with or without a watch, a G-Shock or a Timex or Luminox or Macy's latest special Diesel or Fossil, you can't swoon the girl.

Pick a watch and move on

>>15857921
>metal bracelets are groce.
Wrong,
Metal bracelets > leather 90% of the time, especially if it's a watch you wear everyday, unless you want to deal with a daily rotation of several leather straps

>>15857929
She may not recognize your seamaster for the price you paid for it, but shes inherently comparing you to other dudes' watches, which you clearly came out on top of. So that's an important effect to be aware of, even if she thinks your watch cost $100. The most important thing to remember is your package. Your watch added to your package, but is only 1 part of the sum total.

I guess I'm at the point where I'm not willing to pay for that level of quality. I'm okay with a $200 watch that doesn't last 5-7 years because I'm just not looking that far out. I'm 28. I'm okay paying $200-$500 on a fashion accessory, but no more. By age 35, if I'm not married, it will be a different story.

>>15856500
lmao look at this faggot wasting his money on "charity". If you want to waste money, at least buy something for yourself

>>15857936
>doesn’t post a picture of Damasko watch
>doesn’t tell us what the model is
>doesn’t tell us what bracelet type he’s looking for
>implying I’m not going to put my balls in your mouth when you’re asleep

Learn how to ask for help properly. Otherwise, you might as well ask, “What’s a good thing for my other thing?”

>>15857945
That's perfectly fair; and I can't fault you for it because I'd feel the same way at your age and from the same perspective.

To me, a watch was never a fashion accessory; it was a tool that helped me to live. I needed accuracy to the minute for the trains in London, and it was an added bonus that the seconds were also accurate too. That can mean the difference between a casual walk to my location with time to spare or a rush and dash because I missed my train and had to wait 5 more minutes with delays on the fucking District Line. So for me, it was practicality first.

But here's the question I have for you: If you have 200 saved up now, what stops you from saving up another 200 next month. And the month after that...and after that. In 5 months you have 1000, and you already are able to get a better watch that will last longer and be in all ways better than what you could afford before. So what is stopping you?

If it's only a very expensive fashion accessory, then from that perspective you have to remove concepts like accuracy, performance, reliability, etc. from the equation and focus solely on the look of the watch and how much it can impress someone. If that's the case, go with a Skeleton modern Rotary (not like the pics I had but from the actual website I linked), or any of the open-heart watches you can find on Amazon (just search 'open-heart watch' and you'll find thousands). At that point, find one you like the look of at the price point you want and click buy.

The difference between you and me is not how much money I make but the differences between how we view a watch. To me, watches are not disposable, so I'd be willing to delay buying one in order to save for one that I like. It's not an issue of 'comfort' in terms of how much one is spending, it's an issue of 'am I happy with the watch on my wrist' and by extension, 'is the money worth the experience'. It's like buying a ticket to an amusement park.

What's the best watch?

>>15857957
Grand Seiko.

>>15857949
I'm asking what company that isn't damasko makes the best bracelets.

>>15857959
Never heard of it. Is that from Macy's?

>>15857964
No...you can get them from Roots Canada or The Bay.

>>15857956
My issue is, that a $1000 watch is just as easily scratched, stolen, dropped or soiled or, worse, make me act different so I don't get it scuffed and banged up. Plus 1 nice watch doesn't match all outfits and I'd get sick and tired of it

Is it possible to make my regular stainless steel watch patina like this?

>>15857970
No. T
You can take it to a machine shop and have it sand blasted for that look.
Electricity can make stainless and titanium into cool colors. Chemical etching is a thing for artificial Damascus... I'm getting ideas now

>>15857880
Women don't care about:

- Watches
- Shoes
- Designer Clothes for men (full rick)
- Glasses

That's not to say that these things don't matter, but to most women, a chad thats tall, fit, wearing a t-shirt, jeans, daniel wellington watch, and basic adidas sneakers is preferable to a neckbeard in "full rick" with a Puhteck Fillippe and geobaskets.

Things you can do tomorrow that will actually impress women:

- Be clean,
- Be confident
- Smell nice
- Wear well fitted clothes to your body shape

On this forum, we talk about watches and frags and shoes cause we like them for ourselves, not cause thots like them.

>>15857969
Your points merit serious concern:

1) Every watch (unless it's Ceramic) get scratched. You live with it, and eventually recognize that the watch is simply 'living' with you. If you're careful, then you won't scratch them; it doesn't require anything serious in terms of behavior modification, it's just about observation. Not knocking into doorknobs or trying to pick up pencils from behind a desk.

2) Stolen: Where the fuck do you live where your watch will be stolen? Unless you live in Rio (where they'll hack off your hand for the Rolex on it) or London UK (where they'll hold you up with a gun to steel your Pepsi), you'll likely be okay.
3) Dropped: This is only fatal if you drop it on ceramic or tile floors. Carpet will be fine.
4) Acting different: I understand the worry about wearing something expensive...but you have to realize that it's simply 'dead' money. It's expensive, sure, and valuable, sure, but if you watch the secondary markets for long enough, you recognize that even though things had a value when you first bought them, that value has significantly decreased due to the wear and tear on the watch. Just buy it and enjoy it...everything else is worrying about the grave.
5) 1 nice watch doesn't match. You'd be surprised. There are quite a number of 'nice' watches that fulfill all the requirements of a watch. Stainless steel is acceptable for dinner wear (thanks to James Bond), so you don't have to worry about precious metals. As for style, simpler is more versatile, and if you buy it on a bracelet you can always take off the bracelet and switch it to a leather strap when you want it to look more formal or upmarket. I did that with the Seamaster quite a lot actually, and with the Panerais it was par for the course.
6) I might get bored of it. THIS IS THE KEY!!! This is the point I've been trying to communicate to you. If you keep buying substandard watches, you'll be guaranteed to get bored of it. cont.

>>15857607
thanks fren, I'm actually seriously considering this I like it a lot. Is there anything you can tell me about it's movement or why its a better a good choice

>>15857956
I hear what you're saying. For me, it comes back to the house downpayment issue. My default is every saved $ goes into the downpayment fund. So the difference between a $200 vs $1200 watch isn't the amount I've saved for it , but rather the amount I've taken from my housing fund

Its hard to explain and highly US centric, but my current city is just where I live right now. Eventually, in 2-5 years, when I have more demand in my career, I hope to own a house in a bigger city where I earn a decent income, and can afford a decent living space. Until then, I'm just dating hinge girls and trying to do good at my job

>>15857969
>>15857982

cont. You have to now put in the effort to look for a watch that is aesthetically beautiful to you, one that makes you feel something. One that you desire, that you lust after, and as you're saving up, that you even dream about. A watch that makes you scour the internet for every last morsel of information about it, one that makes you watch every single review of the watch on YouTube, regardless of how annoying the personality is. Then you start saving, and during the time taking to save you get to second-guess the decision of whether or not to buy. When you achieve the correct savings, if you still feel that this is the watch to own, then you pull the trigger. Then sweet sweet release is guaranteed to you. That's what I've done with all my watch purchases that are over 300$, and I've never been happier (but to be fair I haven't been buying watches often at all).

If you don't have a sincere honest passion about the watch you're going to spend money on, you'll regret it fully, guaranteed. I don't want you to feel that Anon.

>>15857984
I understand the housing situation, and I default to my previous statement: if you're weighing between a house and a watch, get the house as SOON AS POSSIBLE. Don't wait. Owning real estate can always be leveraged if you move to another city, so you've got nothing to lose. Renting is just throwing away money at this stage. So, forget the watch, and go for the real estate. Come back in a few years when things have settled down...if I'm not here, others will be.

>>15857987
>>15857984
Sorry, now that I re-read what I wrote, it looks rude:

>come back in a few years...

I don't mean leave. What I mean is that your priorities SHOULD be the house. A watch can wait, and there will be plenty of watches for you after you take care of the real estate issue. I didn't mean to say, 'fuck off, you don't know what you want'...lol

>Yes, the drunk SeagullAnon has returned for a moment. No, it doesn't stop working if you clap your hands.

>>15857987
The thing is, I could buy now. I have $50k saved up outside of retirement which could all go towards a home. I just hear that I need to commit to 5-7 years to break even and I hope to be out of this city within 2-3.

I'm also nervous about my ability to perform in my field long term. I choose to ignore these thoughts but it's worth acknowledging. What if my salary actually declines in future years?

All things said, I still want a watch in the short term, to wear on dates and contribute to my confidence when going out.

New bread baked:

>>>15858004
>>15858004
>>>15858004

>>15858003
I responded in the new bread...although now there seems to be concern that there's a second thread as well from before. ????

>>15857345
>real watch
>tag huehue
Pick one

>>15857959
>Grand Seiko
>Posts a King Seiko
That's the best looking vintage Seiko tho so I'll allow it.

>>15857645
If you're gonna buy an Explorer II, have it be a 5 digit.

>>15857187
Bases, to be honest. The more time I spend reading and learning about watches, more I want to get into modding. I got myself some watchmaker tools for my birthday and I'll get some broken watches at my local flea market when it opens again, to try and get used to manipulate such small pieces.
Once I get some practice, I'll try it with some real pieces.

>>15857714
bump

>>15857083
Not really.
Women tend to evaluate men on their financial status a lot more than the other way around.

>>15857096
This.