/fa/ - Fashion

>>6358670
Besides their present association with finance douche types who think they can buy character and experience, what's actually wrong with a Rolex?

Big, recent, bizarrely complicated one that's never left the City of London or lower Manhattan? Of course it's shit.

Standard size, worn, functional vintage Rolex? What's the objection? Just "lol, plebs plez?" They're less gaudy than a lot of renowned "patrician" watches that try to show off with pointless piling up of complications.

>>6251750
One or two of those three, plus some carefully selected token Audemar (just because "Audemar" is so, so euphonious) are the only mechanical watches I'd ever bother to own under any circumstances that don't involve flipping them. I don't own any of them; I'm too poor right now and they're not essential today. I use a Modaine Evo and a Terrorist Special. I wish someone - and maybe someone does; I'm not a huge watch nerd and haven't given it too much research or thought - would make a watch today that re-embodies that spirit, somehow transcending the essential frippery of a watch when any serious expedition is going to have a rugged GPS receiver that brings down perfect time from heaven.

Maybe GPS receivers are the new sport watches. We need to get a good designer over to Garmin.

(Explorer I in pic.)