/fa/ - Fashion

>>16002120
Guess I've been away too long...

>>16002179
As >>16002184 said, it costs more to service than to buy, so it's a 'disposable' column wheel chronograph. Mine has given excellent performance so far, but I don't wear it anymore since I acquired the Speedmasters. Get one if you want the 'mechanical chronograph' experience without spending +500, but there are alternatives that use the same movement but have aesthetics that might be more to your liking.

>>15864907
Because the average human being is not informed regarding aesthetic balance, and the market happily supports them to sell a product. Just look at the survival of Alain Silberstein.

>>15864920
Agreed, though I do wonder what people actually do to 'abuse' their watch. I mean, banging into doorknobs or hitting countertops is probably normal usage, but are people chopping wood or changing a tire wearing a Patek? It's so strange to me...just take off the watch before doing something stupid.

>>15864928
Looks awesome!

>>15864929
Never been a fan of the circle hour hand, but that's just me.

>>15864938
I have never understood the appeal of Mille. They do get everyone to wear their watches though....

>>15680321
Browsing Chrono24 puts my mind at ease. When you see just how many Rolexes, Omegas, Pateks, Langes,etc are for sale, and just how few of them are actually unique, then it helps to reset the mind a bit. Expensive watches are no longer 'special', they're just expensive, and there are lots of them out there. That issue alone (i.e. uniqueness) makes me see expensive watches as less of a thing that I want to get so everyone else can notice how special my watch is, and in today's world, that issue of consumer uniqueness is a huge contributing factor to why we buy things at all. Exclusivity really doesn't exist unless you're buying something of a 1-off from a single watchmaker or buying something ludicrously rare or in exceptional condition.

I have 6 watches on my list that I continually come back to over the course of the last 20 years, and so far I've acquired only 1. The 2nd is currently somewhere on a plane (hopefully) on its way to me. The other 4 will wait until the price is right.

One other thing to remember about the internet age: the vast majority of youtube videos that are 'reviewing' a watch are done by someone connected with the industry or someone who owns a watch shop and sells watches. Very very few are done by normies who just love a watch and want to share their enthusiasm with others. This makes the whole, '10 reasons I love the Speedmaster' type of video like a used-car salesman. It doesn't stop me from enjoying Watchfinder & Co's videos (they are shot well), but I know that they're reviewing watches because they want to sell them, not because they're necessarily passionate about them.

>it's been a long time folks...

>>15436784
To answer your first question, I like to be here when I'm drunk. It's nice to see people enthusiastic about material possessions that I'm enthusiastic about too. It somehow makes things a little more bearable in the 'current year', when it's very difficult if not impossible to be honest about anything in public. There are watches here I've never seen before, and one or two I've picked up for myself as a result. So, it's in general a learning experience, but hopefully my thoughts can be of use to someone just getting into the 'hobby' (though buying things is not really a hobby, is it...).

I was asking what brought you here because it seems like you have nothing to contribute other than to complain about your current situation, which while problematic is outside the scope of /wt/ given that there are no direct solutions to your personal financial situation.

Interesting though:
>...so my main interest in life is fucking pointless.
Watches are your main interest in life? What's your favorite model?

>>15406145
Safe travels Anon. We all have our hobbies, our personal luxuries, and for some people travel and life experience are what make them happy.

If you do come back to watches of any kind, consider them as tools that may remind you of human ingenuity, mathematical and scientific brilliance, and the remarkable autism necessary to quantify something that in our experience is continuous and ever-changing. Watches are not really 'entry level', any more than they are 'mid-range'. Watches are watches, and if you wear one that makes you happy with its performance and its aesthetic appeal, then you win, regardless of price.

I've never owned a watch above mid-tier (and I include the Rolex GMT in this); they all were either mass-produced or easily available at the time, and they all brought me happiness in some way. But what I've found is that I have tended to gravitate towards the ones that just make me happy regardless of their reputation in the industry or their engineering. Perhaps that's the point really...you 'collect' until you find what makes you happy...then you're done.

>>15406148
Ditto the above.

((15387789))
No, u.

>>15387821
Yup. Some Anons hate the shit out of me here, but that's okay. I still keep coming back for more. I don't choose to cause conniption fits...but whatever.

>>15387846
It depends on what is making you unhappy Anon. For me, watches make me happy because they're companions on the adventures of life and tools that I can rely on. This particular watch was one that I'd thought about since I was a kid, so the satisfaction is serious and deep. Identify the core cause of your unhappiness (family, legacy, work, life, etc.), solve it, and maybe solve it while wearing a cool watch that makes you smile when you look at it.

>>15387891
I think Daniels took it to Patek as well, and they did a prototype but said it was too thick for their movements or something like this.

>>15387913
Early Co-axials (the 25xx series) had known problems and flaws because Omega tried to integrate the new escapement into the existing 2824 platform. The Master Chronometer Coaxials are known to be no problem so far....so far. Also the 85xx series is also seemingly reliable.

>pic is the older 4.5 incarnation. Far more rare, far more pricey.

Unobtanium Edition

This thread is about the appreciation of watches and their design, their history, and the engineering and materials that are required to make a functioning timepiece.


Guides:
> Poorfag guide: https://m.imgur.com/a/NFMXDuK
> Watch essentials 102: https://pastebin.com/Rc77hhXV
> Purchasing used watches: https://pastebin.com/f44aJKy2
> Purchasing straps: https://pastebin.com/SwRysprE

Should I buy this MVMT / DW / "minimalist" fashion watch?
> Only if you're effay.

Should I buy this Armani / Michael Kors / mall watch?
> /fa/ says yes.

"Suggest a watch for me."
> Your budget
> Watch type, e.g. dress, diver, pilot
> Movement, e.g. automatic, hand wound, quartz
> Desired features, e.g. water resistance, day/date, 2nd time zone
> Preferred strap option, e.g. leather, nylon, bracelet
> Wrist size or desired watch size

Previous: >>15320194

>>15315270
Believe me Anon, I'm making the comparison 'in favor' of the real thing, not to criticize it. My point is that the Anon before was comparing fakes and authentics as if the tech of telling time was the only factor that mattered, but there's far more to it than that.

JLC has historically provided movements for lots of upper companies too (I had no idea they provided movements for Vacheron until a few years back)...JLC movements are awesome in research and design.

Have a good eve Anons.

First for Holy Grail. There's one on Chrono24 for around 25,000USD right now with box and papers...it's gone down in price. Maybe now's the time to buy?

>>15295430
Perhaps, or perhaps you don't understand why we love them. The outer appearance is just part of the reason why we chase after watches, and though depending upon your social circle it can have ramifications or not, the exterior status a watch can contribute to is not the primary reason for buying one.

The fear of scuffing the finish is a real one, to be sure, but after a while you learn habits that prevent those things from happening, and when they do inevitably happen by accident, you learn to accept it and even 'celebrate' the individuality the watch is picking up through its scuffs.

I had my Seamaster serviced a year and a half ago, and it looks nothing like what it looked like before. Repolished, refinished, new crown and helium escape valve, etc. The watch I'd looked at during formative times of my life looked new, and thus 'not mine' anymore. It was a shock, but then again, now I'm reacclimatizing to it. The only thing scuffed is the clasp (which is a scratch magnet), but the rest of it is still fresh. Who knows. Maybe they sent me a new watch and threw away my old one.

>>15295432
Unfortunately, you're incorrect. You can wear it daily or not, depending on your work and rotation. Oils today don't pool, so you don't have to worry about long-term storage, nor does it make sense to have a watch on a winder unless it's a full calendar that is difficult to set (and you want to wear it at least 1 day in 7). You don't need to wash a watch, and luxury watches are usually at least 50m so in gentle water and soap is fine. Servicing is dependent on the wear, the movement, etc. You can always get it done by a trusted independent. Polishing is your choice, but it's your watch, so unless you plan (invest) on reselling it, then polishing is fine. Finally, someone will always want a fine watch. I know, because I'm still buying them (at rather low prices).

>>15295439
I'd avoid fakes at that price point; you can get a real Stowa for less.

>>15143064
The movement is important Anon, because if it wasn't reliable then it would be a fucking useless watch. The Lematina 5100 is still beig used in modenr watches today....and this omega version was 86/87, which is fucking 33 y ears ago. That's how good it is.

Regarding the aesthetics, I totaly agree. But such is life. Here..another pic to drool over (not that I haven't done os myself).

I don't believe it...it fucking worked!!!

>>14844559
Why? There weren't any. Lemania didn't start to introduce plastic until the early 70's, using Delrin brakes at first (you can see that in the Cal. 861 and from then onwards, like in the Lemania 5100, pic related). They used plastic to lighten the movement because it was self lubricating and surprisingly reliable.

Why so testy Anon?

>>14738061
A couple of ideas to think about.
1) Movement: The co-axial movement at this stage is only reliably serviced by Omega. Independents who can do it are far and few between nowadays, and given that Omega has stopped selling their parts to independents (like Rolex did officially years ago), you're looking at a situation where you MUST service it through Omega in the future. Movements that use a standard lever escapement can still be done by independents, for a lot less and with you determining precisely what you want done. Normally I'd say don't worry about this, but the issue is that the co-axial has not proven to be any more reliable or accurate than a trad lever escapement that is well balanced, and furthermore the average service times of the co-axial (which were initially advertised to be over 10 years) is now down to 5-7 from Omega officially (depending on the country, model, year, etc.). Which happens to be the same timeframe as trad movements.

2) The aqua terra is an excellent watch, far less expensive, and more 'under the radar'. Consider it seriously.

3) If you're getting a gold seamaster from the 60's, then you are in a sense doubling up so don't bother with the constellation unless you have cash to burn.

The other thing to consider is how much wear you'd get out of your watches. I find that the ones I wore for the longest periods (i.e. during school, during uni, etc.) are simply the ones that feel the most like 'mine'...whereas the new ones I've gotten recently still feel like they're imposters...lol

Ultimately get what you want, but the more watches you have, the less connection you'll feel to them and eventually you'll either turn into me (who has no interest in buying any watches in the future forever) or the Anon here who has the watch that you have to water to keep it going....his collection is remarkable, but gigantic.

>>14527575
Honestly, I like it except for the off center seconds. I hate that. The enamel dial though...fuck me.

>>14527578
Did before I started drinking. What the hell else would I do after getting home from work?

>>14520486
I'd never buy it for myself, but it looks like a good modern update on a kind of flieger that is easy to read when you don't have time to look. What kind of movement does it use? Are the numerals lumed? Have you tried on one?

>>14508459
This is the holy grail, 376.0822. Speedmaster Day Date, using the legendary Lemania 5100 movement. It was produced for about 2 years, and is considered one of the rarest production watches of modern Omega. One day I'll buy one...

>>14243152
Well, there's more to it than that.

1) Be better than your competitors in everything. Be the smartest person in every room you walk into. Be the kindest but most responsible person in your circle. If you're not any of these things, then work as hard as you can to be so. Do not settle for second best in yourself, because no one else will.

2) You have to network, but networking is an easy meme, so let's be specific. You have to determine who is influential, and make sure they become aware of your skills, talents, and work ethic. Make a note to remember their anecdotal circumstances (are they married? Did their son just go off to college?). Stay in contact with them, but not too often (once every 4-6 months, depending on the familiarity), but only stay in contact to talk about work related issues (usually with you accomplishing something serious). If you're in university, all the more important, especially if you show interest in the influential person's direct field of expertise.

Above all else, if the situation is right, then slowly and gradually let them know that you know what is going on in the field of work (i.e. the vintage 'red-pill' that is slightly different from today). If they know that you can perceive the shades behind the painting, then they will perceive you as slightly different (smarter) than anyone else in the field who will be applying in the future.

Item 1 guarantees a job in almost any field, but Item 2 is what helps you get into something that is rarefied. The combination is always successful, but the job field has to be considered the way it is in China and India. Simply imagine that you're competing against billions of people for the same job. No employer cares anymore that you volunteered at a hospital or that you like to read Kant. The ONLY thing they care about is what value you bring to their company.

I could go on and on, and I just might considering how quiet the board is.

Consider this. Without the need for a watch to succeed in daily life, what is the point in a watch being accurate over the hours? I mean, really...what is the point? Well, the point is the hobby: the celebration of human ingenuity, mechanical precision, and of course the aesthetic component that goes with it (design, craftsmanship, finishing, etc.). This is the achilles heel of the watch industry as we know it.

1) Any mechanical watch company that tries to sell a watch based on its performance will be shut down with a simple word: quartz. So, that argument is out. They have to do something else.

2) If you've ever talked to people who work in the boutiques, you'll notice that they NEVER want to bring up the subject of servicing and how much it costs. The reasoning is simple: why would anyone want to spend this kind of money on something that can stop working? Furthermore, if you have to send the watch to the company, you're looking at 800$+ for a servicing of a normal, 3 hand date movement. Once you get into chronograph territory, it increases, and then for vintage even more. So, once again, there's another downside.

3) Real-world performance is another key factor. You wouldn't believe the number of people I've talked to who told me that they hated owning a Rolex, for the sole reason that it didn't live up to the reputation. They expected it to perform within normal quartz specs. As buyers, they had no idea about positioning, temperature differences, winding differences, etc...they thought, 'it's an expensive watch, so it should tell the time', and they were shocked that they had to reset it more than once a week.

We live in an age now where society is trained to expect things instantaneously, and to have quartz accuracy (or satellite) from every device we use. Wearing an expensive piece of jewellery that never gets the time right is contrary to this.

>>14169687
And? The 5100 has lots of delrin parts. The reliability of these movements is what matters. Furthermore, Speedmasters are most functional with solid casebacks, as they normally have metal inserts to prevent them from being magnetized. The display back Speedies are nice to look at, but less protected in this respect.

>>14113517

Thanks Anon; I'll start reading immediately. It's been very difficult to track down any consensus or study about the varying quality levels that you see in turn of the century pocket watches...it seems like a crapshoot, and my concern is that I don't want to get something that has a good name or 'reputable' movement only to find that it's...well...shit. lol Thanks.

>>14109652
cont.

The economics is the problem. The normal customer who would be looking for the 1000-2000 price range is diminishing in numbers, which is one of the reasons why Omega has been pushing their ranges to higher price ends. It isn't just to compete with Rolex (either in truth or in perception), it's because the lower end market doesn't have enough customers to make it worth while. Last time I was here, someone was discussing how Seiko was getting rid of their low-end mechanicals for the same reason. Yes, there will always be a few Anons who want one, but the vast majority of the normal population either don't wear a watch, or do so for ironic counter-culture reasons. For those who like horology at that price, they buy vintage but good brands. The 90's are over, and with it the need for Tag. In some ways, I'm still amazed they still exist today (although the same could be said for Fortis, Blancpain, and all the rest).

>>13991516
Oh Jesus...you're the Observatory collector with the GP? My memory must be turning to shit and gravy. HOW ARE YOU???? Happy New Year to you and your family! Hope you all have good health and lots of happiness for 2019!

>>13953824
Thanks for the response...I was too tired and went to sleep.

It makes sense about bringing people to the boutiques, but what I've found is that either due to my 'look' or due to my age, I'm NEVER shown new watches. I'm the one who always has to ask about them. Granted, this is a problem that is usually limited to the specific boutique I visit, and is likely not something that is company wide. Still, it did really annoy the hell out of me when I brought my Seamaster in for servicing a year ago. First, the guy told me the battery had to be replaced...then, after 5 minutes of extended conversation when I tried to tell him it was a mechanical movement without a battery, he finally took it to the guy behind to look at the serial number with a loupe and 'check the records'. I almost asked for the manager...but I realized that these people simply didn't do servicing often and were more accustomed to simply selling watches to people who didn't know any better. That's why I like my independent; he knows watches and is passionate about the concept. He's not going by a guidebook of 'how to deal with customers who look like x'. lol Incidentally, the woman who dealt with me from JLC/Rolex was far more gracious. But again, I honestly believe it's an issue with this particular Omega boutique, and given that I've been in other ones where this wasn't a problem, I know it's not systemwide.

>>13953902
Jesus....agreed with >>13954456. It really looks good in the pic. I wonder if anyone has one with real pics.

>>13954483
Have you got one?