/fa/ - Fashion

>>13671087
I haven't shit on anybody. The only thing I did was stating in an earlier thread that I think it's kinda strange that some will only own an f91w (whether you like it or not, it is the typical watch for non-enthusiasts), and then sit around in a watch thread all day long, proudly posting it as if it was something to be proud of. I mean, it's strange. I don't want to shit on them for having different taste, if digital watches is what they like, but I do think it's very strange. Strange because it looks like a non-enthusiast judging from the wrist, but they speak about it as tho it was some kind of gem of a watch.

>>13671120
this thread is spam

original new one here
>>13671108

Thank you for no timex plox ^_^

Post old stuff

>>13671128
Np anon. Let's have a real thread for a change.

>>13671128
>>13671133
While I agree with you, it's literally just the op image, not worth thread splitting in my mind.

This was one of my grails so I arranged to view one in person.

I didn't like it :(

>>13671127
I love that Omega made these

Are there actually any good current Swiss digitals?

>>13671137
I'm with the OP. No need to encourage the shit poster.

>>13671125
I can kinda understand that, because I don't like digital watches that much ether. I own a f-91w too but I only wear it when I go into mountains because of the timer and weight.

Still people got interests outside of there own belongings and activitys, discussing that interest with friends or whoever. In this case those people come to wt because they got hooked into watches.

Yet browsing these threads without posting anything or getting some replys sucks so my guess is they will post there digis to contribute.
Also they will set them self grails they can archive kinda easy.

There is nothing wrong with that in my opinion but for me a grail would be a watch I may archive in 10-20 years, not within a month.

Anyways if you'd stop responding to digis/quartz/shit whatever I can almost garantee you they will get posted less, because they get no attention.
Would you post on 4chan if you get no replys?

>pic related, propably my grailwatch

>>13671144
It's pretty neat. If you ever see one up for sale again let me know.

>>13671155
Since Lange is German and journe is French, the item pallweber isn't actually all that bad.

>>13671167

>>13671167

Thoughts on Grand Seiko watches?

>>13671183
Tell us your thoughts first if you have any.

>>13671174
so awesome!

>>13671178
fap fap fap

>>13671201
Best watches in their price range.

>>13671168
sorry but can you tell me what this is?
I am clueless.
It circles when moved from side to side doesn't it?

Thoughts on Tudor watches?

>>13671214
The only thing worse than a Tudor is a fake Tudor.

>>13671120
those are so beautifull, I hope I can afford one at some point!

>>13671213
It's a model to show how la sourris (the indexing gear capsule) works.

I used to find the Defy line absolutely disgusting, but recently I've started to like them.
Something about the 70s avantgarde look seems to click

>>13671225
>man falls in love with photoshopped pictures of watches

>>13671221
Why would anyone fake a Tudor

>>13671227
thanks bro

>>13671236
When they can't afford a fake Rolex.

>>13671234
It's not the picture, I watched videos with it and saw enough pictures of them worn to know they are gorgeous!

>>13671236
>>13671242

Post THIN watches

FUCKING GREAT YET ANOTHER DOUBLE THREAD

Gonna sit down and play some fucking Subnautica. What watch should I wear for some vidya diving:
>Vostok Amphibia
>Seiko Baby Tuna
>G-Shock DW5600

>>13671225
>>13671244
They're fucking awful, and you should get gassed.
>MMXVIII
>sub-seconds

>>13671253

>>13671232
You're luckier than me...I still can't stand the look of Zenith, and yet I really like their technological innovation direction.

>>13671214
For me it's always second best to Rolex, both in how I perceive it and how the general public does, so personally I'd never buy one. That being said, if they actually had a design that I liked, then I'd look into it.

Are you thinking of getting one Anon?

Pic unrelated...my own grail...one day.

I Seiko would go out and find some designers to come out with some new watches and give them the factories and workers and finishing resources of the GS factory

because they people there now are fuckign clueless

>>13671256
Vostok, every time

>>13671275
>designers
>the people there now are fuckign clueless
Basically Japanese in a nutshell.

>>13671267
> Are you thinking of getting one Anon?
It's an known /g/ troll with his fake. Just ignore him.

>>13671263
>Only the Brave
Well that's correct

>>13671267
>That being said, if they actually had a design that I liked, then I'd look into it.
Only decent Tudor imo

>>13671267
I have one already, loving it every day.

>>13671299
kys shit stain.

>>13671267
You see the people here don't like Tudor watches (>>13671286 >>13671305), I hope you are better than others around here and see past the brand.

>>13671316
We don't hate Tudor, we just hate you.

>>13671335
*I*, not *we*

>>13671316
You've got the wrong McFly...

Since Mechanicals today are obsolete in their function, their value in the market is determined precisely by the thing you think I should see past, the brand. Brand today is everything, and it's made even more intense precisely because tolerances of performance are now so consistent across different brands that the only thing you have left to distinguish them by the majority is aesthetic design, finishing, and 'heritage'.

I'll say it, even if you are a troll. Brand matters today more than ever. Tudor is lower tier Rolex, that's what its purpose and its place. In a world where people NEED reliable and affordable mechanicals to tell time (i.e. before the quartz revolution), then Tudor has a function. But today....well, unless a person really likes the aesthetic (which I've stated I do not), it is no different to me than Tag Heuer (which also I don't particularly like).

Now, I give Tudor credit for trying to go outside the Rolex box recently; I think it was a necessary and correct move, because if they distinguish themselves as their own brand instead of 2nd tier Rolex, that will help the general perception a lot. So...perhaps you can take comfort in that.

>>13671335
this

>>13671261
Breathtaking

>>13671335
Yeah, this.

>>13671335
>>13671353
>>13671362
What have I ever done to hurt you?
Pretty sure you are samefagging

Whut up wt?

One day ...

never thought I would fall in love with a green watch

>>13671396

>>13671398
never been a huge fan of submariners, but this green one is an absolute beauty up close

>>13671421
Agreed. The Kermit is probably the only Sub I'd consider buying.

This has grown on me more than I expected. It wears a little larger than my pulsometer and the dial texture looks quite nice. It's a shame the lizard strap I used to replace the truly awful strap it came on doesn't fit the original buckle with the majesta logo; I need to find a strap with more taper.

>>13671253

>>13671450
The claim on the caseback that it's antimagnetic to a whopping 69G is pretty underwhelming though. Still, rare enough to see watches of the period make quantified antimagnetic claims.

>>13671253

>>13671132
Ok

>>13671138
What didn't you like about it? I really like the steep version of that model, personally.

>>13671469
That's hardly old.

>>13671470
It looked great in pictures but in person it was kind of unremarkable. Just another plain gold dress watch. It was also kind of small.

>>13671472
47 years old is 'hardly old'? Kek

>>13671469
This is what peak performance looks like.

>>13671478
I feel that watches from the mid sixties and later are common enough around here to not be particularly old.

>>13671485
Fair enough, it just never occured to me to not consider an nearly 50 year old watch 'not that old'.

>>13671485
Watch repairer here. Textbooks categorize "antique" as anything before the 1840's, when the keyless work was invented,

>>13671132
This is my oldest watch, probably early 50s. Manual wind A. Schild movement Accurist.

>>13671523
Dang, this is too new.

>>13671209

Agreed.

>>13671183
Keeping alive a design and manufacturing tradition that reaches back into the 1960s, the last volume producer of watches to extensively hand adjust regulated balances, the best external finishing outside of haute horlogerie.

That said, too many of their watches are 2mm larger than they should be, if you don't like the grammar of design aesthetic you'll find many of their watches boring, and their non GoD watches can be...aesthetically challenging.

Overall a great value watchmaker at the upper end of production watches.

Out of my way, nerds.
This beauty is mine.

>>13671695
Sorry bud, Mark said he's saving it for me.

>>13671696
:(

>>13671721

I’m not posting in the other thread.

Daily reminder to stop buying Quartz/Digital watches

>you will never be this much of a tasteless wigger
feels bad

>>13671183
they make nice divers

>>13671764

>>13671750
really nice, thinking about getting one for my dad for christmas...

>not owning a $5 million watch

must suck to be poor lmao

>>13671770
>not having an in-universe movement

>>13671275
Seiko has designers. You are free to dislike Seiko's 'grammar of design' house style, but it is a well established house style that Seiko has had since the 1960s. Seiko is one of the very few production watchmakers with a continuing house style from before the quartz revolution.

/p/ here
I want this what do you guys think?

https://petapixel.com/2018/09/10/tacs-offers-lens-inspired-watches-for-photography-lovers/

>>13671818
>Miyota 82xx
>$440
Looks like pleb bait.

>>13671345
Speaking only for myself, brand only matters to me in as much as that brand is the result of consistently producing watches with very good external finishing and movement quality at a reasonable value, and demonstrating a design and manufacturing philosophy more consistent with horological and chronometric considerations than purely marketing driven ones.

As such, I put no brand premium whatsoever on a Rolex over an in-house Tudor, nor would I privilege Rolex over anyone else making high-quality in-house production watches like Grand Seiko, Zenith, JLC, Damasko, and Nomos.

For me brand cachet is a consequence of demonstrating the above virtues and nothing more, but I am well aware that my perspective is quite unusual in today's market.

>>13671386
I think I like your Business-A better, even though this one has dauphine hands.

>>13671450
If you measure the buckle width I could probably mental Rolodex you a few suggestions for strap manufacturers.

>>13671758
No

Anyone have any experience with vostok europe?

>>13671267
You can get that exact model on Chrono24 for like $1300 right now dude
Meanwhile Friday is payday is speedy day

>>13671847
Interesting point of view. I agree with some of it, disagree with some.

The difficulty I have comes from the tag at the end of the first statement:
>...at a reasonable value
This is perhaps where we disagree entirely, but I'll put my thoughts in better order so that you can see what I mean.

In the end, what is the difference between the in-house movement of Tudor and a modified ETA that is COSC grade? I'm not talking about manufacture or materials, but purely performance. Does one last longer than another before service? Is one more consistent than another over time or through the spring tension uncoiling (I don't know the proper term, but I think you know what I mean)? Is one less prone to certain types of wear and tear, or is one more resilient regarding lubrication? In other words, in day-to-day use, is there a difference that would have a definite effect on the human wearing it?

I'm of the rather unpopular opinion that there isn't much of a practical difference at all. Unless you're dealing with the Zenith new regulator thing, then it's pretty much the same thing. Everyone is within COSC for their higher grades, with some having better positional variance than others, some having better power reserve, etc, but all in all...within the 24 hours of wear it's the same.

From my point of view, that takes the movement out of the running entirely, and makes me think that a Tudor movement would be no better/worse than a Rolex movement, for this kind of performance.

cont.

>>13671958
You mean I get to have an old rusty and scratched watch for only 1300 dollaridoos?
Jeez where’s my credit card!

>>13671978
I mean they dont make that model new anymore so you'll have to buy one with some degree of use
I've seen nice ones sell south of $2k, that's like half a paycheck if you aren't a retard

>>13671984
Well maybe I am!

>>13671958
I think you're mistaken...the lowest price for a Speedmaster is $1632 for the first generation X-33....can you link the one you're thinking of? The lowest price is around 15,000, from Germany....

>>13671960
cont.
Then the issue becomes one of the external finishing, which I believe is definitely a quantifiable element that so many people here argue about. That's also where the price goes up, and 'value' becomes another odd issue. Is Grand Seiko 'good value' for their finishing, if the accuracy of the movement is removed from the equation? Likewise, is Omega finishing 'bad value' for the same reasons?

Then the issue you mention about 'marketing driven' considerations and manufacturing philosophy. What do you consider to be marketing driven as compared with horological? Let me put it another way. Can you (because I can't think of any at the moment) give me some examples of watches from 'respectable' houses like Grand Seiko, Zenith, JLC or Rolex (I got these from your list) that make watches purely for the marketing purposes? In my mind, the only one that even comes a little close is the Rolex DeepSea...which is entirely useless for its purpose (which the Submariner and the Sea-Dweller could accomplish for normal human beings).

Even Tudor...I don't think they've done anything that could be argued as being purely 'marketing' driven. On the other hand, Omega is notorious for having 'special' or 'limited' editions of their Speedmaster...too many to document. But that's really the only line (outside of anything in the James Bond world) that has this...

The more I try talking about this...the deeper down the rabbit hole I go, and I think the less I make sense. Does any of this make sense to you? lol

>>13671992
I was thinking of the speedmaster date models
They're way more expensive now than when I was looking at them
https://www.chrono24.com/omega/speedmaster-mark-45-day-date-chronograph--id5778581.htm

Is orient bambino being too big a meme, or are they actually hueg for that kind of a watch? I'm 6.5 inch wrist

Arrived

>>13672007
Okay, I see what you're saying.

Here's the thing about this model. The movement came in a few different styled cases. My grail is the rarest version, the one that uses a modified Speedmaster case. The 4.5 you listed is more common, and definitely less in demand, but it's a steal when you consider what the movement is capable of and how long they last.

Canadanon could tell you more, as he owns one. I would never be happy with the other iterations though...it's not solely about the movement, it's about the whole package. Personal choice, but the movement is definitely worth it.

>>13672017
Looks like an adult G.I. Joe cobra watch.
I like it lol

>>13671852
The strap is 18mm tapering to 15mm

>>13672016
They’re really great for the price.
Don’t let /wt/ memes fool you. No one irl really cares for watches.

>>13672026
Never saw one
Post it anon

>>13672045
No I was just poorly describing it.

Wish these were easier to find

>>13672093
this one is on yahoo jp but it's a bit... green

Is the speedmaster worth it's price or is it just an American soggy biscuit?

>>13671253

>>13671960
First, to clarify, by 'at a reasonable value' I mean at a price that remains at least somewhat proportionate with the manufacturing costs of the watch, remembering that I personally see the value added every dollar spent on marketing as $0.

>In the end, what is the difference between the in-house movement of Tudor and a modified ETA that is COSC grade? I'm not talking about manufacture or materials, but purely performance.

The Tudor in-hous will have better shock resistance to both damage and rate errors, better positional variance, better power reserve, less thermic variance, better magnetic resistance, and should be capable of better accuracy

>makes me think that a Tudor movement would be no better/worse than a Rolex movement
On this I'd agree. The Tudor in-house movement is at least the technical equal of the 31xx, if not the 32xx

>>13671992
>Is Grand Seiko 'good value' for their finishing, if the accuracy of the movement is removed from the equation? Likewise, is Omega finishing 'bad value' for the same reasons?
Yes, I'd say when you look at the amount of work GS puts into their external finishing compare to anyone else in a similar price range it's clear that GS is doing more on their cases and bracelets.

Conversely, up until a couple of years ago Omega was selling watches for many thousands of dollars with truly mediocre external finishing, noticeably worse than their competitors at a similar price point.

>What do you consider to be marketing driven as compared with horological?
The Swatch Group's horizontally integrated brands, TAG, Hublot, Sellita IWCs, Panerai, etc.

>>13672028
Are you looking for a specific style of leather strap? Croc? Cordovan?

>>13672123
I have it right now on lightish brown faux lizard and think it looks pretty good. I generally prefer smaller grains than croc.

>>13672113
It depends on what you mean. The watch itself is not worth the premium you pay for one new, so if you want a standard Speedy the best way to do it is to buy one used in shitty condition and have it serviced by Omega.

In terms of its capability as a watch, well, it's a hardy chronograph, able to withstand a lot (except too much water), and it has perfect aesthetics and is virtually unchanged in look from the ones used in the Space Program. If you're a space nut like me, then it's worth it. If you don't give a shit about NASA, then it's just another chronograph with 1960's style.

>>13672126
Hmmmmmmmm
Well, any other watches around that share the same movement at a more sensible price?

>>13672118
Okay, well that makes sense then...perhaps I agree with you more than I thought. Thanks for the clarification.

Regarding the marketing driven...I see some interesting things here, and I have a question for you as a result. You mentioned in the earlier post:

>As such, I put no brand premium whatsoever on a Rolex over an in-house Tudor, nor would I privilege Rolex over anyone else making high-quality in-house production watches like Grand Seiko, Zenith, JLC, Damasko, and Nomos.

Do you see them on the same plane? For example, I'd perceive JLC as higher than Nomos, Zenith over Damasko, both due to the movements. Is that conclusion erroneous according to your principles? I'm curious...because I've NEVER thought of Nomos on the same level as any of the others, and Damasko to me is an aesthetic abortion of incestuous proportions...

>>13671758
The next James Bond should wear a F-91W

>>13672131
I honestly don't know of any other watches that use the Omega 861/1861 chronograph, though other houses of course produce their own chronographs.

I think you have to consider the function of the Speedmaster in Omega's current lineup. There are about 4 generations now of people who may feel some connection to NASA, and more specifically, the magic that was the landing on the moon. Then you also have people who have no relatives who were involved but still want a connection to the event or the general fun science shit (like me). The same people who buy Hasselblad cameras, or the same ones who have little model rockets they build with their boys.

The Current Speedy is sold on this promise: that it's your connection to NASA and all the greatness of that. This is why they cost so much. The technology of the timepiece is 50 years old...and there's nothing wrong with it, but it should be sold at a price that is consistent with 50 year old technology. Obviously, it's not.

Furthermore, to add fuel to the fire, the movement is not the same movement that was used in the original moon watches or the ones initially tested by NASA. Granted, the new movement used now was retested some time in the 70's I think and it was approved, so unless you're a stickler like many space nuts are, you're getting a watch that could easily be worn on the outside of an EVA suit today. So, perhaps you're paying a premium for that.

I don't know if it's stupid to say, but I'll say it anyway. Any watch you pay for that costs more than 10$ is a luxury, and as such you have to ask yourself seriously if 'a sensible price' is even achievable with a luxury item. You're not buying it because you need it, but because you like it and want it. Does that help at all?

>>13672125
Should be pretty easy and not that expensive to get one of the Vietnamese exotic skin strap makers to custom make you an 18/15mm light brown genuine lizard, since they farm them there.

>>13672016
They don't wear big if that makes any sense. You'll be mesmerized by the inside (ver. 2 white dial w/ blue hands my personal favorite) that you won't take size into consideration. If anything, invest in a new strap. The default untappered one is kinda annoying to put on and some people don't like the glossy finish.

>>13672111
Okay this is epic

>>13672131
>>13672165

One more thought on this. Pic related is my Seagull 1963. It cost around 300$ or so. The technology is 50-60 years old. The movement is a Seagull movement, which is in nearly every respect a Venus 175 movement, which was a chronograph workhorse in that era. The Chinese bought the tooling from Venus, and started replicating the movement for their Air Force. The point is, if the movement is serviced and clean, then it's as reliable as an original Venus 175.

I bought it for around 300$ new. I took it to my watchman to adjust the chronograph and to make sure nothing else was wrong with it for an extra 20$. It's non-hacking, manual wind, just like the Speedmaster is.

I'm not saying that the Speedy should be sold for 300$...obviously the assembly, regulation, and finishing are to a much higher degree than the Seagull. But in my view a Speedy shouldn't really cost more than about 8 or 900$ or so...there's no reason it should cost more.

But you're buying 'a piece of history'....you're not buying a virtually unknown military chronograph reissue that may or may not be well lubricated upon delivery...do you see what I'm saying?

>>13672165
plenty of other watches used a Lemania 1873

>>13672184
I'd totally buy this if it had other dial/hand designs. I love 1963's and what they represent as a watch but it just doesn't suit my taste.

>>13672186
Fair enough, and you're quite right Anon...I was thinking more about the specific Omega calibre. They had the Lemania that the 321 was until they split off and started to use the 861. I'm sure other Anons could chime in here, but from what I understand the Lemania was a supplier for a lot of chronographs at the time, including their own Lemania watches.

>>13672192
You could always try buying one from HKED (check the Watchuseek forums); he does the alternate historically-based colour combinations (including different hands, dials, etc.). The Panda dial (pic related) is particularly popular, though I don't really like it myself. I've never ordered from him, but from what I understand you need to e-mail him directly (again, look at the watchuseek forum to find his address) to see what is available and what he could make for you. The price is essentially the same.

>>13672152
Yeah and be a woman

>>13672196
The Lemani 1873 is the Omega 861, in the same way the CH27 used by Tissot and others is the Omega 321.

>>13672197
>Idris Elba as Jane Bond
Make it happen bogs!

>>13672203

>>13672200
Well, there we are then...I had no idea. Thanks Anon!

Another beauty for you guys...

wtf I love quartz now

I actually just got pic related. The band is shit, but the watch is really nice.

>>13672225
Imagine taking the charm of a rectangular face and making it boring

>>13671818

>>13672546
I remember the first time looking at GS spring drive I was fucking mesmerized by it and I still do now.

I'm not rich and not made of money but one day I will one of it.

>>13672587
If you want the smooth sweep then accutron and 5s21 are both affordable alternatives

Is this good to carry around watches?

>>13672648
Why do you want to carry around watches anyway?
When I travel I take one with me, why do you need to take with you more?

First day out. Love the old school solar panel colour.

>>13672669
> goes on vacation with one watch.
I take one for swimming, one for formal wear, one for daily wear.
Get on my level.

>>13672701
I take one for everything when I go on vacation honestly. I don't like the idea of bringing almost half my precious collection in a bag to some foreign country.

>>13672711
I Took my omega to Paris and my G Shock to Hong Kong.

>>13672669
I go back to my folks home for family and friends on the weekends, and I find the idea of keeping them in a watch case while I have no home of my own risky

Don't respond to people posting digitals

>>13672778
Hey bro.

>>13672812

>>13671848
Me too mate but the Seikomatic-R sadly runns way better. Did 30sek off till today wich seems ok to me.

The business a sadly stoped twice over night, once at 10:something and 3:30am. I can't open it ether so I have to get it to a watchmaker.
After that it will be business all the way

Rate my collection and post yours.

I got my white gloves today

>>13671480
>>13671469
why is this shilled so hard ?

Wristwatch check

>>13672968
The only hairless pussy Tudor owners will get.

On the other hand fake Tudor owners probably also molest children, so there's that.

>>13672977
This is my girlfriend's cat, but I can agree that fake watch owners are scum.

>>13672968

Gonna sell my new King Quartz as I hate how it sits on my wrist as it’s quite thick.
Hope I’ll make a profit.

>>13672968
Its base metal, hard to set, no 24h, but I'm still going to keep it since its now my oldest lcd watch and I like vintage digitals.

>>13673007

>>13672968
>>13672989

I'm watching RLM review John Carpenter's The Thing, them saying how disgusting the effects were, and I'm fine. Then a customer hands me a watch that STICKS and I'm fucking sickened.

I've had enough of normies and their disgusting filthy shitters. Every time I use the ultrasonic cleaner on a bracelet or a watch case I have to replace the water, since it turns into this brown opaque smelly puddle water after one use.

>>13672648
It's fine, that's what I use when I go on holiday.

>>13672648
I prefer these, they're more space efficient.

Post lume shots.

>>13673102

>>13671929
Spec wise they aren't worth the price
They make some interesting designs tho

>>13673102
>>13673114

>>13673102

Which version of the Casio MTP should I get as an everyday watch?
Gold or silver? Roman numbers, arabic or no numbers? White dial or black?

Good morning wt

>>13673336
>>13673336
Hey. I remember you had some kind of astronomy watch. What is it again? And how big is it?

>>13673405
It is the Accurist celestial, a rebranded citizen astrodea. It's not small - I think it's probably my biggest watch at 43mm if I remember correctly. Keep in mind there's a 50N latitude version and a 35N latitude version.

>>13673437
>a rebranded citizen astrodea
What do you mean by this? I see that Citizen has their own astrowatch.

>Seiko, Casio, Rolex and Omega everywhere
/fa/ is such shit.

>>13672966
Because they're nice.
Also I spent $120 on a buckle, pic related.

>>13673461
Okay what kind of watch should I buy?

>>13673452
Accurist licensed the citizen astrodea and sold it under their name for a commemorative limited edition for some anniversary of the Greenwich observatory.

>>13673482
Ok. How does it work?

Omega>>>Rolex
Change my mind.

>>13673506
I can't because I agree with you.

>>13673502
It has two geartrains, both driven of the same stepper motor. The dial turns once every 23 hours 56 minutes (roughly), so it displays the positions of the stars. This post has some pretty good background on it.
https://forums.watchuseek.com/f220/citizen-astrodea-review-tips-warning-nerd-content-562862-6.html#/topics/562862

>>13673336
What watch is this? It looks neat

>>13673523
It's the fucking dude with his plant watch
I'm so jealous

>>13673336
What is this and how does it work? Does it use water to generate power?

Pic sorta related, another wacky failed method of powering a watch.

>>13673523
It's a water activated watch. The power is a wet cell; putting the watch under a tap it in a glass of water for a few seconds fills up the cell and allows current to flow. Was pretty cool taking the watch out of the envelope with the screen blank, watering it, and seeing it come to life.

>>13673520
Hmmm, seems like it's hard to find? Is it rare or something? How do I get a watch like this. For fuck's sake.

>>13673551
Is this watch still for sale somewhere? Or is it some unique watch you've found inside some meteorite? A model number would be very much appreciated!

should I cop it for 25$
(strap not included)

>>13673572
>automatic at 25$
What's the catch?

>>13673567
>>13673571
They're not impossibly rare; I somewhere about water activated watches, searched on eBay, and bought one. Looks like there's one that might be NOS on eBay right now.

>>13673572
That looks nice. If the seller is not Ukrainian then cop.

>>13673571
Accurist celestial on ebay, theyre easy to Find.

>>13673590
Was meant for
>>13673567

hey guys I am about drop some songs on soundcloud, working on my face tats now, gonna call myself lil chan

what's a good watch for me?

>>13673597
This >>13671263

>>13673597
>what's a good watch for me?

>>13673590
Neat. Do they exist in the 38mm case size that citizen used to have? How do I find the 50N latitude variant?

>>13673611
The Accurist is just in the large size. To find the higher latitude you can look at the number printed on the dial - it either says 35N or 50N. The Accurist model numbers are also different if the listing has the model number - ends in USA for 35N and UK for 50N.

Orient FUG1R003W6 or Seiko SUP873P1 for a poorfag dandy like me?

>>13673588
Damn can't find it for sale anywhere on the internet. Such a shame

>>13673614
And nobody is producing the 38mm anylonger?

>>13673597
>what's a good watch for me?

>>13673623
I don't think anybody is producing any of these anymore, neither citizen nor Accurist, except in the citizen campanola line (which is a large size). There are a couple of astrodea pieces on eBay right now, though they're priced very high.

>>13673638
Well I can live with that size I think. I tried to find Accurist GMT118UK, but it says it's sold out on both ebay and amazon. WTF is wrong with this world we live in? I NEED this watch, and it even looked a lot better because no gold tones.

What is the lug to lug size on it btw?

>>13673597
Get a fake Rolex, but not one of those nearly perfect replicas, get a 20$ shitty fake from Dhgate and wear it proudly

>>13673643
I can look at mine tonight, although if I remember correctly the integrated bracelet can't really be replaced.

>>13673597
Gshock obviously. Also do a music video in a Roblox suit. Apparently that's really popular these days.

>>13673656
Ok.
Seems like it's impossible to find a latitude that make sense for me tho, if that 35 thingy is the only one then I can just forget all about it.

>>13673597
Or get Kanye's quartz monstrosity

>>13673643
I got mine used from govberg a few years ago, and had to settle for the two tone, since that's all that was available. If you really want one you could check if any of the citizen astrodea models on eBay right now are 50N models.

>>13673597
>lil chan

>>13671120
Good afternoon anons

Thoughts on the new Seiko 1968 diver revival? They call it the baby marine master I think

>>13673707
It's a very original design. I've never seen anything like it before.

>>13673707
Tell me about it anon
What's the pricing
What's the calibre

what watch would you wear daily if you lived in Rio (highly likely to be robbed at gunpoint at least once in your lifetime)?

>>13673707
Very nicely finished, but retail is too much, also has a shitty clasp.

T. friend bought one on the cheap

>>13671762
>
>>13671398

>>13673744
What kind of shithole do you live in to think being able to afford a Sub means they are rich?

>>13673633
>teeth on the reversing wheels have no coating
Extremely obvious fake.

>>13671338
why are instagram "influencers" so obnoxious and why can't they think of a different pose to perform for their shitty depth-of-field overly saturated photos

>>13673755
Really being able to afford a sub is being quite well off tho. What I mean by "really" is that you can afford it without being one of those silly people who save up months after months so that you can scrape together enough money to buy it. You can always be that ridiculous blue-collar guy buying a sub after saving up for it. But someone who actually can buy a sub the same day as he decides he want one, and don't need to let some other important or sensible ways of spending that money go down the toilet in order to prioritize that watch, then I'd say you're well off.

>>13673707
Looks nice. How much is it?

>>13673177
Silver, baton indices, white or silver dial.

Just got this Jean Paul Gaultier and Citizen collab a few weeks ago. Thoughts?

>>13673585
It's probably a manual wind.

>>13673633
obviously a decorated rep movement and not a replica of the 3135 which is also available.

>>13673597
tudor

Father gave me this when I finished my master's.
Does he like me or does he hate me?
Quartz, 40.5mm.

>>13673842
>Quartz

>>13672719
Same here. When i travel i prefer to make do with my 1992 Seiko 7T42. Dual timezone, wr150m, chrono, alarm, timer etc.

Almost as sporty as a gshock akd almost dressy as a proper watch.

Do Seiko presage watches feel "cheap" when you handle them or wear them on their wrist, like the Seiko Sarb033/35 does?

>>13673822

I think I got one of these in a box of cinnamon toast crunch in the late 90s.

>>13672948
loving your two 2209s

>>13673848
In what way do you feel like the SARB033/035 feels cheap? Is it the bracelet or the watch itself?

>>13673855
Bracelet to be sure, but the case and the dial doesn't feel particularly high on quality either. But the bracelet is the biggest flaw, very cheaply.

>>13673842
>quartz Tag Huehuehue
He obviously thinks you're a cunt

So my buddy had this shock alarm clock and it came on a really cool magnetic Milanese bracelet. The strap was easy to adjust but felt secure on the wrist. I'm wondering if it would be a good choice for an auto or if the magnet is strong enough to mess with the watch.

Also thinking of picking up one of the bracelets for my casio royale which I think would be a fun look

>>13673864
I have a SARB017. The stock leather band is very cheaply made, but the case and finishing is very nice. Doesn't feel cheap at all (for the price). Feel the same way about this watch?

>>13673842
It's a decent watch honestly. Too bad it's quartz, but it's a pretty good quartz at least.

>>13673842
> Does he like me?
Only if he knows nothing about watches.
> Does he hate me?
Only if he knows about watches.

>>13673875
>SARB017
Never handled it before. I own a sarb033, and I think it feels like a cheap watch, I guess mainly because of the bracelet, but it's also the case and dial too.

I want to gift a watch to my bf
He's a pretty feminine twink with tiny wrists, would a ladies' watch suffice?
Money are not an issue

>>13673894
Get something vintage.

>>13673873
I have a Milanese on my Garmin watch. Read the Amazon reviews, some vary compared to other.

>>13673894
Don't give him a ladies' watch. Just find him a 38 or 39mm watch. Maybe even 40mm will do.

>>13673843
>>13673871
Anons, what did your fathers give you??
>>13673876
Thanks anon. I think the idea behind was to have an everyday tool-watch that you can bang around and won't cost much to maintain.
My father's quartz Tag is still running strong after 20 years btw.

>>13673899
Would you mind posting a photo of it?

>>13673894
> tiny wrists
A lot of womens watches are actually unisex for precisely this reason and it's perfectly okay for a guy to wear them.

>>13673902
Those watches are really the kind of watches you can keep all your life. Enjoy your new watch, pal.

>>13673902
> Anons, what did your fathers give you??
Psychological issues.

>>13673907
The thing is... nobody have so tiny wrists that they can't wear 38-40mm

I have the slimmest wrist of all in this thread, and I can wear 40mm just fine. That's why I think that it will be a mistake to go looking for women's watches. Not to contest what you said about unisex watches, but I don't think it's necessary to start looking for that when she can still look for normal watches within 38-40mm.

>>13673919
> I have the slimmest wrist of all in this thread
What size?

Thoughts on MVMT watches?

>>13673933
Tell us your thoughts first.

>>13673902
>Anons, what did your fathers give you??
bro it's a quartz tag

it's more of an insult than a gift, it's not like you can wear it outside

it's like your mom giving you a big fluffy rudolph sweater for xmas, where are you going to wear it lol

>>13673946
Good roast, anon.
But you still didn't answer the question :^)

>>13673933
Great brand, offers watches that are affordable and at the same time very good quality.

>>13673933
Just like almost every fashion brand that makes watches. Cheap quartz movement and no real love for watchmaking itself, but just how it looks. And ofc most of these types of watches are overpriced. Would go for a Seiko 5 over a MVMT, Daniel Wellington, Michael Kors, etc.

>>13673685
What a beauty!
What is the prizetag on that?

>>13673925
15cm

>>13673726
Considering caliber/bullet limitations that i think apply there, a .38sp 6 shot snubby with semiwadcutters and "FBI Load" load specs should allow me to wear whatever watch i think.

>>13673707
But it's 44mm, why are they calling it baby?

>>13673978
> 15cm
That's pretty damn small. No way should you be wearing 40mm. That would be like an Oreo on a stick.

>>13673956
>But you still didn't answer the question :^)
Not applicable. What my parents have and have not bought me have no bearing on your shitter

>>13673717
>>13673724
>>13673803
It's around $900-$1000. Its basically the Shogun but with 2 major differences
>stainless steel bracelet
>sapphire crystal

So with the SS and diashield and sapphire, its a fucking indestructible watch. My only gripe with it is that it still uses the 6r15 movement. Which is not that bad, it definately holds up better than some ETA movements that shit out after a few years

pic related is the shogun

>>13673961
this

>>13673978
go for vintage watches mate, 36mm max IMO

>>13673740
whered he get it cheap?

>>13673982
bc its cheaper than a marinemaster (but better imo, since sapphire)

Rate my shitty watch collection, I'm a poorfag and a NEET and I don't have any money to buy nice watches.

>>13673989
It works just fine. The lugs are right at the edge of my wrist, not on the outside of it. The dial is much smaller than my wrist too. It works quite well. I have flat wrists tho, or whatever you call it. If you have very round wrists @ 15cm then I guess you would be in a little bit of trouble with 40mm. But then again, all of you guys have at least 16cm wrists.

>>13674003
>I don't have any money to buy nice watches.
We can see that.

>>13673995
I go for 38-40. 36 is borderline too small for me.

>>13674003
It is respectable, I'd go vintage if I were you.

>>13674003
The skx is very nice.

>>13673894
Get him a 30mm Oyster Perpetual.

Cop or not?

why do we have 2 threads ffs wait til the image limit hits you AUTISTIC FUCKS

>>13674025
Not

>>13674030
because people didn't want to post in a thread with a timex pic on the op.

>>13674030
If people want to reply to the troll OP that's their own stupidity.

>>13673832
Post pics of the escapement of this "replica of the 3135" so I can laugh.

>>13673848
Seiko's SARX/SBDx tier watches have their cases and bracelets made in Japan by the same sub-division as the near-GS models and GS models, though of course the GS cases and bracelets receive more extensive finishing.

This is a totally separate supply chain to the SARB tier models and produces a much higher level of external finishing.

>>13674071
So what you're saying is that they will feel like higher quality than the Sarb models?

So what happened to windyknob? Where is he?

>>13674003
pretty OK poorfag collection, however I would get something next to show what you are interested in not just what everyone else talks about

Evening wt

Has anyone herengot some experiences on the omega cal 601? Is it actually good? A few people on the omega forum seems to loose there face over this caliber but they are propably bias.

I just saw, that this caliber was used for pocket and wristwatches, is that common for this timeperiod(1962-70)?

Coped this beauty last week for 150 eurobucks wich seems very good to me.

What do you think? Anyone into pocket watches?

>>13674086
>>13673875
They also use sapphire crystal and updated movements
I have a SARX that came with a leather strap and it is pretty decent quality too

>>13674003
why did you pay extra for the skx007j

>>13671764

Agree wholeheartedly. Just scale it down a little bit Grand Seiko

>>13674086
Yes, noticeably so.

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Vintage-wrist-watch-Aureole-chronograph-cal-Landeron-48/283145401786?hash=item41ecc7f5ba%3Ag%3A6nAAAOSw88RbK592&LH_ItemCondition=4

How stupid of an idea is it to buy something like this and do a dial swap to a cleaner version?

I don't give a shit about frankenstine. It's the movement I want to get my dick into.

>>13674118
I saw that one on Long Island Watch. Would you look at that dial, superb choice!

New Thread

>>13674133
>>13674133
>>13674133

>>13674132
also just fyi there are extremely high rep ebay sellers that sell the JDM seikos new for much cheaper than a US based importer

>>13674135
Thread is not at bump limit
>>13671108
>>13671108

>>13674087
Ew this one is proply the uglyest PP!

Whats the prizetag of this ugly fellow?

Also are there realy people into the diamond look or slis it just to show off dem moneys? I mean look at this and imagine wearing that discoball on your wrist.

>>13674105
Nice dog

>>13674148
No one cares about timex thread except the troll

>>13674157
and 24 posters

>>13674125
It's a dumb idea. That case is in absolutely atrocious condition, the chance of finding an original dial in acceptable condition is not great, and it sounds like the chrono functions need some work too. All in all, its more trouble than its worth

>>13674155
Thanks bro, love my furrball!
Sadly he doesn't like to wear watches, allways telling be to get them off him..

>>13674105
My own Semenmaster 600 has a cal. 601 in it. It's a very nice, simple, accurate hand-winding movement, with no real flaws.

The central seconds is indirectly driven though, so a not properly adjusted seconds pinion brake can cause a jittery seconds hand.

>>13673977
$150 for the watch and $78 for the leather strap. SRPA29 it comes with a pretty standard/average stainless bracelet

>>13673977