/fa/ - Fashion

First for zenith

>>13877713
Bunch of shit. You should’ve saved that money and gotten 1 or 2 good watches instead of multiple shitters.

Pretty nice schematic of the escapement mechanism of a LIP R148 electric watch. Electric watches have pretty different escapement designs from traditional mechanical watches.

>>13877725
nah its sweet

Which wrist is most fa to wear watch?

does lume have a time limit or something?

I find throughout the day when I go into dark areas my watch lumes up. but when I go to bed, I find the lume is nice and bright when I turn out the lights but when I wake up it seems to be non-existent even though it's still pretty dark in the room

>>13877817
https://gearpatrol.com/2017/02/13/how-watch-lume-works/

>>13877761
>doesn’t know we can see samefags

>>13877824
that is someone else then

>>13877850
>script kid
Lol

>>13877860
what

What does /wt/ think of modding?

>>13877887
It's cool

Thoughts on these? I’m considering this instead of a citizen promaster.

>>13877887
It’s fun. You can make some absolute monstrosities.

>>13878030
Looks painfully boring to me but whatever floats your boat.

>>13878043
What divers do you like? I’m in the market for interesting ones.

The promaster is boss.

>>13878046
DSSD

>>13877703
Thoughts???
I know the strap is shit I has the original one changed. I did not like the clasp on the one it came with.

>>13878046
Pic related, the black bay 58, SLA017, JLC deep sea. The rado captain cook looks nice but the movement, lack of a screw down crown or lume on the bezel are a dealbreaker imo. There are probably others I'm just not remembering at the moment.

>be Rolex
>generate $5 billion a year
>don't pay taxes

Morning wt
How's it going?

>>13877703
can i get peoples reviews/opinions on the junghans maxbills?

Beware of zenmarket their site is a bit dodgy

I really like my Black Bay 58.

I consider buying a Sinn 556 as a nice completion to my collection for having a watch being more unobtrusive. Does anybody have one and if yes can you recommend it?

>>13878063
I meant more in the few hundred dollar market. I’m over spending thousands on a watch.
Still planning to sell my Speedmaster

>>13878152
There's the obris explorer, but those are long sold out.

>>13878152
Obviously the Seiko SKX or Turtle/Sumo if they tickle your fancy. Personally I find them too big.

>>13878112
They usually use reliable movements with plenty of spare parts available so service or repair wont be an issue for a long time. It is quite easy to scratch the casing which you wont really see, however the domed mineral glas is in danger of both scratches and shattering.

The hand-wound Max Bills are quite small at 35mm and very thin, which I like a lot, the automatics are 38mm and noticably bulkier. Due to the small bezel the watch looks bigger than others with the same diameter.

I own a handwound Max Bill which I wear with a black shell cordovan strap and dress shirts. I like it a lot, it isnt flashy or gigantic like a lot of watches I see these days. However I got the watch cheap with a scratched back and honestly I would never buy it at full price.

One thing that might be an issue for you is however the similarity to typical "fashion watches" these days. I actually had a heated conversation once where a self-proclaimed watch afficinado accused me of wearing shitty fashion watches...

Theres also quite a community around vintage Max Bills and they can still be worn well today.

Watch repairer here with an update.

Now, along with Police watches, old handwinding Doxas are now added on the "will not do" list, thanks to cheapskate old farts, who never serviced their shitters in fifty years, and argue about pennies.

This time this old FAGGOT didn't want to pay the extra $14 for the extra part I had to ad into his shitter with an FHF-969, because "we didn't agree on this" (we most certainly did, you senile old bastard). So I've made a compromise of letting go of my full $6 profit from the final price (SIX DOLLARS FOR TWO MONTHS OF WORK TO HUNT DOWN AN EXTINCT PART AND THEN FILE THE NEXT BEST THING INTO PLACE INSTEAD), and told him that thanks to him, never again I'll take in old shitty Doxas.

The fancier ETA-movement Doxa Synchrons are the only exception. Anything else can be thrown in the dumpster.

>>13878210
Lmao
Thank god I didn't take the watchmaking pill

>>13878210
Now I just remembered another one. And old fart brought in an old Doxa with a missing stem. I sourced the part, installed it and wound the watch. Nothing. Turns out the balance is almost completely seized up for some reason (dead oil, dirt, corrosion, who knows). When the lich comes back I ask him whether he wants the stem at all, since the watch need a complete service.

Then he ACCUSES me of stealing parts and replacing them with bad ones, since "the watch was working perfectly before". The watch with a completely seized balance, get it? So I gave him back the unfinished watch, and told him to get his undead senile ass out of here. Old people are the fucking worst.

>>13878241
What country is this?

>>13878258
Hungary, land of literally the most entitled old people on the fucking planet.

>tfw I love wearing dressy outfits but absolutely hate how boring dress watches look

What do?

>>13878262
f-91w

>>13878194
thanks for the review! the domed glass is what is really putting me off from buying this watch, such a nice watch such a shame it uses a cheaper crystal

>>13878292
Actually owning a Junghans Meister which uses the same type of crystal, I can say it is pretty durable. Even Omega uses acrylic glass on their Speedmasters.

>>13878241
Must be a real blast going to your shop.

>>13878262
commit fall damage

>>13878135
For roughly the same price you could get a stowa flieger which looks nicer imo and you've got more choice of sizes/ auto or hw/ date or no date (If you go with auto they both have the same movement anyways).

anyone have this watch? how does it look irl?

>>13878308
Well at least I might get a cal.1481 Omega Geneve next week for a service. That should be fun.

>>13878345
shitter

This looks nice.........
http://rover.ebay.com/rover/1/710-53481-19255-0/1?icep_ff3=2&pub=5575378759&campid=5338273189&customid=&icep_item=173634650691&ipn=psmain&icep_vectorid=229508&kwid=902099&mtid=824&kw=lg&toolid=11111

>>13878363
le shittér

>>13878210
Why is every watch maker who ever posted here such a diva

Newfriend here, cheap watch but love how it looks. Idk why but I prefer the ticking sechand to smooth moving

OH NONONO

>>13878381
Because watch making is an industry for pretentious cunts who cant handle it when it turns out they wont be the next Philippe Dufour.

>>13878340
No but I w2c ;~;

Cop or not?

>>13878381
>ABLOOBLOOBLOO fix my shitter for free!!!!
Spotted the entitled boomer.

>>13878390
t. neet

>>13878394
It's a bit pricey on their website, unless you've found a great deal I wouldn't. It's literally owned by the same people who own old spice.

>>13878398
t. cope

>>13878409
Anyway what was I supposed to do? When someone is trying to weasel out of paying the agreed price, while simultaneously calling me a liar and a scammer? Entitled old cheapskates really make my blood boil.

>>13878411
I am with you on this one, but you really should get your shit together.
Stop being a fucking victim to those boomers and stop with the sob stories.

Is this thing worth the $200?

>>13878416
Yes it is.

>>13878340
I have the Starlight cocktail. They're really beautiful watches. The detail on the hands and the hour markers are really excellent. They have a nice solid feel to them as well. They're a little thick, and the sunburst dial isn't really my thing, but they play with the light beautifully.

I think if any other watch company made something as excellent as a Seiko Presage they'd probably charge twice as much.

>>13878414
Alright, back to posting digital poorfagotry and watch youtuber memes.

>>13878429
>Alright, back to posting digital poorfagotry and watch youtuber memes.
This cope.
There is nothing wrong with f-91ws or Craigshipp.

>>13878210
What's the name of the watchmakers you work at? Genuinely interested.

>>13878435
Not gonna dox myself, but I work for a jewelry store.

>>13878438
Fair enough, don't blame you, you'd probably get your skull bashed in by tudorfag or another autist. shame though, I would've give you some business if I was ever in the area.

>>13878438
What's it like working at one of those? I've always wondered.

>>13878440
Doubt you will ever find yourself in Gyömrő, Hungary.

>>13878438
If you're the anon I think you are, you know you wouldn't get doxed.
Your boss' shop name gets dropped here every once in a while cause someone there knows about 214s.

>>13877817
From a dive perspective, you generally aren't in the water much longer than the lume would last, and its okay that it fades because your eyes adjust in the dark.

>>13878447
Sometimes kinda annoying. People can come in any second for a battery change and you have to drop whatever you're doing. And you have to protect whatever clean movement you were just working on from the dirty crusty shitter they hand you. Pic related, this white Bergeon mat is only like two-three months old. I wash my hands like twenty times a day. fucking disgusting dirty fucks.

Other than that it's nice that I'm the only watchnigger, so no one bugs me, since it's literally impossible to check my work, apart from the bottom line at the end of the month, which is usually pretty good. I work more than the previous guy, and rarely get complaining customers (thankfully mostly baseless complaints). Deadlines kinda slip sometimes, but what can I do, I don't want to give out shit. So as long as I keep it like this, upper management is happy.

>>13878440
Maybe when I set up my home workshop, I'll do mail jobs.

>>13878448
Impressive young Skywalker, but I know I have been shilling the stuff I sell on Ebay for a while now.

>>13878458
Nope, completely off. I want to learn Accutron servicing, but I have a Hisonic for over a year now, and I'm still afraid to touch it.

>>13878210
B-but fhf-969 is beautiful. Doxas are shit though. Please recommend some nice automatic movements

>>13878500
>completely off
kek woops. maybe he died when we got shoved over here. gets free advertising though
>i want to learn Accutron servicing
do it. there aren't a lot of competent people that can do it

Hey, I got a Timex for black friday, analogue, no date, no chronographer.
I tried to adjust the time and the seconds don't adjust.

Is this normal for cheap 'starter' watches?

discord.gg/8nj7key

>>13878516
I should, but if I fuck up and brick my Hisonic I'd be pretty sad.

>>13877817
The lume on my Seamaster is still visible when I get up on these dark winter mornings.

I think about swapping a bracelet- maybe for dark brown, black or just golden one. What do you think?

>>13878416
hell no

>>13878505
>Please recommend some nice automatic movements
>vintage AS.
>vintage 21600bph ETA
>Omega 500 and 700 series
>Seiko 70xx and 61xx series
>Citizen Leopards
>East-German Glashütte/GUB Spezimatic
>unironically Poljot De-Luxe auto and soviet Vostok 2415/6

>>13878554
vostok amphibia

>>13878554
Gp 32a and derivatives
Seiko 52 and 9R series
Longines ultrachron
Omega memomatic
Rolex 31 series

>>13878525
Just get a broken 214 off ebay, they're cheap, especially if not spaceview.
If you get it working you win.

>>13878419
>>13878547

Well gee wiz, should I or should I not get it

>>13878432
Craigshipp is a yuppie faggot

>>13878519
I solved this anons, disregard it. Can't delete it now.

why does /g/ have to be so mean? :(

>>13878387
Lurk long enough and you wont even be able to look at that watch

Good morning wt.

Seikomatic-P bought from another wt regular. The crown has an inner part and outer part; pushing in the inner, hexagonal part quick-advances the date.

Should l get a 2254.50 or the Bond one with the ceremic?

>>13878571
It is one of the few digital watches with proper steel housing made today.
Also it is a follow up for the bond meme watches if you are into those.
Get it.

>>13878719
Get that one in the pic. Maybe people won't believe it's a fake, like with a Bond.

>>13878416
No. Get this >>13878363

Anyone here own a Navitimer? How difficult it is to actually tell time on it?

>>13878719
That model is an abomination, black wave dial with sword hands what the fuck.

Which Bond do you mean? There isn't really a ceramic Bond. The Bond is the blue wave dial non ceramic version. The ceramic Seamaster has actually never been worn in any Bond movie, only the Planet Ocean and Aqua Terra have been worn in them (and the Spectre homage version).

I guess you mean the plain dial Seamaster ceramic. In that case, that's a better watch than the one you posted, simply because the black looks better plain. Black waves are fucking terrible looking.

The best Seamaster to get is actually the 2531.80 though. It's the only one that has and will become collectible, as it's *THE* Bond. It's in high as fuck demand.

>>13878152
>Still planning to sell my Speedmaster
You dont like it?

Give it to me unfiltered, I wanted to buy one soon but I've heard of people buying and selling it a lot.

just stumbled upon this. Guess these are the flagship gshock squares now? vibe alarm and blutooth back up seems like cool features

>>13878868
You mean this one?

>>13878741

Would it be cool for business casual or no.

>>13878868
>That model is an abomination, black wave dial with sword hands what the fuck

Not the original guy, but those are my favourite things about it desu

Too many nice Omegas

Post your /shittahs/

>>13878955
get rid of one of your white dress watches, and the cuckstopher ward

>>13878888
What does the Bluetooth do?

Vintage French dive watch just like this but has a rubber rally strap. I need something I can wear with scrubs at work and is washable and smaller sized (36mm) watches look better on my thin wrists. But if it looks nice I may wear it with other fits. Thoughts?

>>13878969
Looks fucking nasty

>>13878801
no one wears watches like this to tell the time

>>13878389
I watch his videos mostly to know exactly what to avoid. Literally anything he mentions in a video is a terrible idea to get.

>>13878969
You can't expect old watches to still be waterproof, unless a watchmaker does a complete overhaul. Pic related, waterproof, but only after restoration.

I suggest you get a basic 50m or 100m digital Casio for that.

>>13878955

Is that Casio actually fashionable

I don't understand why people like this thing. It looks gaudy as shit.

>>13879017
God no, I use it in lieu of a gshock.

>>13879028

Is there a cool digital watch out there that I could wear business casual?

>>13879029
Here >>13878363

>>13879043

Anything cheaper?

>>13879029
Vintage is the best, this one had the best specs until the new gshock was released >>13879043
If you want a basic digital watch (chrono, alarm, etc), Seiko a914 (pic) is imho a really good option.

Modern options are limited if you want one with a metal case.
Pulsar and Nixon make some, most of them have plastic buttons though.

>>13879025
What I don't get is why a watch named after a tree has to look like a porthole or steam valve. Should've called it the "Battleship Deluxe", "Imperial Industrial" or some shit instead.

Rate

>>13878657
Mind giving me a headstart? Do anons hate the extra dials or something

>>13878416
probably, if you like metal gear or bond movies
>Also it is a follow up for the bond meme watches if you are into those.
that model is actually a new non limited edition of the MGSV TPP limited edition watch which is just like snake's in the game, which goes for about 1200€ now since only a few thousand were made, which yes was inspired by the sports 100 bond used in octopussy
I'm pretty sure many people got the "casio royale" because they wanted venom snake's watch

I can't believe I have to wake up super early tomorrow.
Take care guys.

>>13879208
I like it

Pic is mine, it was a gift I always thought was ugly until i changed the bracelet for a strap.

Hey /wt/ what's the best place to get NATOs?

>>13879279
They are just nylon fabric, so buy the cheapest shit you find on ebay.

>>13879278
It was given to me with that bracelet, amazing how a leather strap changes the whole watch.

>>13879285
>implying all NATOs are equal
It's really sad to see people like you mixed in with those who actually appreciate nice watches.

>>13878340
Saw it in a store window a week ago and it looked dope, forgot the name until you posted it, thanks anon i was looking for this

https://www.ebay.com/itm/Omega-Seamaster-135-018-Cal-601-1960s-Vintage-Watch/392175006245?hash=item5b4f73b225:g:PusAAOSwQwFb7~pt:rk:2:pf:0&LH_BIN=1
Na jó, ez melyikőtök?

>>13878967
Syncs the time. Let's you change the alarm text. Phone finder helps you find your phone. I think it makes a distinct sound even if it's on silent.

>>13879337
That's kinda neat.

>>13879336
> Serviced 1 week ago
> Keeping good time
Just post the damn timegrapher results

>>13879345
It's not me, it's another Hungarian with a very similar Seamaster 600 setup.

Coming in with the GOAT
>water resistant
>plastic
>keeps decent time
>not flashy
>not too "le minimalist"
>literally $15 so its replaceable if lost/broken

>>13879352
I have this. Literally only wore it like twice.

>>13879352
Looks like a clock from a 2nd grade classroom

>>13879358
i wear mine every day and swam with it all summer. still goin strong
>>13879385
low key thats the point. very unpretentious. nobody even really notices you're wearing a watch. its just kinda there as a tool

Is this autism?

>>13878135
Get rid of that dog

>>13879422

Nothing wrong with having a type

What's the most durable and rugged of the all time iconic luxury watches that is not a Rolex? I'm talking at least 100m WR pretty much.

>>13879025

It is the ultimate new money watch. Literally nothing but super iced out ga6udy royal oaks and richard milles on instagram. All arabs and indians

>>13879422
No, but it's boring.

I’ll admit my first watch was a fossil

Has anyone gone full circle with watches? When I was in high school I used to wear quartz shitters my parents bought me from the mall. When I started working I bought myself a seiko turtle and sary055. I was about to get a second hand rolex perpetual but I just couldnt convince myself it was worth 10x my 055. 2 years later and I rarely wear either of my seikos, they’re fucking heavy and hurt my wrists if I use my phone for a hour straight and I hate having to set each watch every month for it to stay accurate (and that’s assuming I didn’t let the watches die from not wearing 3 days in a row.) Now I just want one of those casio oceanus, seems comfy, light weight titanium and the watch sets itself through an atomic clock.

>>13879422
A lot of collectors of high end watches do the same thing. There’s nothing wrong with having a type that works for you

>>13878715
Haven't been much of a regular lately. Too busy, unfortunately.

>>13879519
My first watch was a Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtle quartz

>>13879512
Sinn U1

>>13879519
>>13879612
pic related was my first ever watch. It was a birthday present from my mum when I turned 6 or 7, I forget. I thought the lume was super cool. Shame I only had it a couple of months, I slipped off my bicycle and the watch was smashed against the asphalt. This still haunts me to this day so I try to be as careful as possible when i'm wearing something I care about.

>>13879514
that watch is moldy. somebody should throw it out

>>13878719
Get pic related.
>>13878908
That's my pic.

>>13879519
This is my first. Hasn't run in about 5 years. I began to hate it about a week after I got it, just reminded me too much of the clocks they have in school classrooms. The big arabics made it feel like it was made for an old person with bad vision. Not bad WR though

>>13879747
My dad still wears a Lorus he's had for around 20-25 yrs. He's a 'if it ain't broke don't fix it' kind of guy. He said he bought it because he couldn't afford a Seiko back then. So I got him one for Christmas, I'm really excited to give it to him. He actually knew a surprising amount about watches and we bonded a bit. He literally cucked himself from buying the things he wanted to take care of me and my siblings, I respect that because I'm terrible at controlling impulse.

Is there a seller for pocket watches that have the hands rotate counter clockwise? I’ve looked them up but I just find watches from tv shows and anime, I just want it to look normal.

Gold Movado from my grandfather. The face has a scratch on it and probably needs cleaning but works fine. How much would replacement be?

>>13879657
Great watch but not quite all time luxury icon. I'm talking Royal Oak, Nautilus, Reverso, El Primero, Navitimer, Tank, Calatrava level. From what I listed I think the El Primero is 100m WR which is pretty good. Rolex obviously has a handful that are durable icons: Submariner, Datejust, Explorer.

>>13879835
Replacement what? Face?
Don't do that you fucking idiot.

>>13879848

Well if it’s scratched it looks like shit

>>13879835
DO NOT POLISH IT, DO NOT REPLACE ANYTHING NOT MECHANICAL

Blancpain at 16...

>>13879852
And when somebody points them out you can tell them it was your grandpas and every scratch has meaning ya know

>>13879025
I agree somewhat with the modern version of the Royal Oak. I very much prefer vintage and original RO, ref 5402. The petite tapisserie dial, the typeface used for the "Audemars Piguet" and the AP @ 6 is perfection.

>>13879163
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Royal_Oak Eight British ships named after the Royal Oak tree where King Charles II hid inside of, the Royal Oak also has an octagonal bezel.

>>13879514
Blame the fucking niggers.

>>13879918
My favourite part of this watch apart from what I've mentioned is its thinness.

>>13879918
Interesting. I want more bote inspired watches now

>>13879925
In its original, un-niggerfied state, it's quite a handsome watch.

imagine not having this watch

>>13879918
fun fact, the same 15" guns that were fitted to Royal Oak's sister ships are on display outside IWM London

What's the best watch under 300$, and why is it the Citizen BN0191 in blue?

>>13880019
p a t e k p h i l i p p e

>>13878389
>HELLOOOOO

>>13878340
It’s beautiful, friend.

>>13878888
That's pretty nice feature list, though it's too bad there's no solar or multiband support.

thinking of dropping my citizen or tisell for some sort of gold/rose gold watch.

or what would you recommend? or which watch would compliment my collection in general.

I really didn't plan on having more than 3 watches but then I stumbled across the yema.

Serious question time. I still can't figure this out, so I thought I'd ask.

Why is it so difficult to create a movement that takes into account positional variance so that there would be none across the board? It seems like elements such as temperature have been solved without a problem using different materials...but unless you do one of those 3 axis tourbillons, you're still stuck with a potential problem between dial up and crown up/down.

Are watch manufacturers specifically avoiding this problem? Have they solved it but are not willing to put it into 'normal' (i.e cheaper) movements?

Also, shouldn't the co-axial have given us an escapement with servicing intervals that are far longer than normal (Daniel's hopeful 10 years or more)? I can understand the first generation being problematic (as they were, with the Omega 25xx and so forth), but now that things have been evolving for a while, what is the excuse?

And the most potentially explosive question I've wanted to ask, but wanted to be sure that I should ask it is, are watch companies making so much money off of repair and servicing that they purposefully build-in problems and shorter lifespans of parts, lubrication, etc., to force a customer to spend more at servicing than they'd need if the watch was built 'right'? Is it a scam, not in terms of watch parts wearing out, but because the design is purposefully flawed in order to force servicing at certain intervals?

I was thinking about this a lot lately because of the apparently recent situation of companies no longer supplying repair parts to independent watchmakers, forcing customers to eventually only have their watches serviced by ADs and/or the actual company. Anyway, it added to my concern.

Thoughts?

>pic is only because some Anon hates it...and I love it.

ignore the beat to shit Bulova

>>13880165
For traditional mechanical watches, positional variance is mostly caused by poor balance poise, changes in pivot friction, and changes in hairspring geometry.

The first is the easiest to address - simply make sure the balance is properly poised (doesn't have any heavy spots or light spots). This is traditionally done with screws in the balance, although eccentric weights could in principle be used. Many watches that are adjusted are adjusted by correcting poor poise.

Changes in pivot friction are harder to deal with. A watch has very different interactions with its pivots when in a horizontal vs vertical position. Thinner, more precise arbors and perfectly machined jewels counter this problem some, but it's difficult to solve.

Hairsprings deform under different gravitational pulls. The biggest effect is found in regulated balances, because the way the hairspring interacts with the regulating pins changes as the watch changes orientation. Moving to a free-sprung balance eliminates this issue (when I was talking to some watchmakers from patek, they said this was the most important reason they use free-sprung balances, where they do). However, even a free-sprung balance will change shape slightly under gravity and thus change its rate.

Note that a double-axis tourbillon does not completely eliminate all these influences. The changed friction through the pivots of the geartrain will impact how much power is delivered to the balance from the mainspring, thus affecting the rate.

Tuning fork watches are also very meaningfully impacted by positional variance. The original accutron had a 5 second delta between positions because of how the natural frequency of the fork changed depending on its orientation. The 2nd-gen ESA9162 developed by Max Hetzel for ESA largely corrected this issue with a more symmetric fork design, though by no means entirely.

>>13880116
how do you like the tisell? I like fliegers and theirs is a great price but im a little leery about microbrands for some reason.

>>13880165
>>13880210
continued

Even quartz watches are affected by positional variance. A standard XY-cut 32Khz tuning fork quartz crystal has a variance of about 1.5spy in different orientations - enough to make it important for 5spy HAQ watches to take it into account when doing their accuracy spec calculations. The effect is basically the same as the effect on an accutron. The new citizen 1spy watch uses a 4MHz AT-cut crystal instead, which is a crystal cut much less impacted by gravity.

It is certainly possible that you could build a watch with active gravicompensation (similar to modern digital count thermocompensation) - say, an accelerometer circuit that automatically moved the regulator pins on the balance to adjust the rate. Urwerk would probably the company to do that, if anyone would, based on their AMC and EMC technology so far.

This is all just static positional variance; it describes how a watch behaves in various positions once it has settled into a steady state. Dynamic positional variance is also relevant. When you wear a watch on your wrist, it is frequently undergoing motion, accelerating in various directions. This can in turn affect the amplitude of the balance; a watch on the wrist will frequently run a few spd slower than you might expect based on its performance in static positions.

>>13880210
Thank you

>>13880210
>>13880232

First, thank you for writing that all out. I have a few questions about your points.

1) Let's assume first that the balance is properly poised. Now, changes in pivot friction become the next problem to deal with. You state that the solution would be to have more precise arbors and perfectly machined jewels to counter the problem some. Is there any reason that companies simply don't or cannot do this? Is it solely cost? I find it unbelieveable in this day and age that the problem of machining a small part is a limitation, especially given the advances we've had over the past few decades. But then again, that might simply show my ignorance.

2) Okay, so free-sprung balances help. Is there any way to counter this issue? I don't know...use two free-sprung balances instead of one, and put them across perpendicularly so when one is out, the other is in, and vice-versa? Essentially, the double-axis tourbillion but stationary? Yes, the case would have to be wide.....but this is a thought experiment, to some degree.

3) The friction in the pivots of the geartrain. Is there any way that the balance could be powered directly from the mainspring instead of having it at the end of the chain? Or would that put too much pressure on the escapement system? I've always wondered about this actually...is the normal series of wheels we see the best combination, or just the one that has been perfected to the greatest degree with other options not having been experimented with?

The element that probably shows my ignorance the most (which I'll apologize for now) was the statement by Daniels in one of his speeches where he describes one of the first pocketwatches he made with the double geartrain escapement which kept to within a fraction of a second in a month. The positional variation was almost nonexistent for this one; so I guess I'm trying to understand how it's possible and why no one else can do it. cont

>>13879254
Lovely

>>13880252
cont.

I'll amend that last statement slightly. What I mean is, if a single maker can tailor a watch to have extremely tight tolerances, to a point where things like positional variation can be accounted for, why is it that a major manufacturer is unable to do this as well? What is actually stopping them from making a watch that either compensates for this problem in their design, either through the actual design or the materials used?

Is there no way to fix this? And if there isn't, how in the hell did Daniels manage to do it for his Observatory pocket watches?

Then you have the mythical Omega chronometer which had zero positional variance across the board, though the movement itself is known to be extremely good and capable of doing this. If a movement is capable of this, then why isn't it the norm instead of the oddity? Is it a situation where no rate change due to position is a fluke? Or is it something that can be designed and applied?

Or, as my current thinking is going...is it something that has been achieved, and can be achieved, but companies choose specifically not to, for their own nefarious purposes? That having enough flaws in a mechanical watch provide a reason for mechanical watches to exist, and that if we had ones that performed as well as quartz watches, then no one would buy them because the direct performance comparison wouldn't justify the cost difference?

Is Casio making a comeback?

>>13878448
>I’m just analyzing pictures
>I’m not creepy at all collecting information on people

>>13880252
I'm not an expert in machining so I can't give you a great answer. But it seems reasonable to me at least to say that it will be very hard to counter the difference between horizontal and vertical positions. The difference between vertical positions, yes. But the way the arbor interacts with the jewel is so different between horizontal and vertical positions that ensuring constant friction seems very difficult. That said, my understanding is that modern lubricants have meaningfully improved this particular issue in the last hundred years.

You can do this, and then use a differential (similar to what's used in Dufour's duality, for example) to average the rates. It is hard for me to intuitively imagine what would happen. If you had six balances, then certainly you could average all six and achieve very good elimination of positional variance due to hairspring geometry.

Fundamentally, based on the way we use mainsprings in watches, there needs to be some gearing between the mainspring and the escape wheel. If you envision a design that doesn't have these two elements, there are presumably other options. Electric watches, for example, don't provide power from the mainspring, but rather from an electromagnet powered by a battery, and so are free of this particular issue.

>>13880266
The competition movements from the observatory competitions of the 60s achieved astounding levels of precision - much, much higher than those ever found in production watches. Looking at observatory.watch, the best result at Neuchatel was an Omega movement, serial 10829676, which achieved a score of 1.73. Even if this movement had an exactly perfect average rate, exactly zero temperature variance, and exactly perfect rate resumption, it still had an average positional deviation of less than 0.4spd. This was achieved in 1967. Mechanical watch adjustment is, above all else, largely the result of tedious, hand-performed adjustment labor on individual movements.

>>13880266
Here's the movement I was talking about.

>>13880276
Casio never left you fucking zoomer

>>13879438
I don't see a dog?

>>13880220
I'm liking it a lot. seems to be accurate. at least more so than the old skx007 I had years ago which put me off automatic watches and made me get the ecodrive citizen

size perfect for me. maybe wished the case was a little thicker

only complaint is that if I could do a redo on the order I would get the other hammer down style crown. the diamond crown does dig a little and does leave marks. it protrudes thicker than the case.

>>13879852
No it doesn't you tool.
Plus redialing kills the value of a old watch.

>>13880298
No worries man, you've got far more knowledge than I do in this area, and thus you can give me something to think about, so I appreciate your thoughts on this.

From what I understand then, the issue is human labor and talent, right? In other words, the cost of having someone regulate and adjust individual movements to be perfect is simply too high, and the likelihood of finding enough people who are sufficiently skilled to do so would make mass-manufacture of watches of these types simply impossible in today's world.

This brings up yet another question that has plagued me and yet no one seems to have a good answer for. Do watches by Patek, or Lange und Sohne have superior timekeeping abilities to a standard Rolex? Or, perhaps even more extreme...will a handmade Roger Smith have a better time-keeping ability than an Omega Master Chronometer?

Then the inevitable question. One thing that Daniels was very adamant about was that he wanted his watches to have service intervals that were far longer than traditional watches. I know that hasn't worked out practically for Omega's version of his escapement, but what about Smith's, which use a variation on the co-axial? Not only that, but is there any incentive for watch companies in general to lengthen the time between servicing when the income is simply better for them if they're servicing the watches once every 5 years instead of every 10?

>>13880320
Thanks for the feedback, fren. I was seriously considering one but went with a seiko cocktail time that i had been lusting over for a long time. Hopefully it looks as good in person as it does in pics. I'll have to put the tisell back on the list.

>>13880325
Yeah, I think it's fair to same labor and talent is the major barrier to observatory-level adjustment. It's simply a matter of the hours required - it's not generally economical. In the competitions, there were a number of adjusters that were considered particularly good - the identity of the adjuster is recorded for every observatory certified watch (mine was adjusted by H. Christen).

Rolex makes uncommonly precise watches. 2spd is their spec, which is very nearly unsurpassed in any traditional mechanical watch. The only published spec that I'm aware of that exceeds it is Patek tourbillons, which are specced just slightly better (-2.4 to +1.4). I've seen some unconfirmed forum posts that Lange or Breguet have a -1/+2 internal standard but nothing I've been able to confirm. I think I recall JLC gyrotourbillons having a tighter spec, but again I'm not sure I've seen a definitive source.

I'm not generally aware of the level of precision specced or achieved by hyper exclusive independents - they're not one of my major areas of interest. I would not be surprised if Smith or Dufour extensively adjusted their watches, I just don't know.

One point on the Omega Master Chronometer - I have major issues with this certification. The supposed point of the certification and METAS's involvement in it is that it be an open standard that any manufacturer can pursue. However, it is impossible for someone (say, me, who has tried) to get the exact details of what they test (in a similar level of detail as is available in the ISO3159 standard for Chronometers, as tested at COSC). The closest I've seen is the the detail Omega gives to watch owners with some basic info about the test results, but maddeningly, some of the criteria in those results appear (under my best guess at an interpretation for what it means) to be LESS strict that Chronometer standards, not more. Until they provide some real detail on what it means I am not a fan of the standard.

>>13880325
>>13880356
Omega chronometer results.

I won't speak much to the service interval question as I don't really know a lot about it. I will say Smith specifically notes beat rate as a major driver of service intervals in his HSNY lecture (the conclusions of which I'm not in 100% agreement with, for what it's worth), and that he keeps his low to avoid needing frequent service. But I think modern materials and lubricants have done more to extend service intervals than increases in beat error have done to shorten them.

>>13877713
what is the bottom right citizen one with the blue face?

>>13880356
Interesting, the whole lot. Regarding the Master Chronometer, the only reason I mention it is because I've been looking into it a bit, just out of curiosity. Isn't the main difference due to the extreme magnetic resistance the watch is supposed to endure? Beyond this, most of it seems generally within COSC or roundabouts.

>>13880361
I remember watching that lecture by Smith, and I remember that point specifically. Why are you not in agreement with him about that? The reason I ask is that it makes sense to me, and if the escapement can be protected against any shock issues (especially at a slower beat rate), then wouldn't it be okay? I mean, the older Cal. 321 Speedmasters were 5 increments per second (so...18,000?) which is far slower than most today, but they were robust enough to handle the NASA tests. Not that that is an indicator of quality....just that it was possible to protect movements that slow. Given that modern watches almost never see those kinds of things except on roller coasters, what problem could there be having a slow-beat movement, shock protected as best we can using today's technology, but melded with the friction improvements of the Daniel's escapement?

Incidentally, before I am called a Danielsfag, I can say honestly that I've been truly inspired by what he did, and the more I read about his ideas, the more inspired I get. I just love the idea of someone doing this with his own two hands, and though I know he didn't make certain parts (he had to outsource the hairsprings, for example), I can still appreciate his ability to machine all these things to extremely tight tolerances. That is astonishing to me, and it makes me wonder quite seriously why advanced machining can't catch up.

Granted, he could just be a genius at what he did. That's always a possibility, and I'm not discounting that.

I just hate the idea that companies don't care about precision.

>>13880365
NH8350-59L

>>13880396
Sorry, maybe I'm being a little polemic here. The whiskey.

Here's what I can't wrap my head around. If it's possible to create a handmade watch using either sourced parts (like hairsprings) or building it with 'my own two hands', how can that compete with computer aided machinery, silicon printing, and all that? Is the issue solely in how the mechanism, specifically the escapement, is regulated? Is that the only source of failure in this?

In other words, by that reasoning wouldn't it be possible to get, say, my Omega Cal. 1120 (which is an ETA 2892-A2, chronometer grade) to be within tighter tolerances than it already is? Or, dare i say, at a perfect rate? Or would there be some mechanical issue in the design that would prevent this, that no matter how talented the watchmaker was who was adjusting the spring, there would simply be no way?

I know I've asked this before, months ago, but it was specifically about the old Speedy (cal. 861). The point that I can't quite get my head around is that a movement can be adjusted to be within a certain rate, say, somewhere within 10 seconds deviation total, but for a reason I can't quite understand it can't be adjusted finer than that.

Furthermore, if the results could be achieved approx. 50 years ago regarding the observatory certs, why on earth has there been no advancing of this in the past 50 years? How can it be solely due to human performance being the limiting factor?

With something human, I can understand that...like sprinters who can only run so fast as the body can go. But with things, with objects that are machined, it seems like a limitation that doesn't correlate with the rest of the extreme development of materials and manufacturing techniques that has happened in the intervening decades.

Or, am I just barking up the wrong tree because none of this matters, and we'll buy a L&S for the aesthetics first, and reasonable performance is okay but not really necessary?

>>13880448
I think there really just isn't a market for watches pushed to the limits of mechanical precision. I'll buy a 3135 2spd watch at some point, but that's the same level of precision GP was guaranteeing half a century ago, at a very competitive price point.

Wearing a watch on my right wrist really accentuates how bad I fucked my wrist up when I broke it. Wew

>>13880470
You mean the Rolex 3135, used in the Sub amongst others (Datejust, et al)? But what is the actual difference here? I mean, between the GP 50 years prior and the modern Rolex? In terms of performance, it's the same (at least where it matters)....what has changed then?

>I think there really just isn't a market for watches pushed to the limits of mechanical precision.

While I can agree with your assessment, I hate the idea of it. If people are not concerned with a mechanical precision movement working in a precise way, then what the hell is all of this about? Is it solely about functional jewelry? (and is my idealism clouding my realism to not notice that that's precisely what it's all about?) If this is the case, then who the hell cares about 'COSC' certification, or 'Master Chronometer', or 'Superlative Chronometer', etc.? Why shouldn't a mechanical watch have +/- 30 seconds like my poor Rotary (which one day I'll strip down and service myself....just you wait and see. I'll get that damn thing within 10 seconds...I know I will).

I don't get it. All the decorations, all the talk of handcraftsmanship and all that from the makers...it's all bullshit if the thing that matters most about a watch (it's ability to tell time accurately) is not actually important, or perhaps not considered important anymore now that a general acceptable daily standard has been achieved. That it's okay to be 2 seconds off because no one cares.

Why is it okay to be 2 seconds off and not 5? 10? 20? Being 2 seconds off is fine if you're catching trains in Germany, because the trains are for the most part on time to the second. But in London, fuck that shit. They're always late, with a second train coming in close behind (and the buses come in 3s...fucking 266). So 2 seconds means nothing, and you might as well be off by 30 (and that was definitely sufficient when I lived there).

>>13880497
One last thing.

What I was trying to get to was this. It's easy to say, 'well Anon if you want something precise, just get a quartz that is synced by satellite and be done with it'. That's not the point at all.

If greatness can be achieved, then why simply be okay with mediocrity, especially if it's within your own power to be better than that? That's what I don't understand. Longines, fine, they can make a watch that is off by a minute a day. Tag Heuer, I don't give a shit...they can too. Hublot, the same, Panerai, the same. But why isn't an entry level Patek having +/- 0.0? What prevents Lange from doing this, or all the other 'high-end' brands?

>>13878965
the christopher ward is the best watch in that shitty collection, virgin

>>13880497
The only production watches to ever have met 60s observatory criteria were the 32A made by GP and the 4580 made by Seiko. Not coincidentally, these were the first two 36k bph movements in history. That was one major technical innovation that allowed the watches to achieve better precision (a higher beat rate allows for better positional variance since it is less influenced by gravity). Few modern watches use 36k balances, presumably largely because of service intervals.

I personally blame COSC. COSC used to issue certificates stamped "especially good results", but retired that distinction when the ISO chronometer standards were brought to the modern levels. The observatories also stopped chronometry competitions when quartz watches became available (and yes, yes, when Seiko mopped the floor with the Swiss). I see a place for a truly superlative (not in the Rolex sense) chronometer certification, of the kind that had previously been offered by observatories. I imagine at least some mechanical watch makers rising to the occasion (perhaps some independents like FP Journe, who does take precision pretty seriously). You do see some attempts at high-level chronometry - GS had their 20 limited pieces of VFA watches (at $60k), although those again only reached the 2spd standard set by GP, Longines, Zodiac, et al back in the 60s. I could see Journe making an observatory watch though. Or even GP, why not, drawing on their history. I'm also encouraged by the ZO342, specced at 15spm - it is, ultimately, the most precisely specced production watch in history that doesn't use electricity.

Thoughts? I'm not super into paying a premium for automatic movements and just want something that tells time and looks tasteful/casual

>>13880545
Looks like every other watch you see here:

https://imgur.com/a/6CNO8

>>13880531
As always, thanks for your ideas and research. You made me look up the 'Seiko mopping the floor with the Swiss' comment...I had no idea that those things happened at Neuchatel and caused them to stop testing...lol Fucking hilarious if you ask me.

I am a little sad though...after seeing the watches themselves, I don't find any of them aesthetically pleasing in the least, so while I definitely appreciate the technical aspects, I'd never want to wear one. Such is life.

Anyway, thanks for the conversation...as always with you, it's an informative one.

>>13880595
Are you talking about the observatory 4580s? If so, I prefer the 4580 VFAs - Seiko made them after the observatory testing but still internally rated them at 2spd - similar to GP, who rated all of their 32A Chronometer HF models to 2spd, even the ones that were not one of the 662 that went through observatory certification.

>>13880603
Sadly, all of them (Seiko, GP, all of them). Months ago I bitched and whined about the design aesthetic of Seiko (in short, I hate it, and they all look awful) but I can separate that from my admiration for their engineering (in particular, the Spring Drive).

But I saw the GPs, as well as the one Longines that was eventually converted as well as others that entered....I don't know, maybe this generation of watches doesn't work for me.

If Omega had put an observatory movement into a pie-pan constellation...well, that would be a different story, and I'd likely have a grail outside the Daniels watch (which will likely never leave private hands) or the Speedmaster (which as I lamented the other day that I no longer chase).

I don't know...I just...don't like this aesthetic. It's never appealed to me at all. But that's really beside the point (which should be about their performance).

Big recommendation to phatkat collections, I have been enjoying his content immensely
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y0i32j1xvLU

>>13880615
to each their own taste, I suppose. At least you are not blind to the irony given your earlier comments.

>>13880620
There were a lot of styles with the same 36k movement and 2spd spec though

>>13880620
How dare you point out an inconsistency of mine when I'm drunk!!!!

Of course. What bothers me is that it's one thing to talk about vintage watches performing astonishing feats. But time has passed to the point where I would expect more watches to be able to do this regularly, with ever higher potentials as the years go by. And sure, mass production of Rolex has achieved this.

I simply do not accept that there is a finite limit for modern manufacturing whereby we accept something in a range of 10 seconds for COSC, and 4 with Rolex as the best we can get for that price. That seems to me ludicrous.

Unless the quartz revolution so seriously decimated the Swiss industry that they are still playing catch-up to the whole thing. Which is admittedly a possibility I hadn't considered.

I mean, c'mon. If Rolex can achieve a 2/2, why can't anyone else? Furthermore, if they can achieve a 2/2 as a norm across the board, why can't they do something tighter for say, highly jeweled Daytonas for Saudi Princes, or Day-Dates in Platinum for execs? What is preventing them from creating a watch that runs perfectly (as long as it's serviced properly)? That's what bothers me...it seems like they're not bothering to try, like they've hit the limit they want to hit and don't care to improve.

But now I'm just beating a dead horse.

>>13880644
Well, what should really be looking at then is the new stuff coming out of Zenith. They're they ones using new technology to push the boundaries of electricity-free chronometry.

>>13880657
Of course, I remember we were all talking about it a few months ago, and I remember asking the thread about their viability. Was it you who has the slow-motion shots of it, or is it another Anon?

I was talking with a rep about it (same day I tried on the Reverso) and she said that they only had one of them, and it was on tour and couldn't be sold at their location (as it had already been sold previously to someone when it was first announced). Ultimately, they would be a game changer, and if I were to put my money on it, I'd guess that whoever owns Zenith (is it LVMH?) is putting their ducks in a row for the inevitable problem that happens if/when the new oscillator becomes easy enough to produce such that the Chinese can copy it and the Japanese can perfect it.

But we had this discussion a few nights ago...and my opinion was shifted by the compelling thoughts of another Anon regarding the Chinese inability to meet the technical requirements to replicate the printing technology.

But then again, Zenith loses with me because their aesthetic is atrocious. I don't get it...they have such great history in terms of their movements....why in god's name does it always have to look like an 80-year-old and a 4-year-old fighting over a geometry set?

>pic unrelated of course

>>13880668
yes I shot those. Zenith's particular aesthetic style and the regional uptake of the movement aside, that movement represents exactly what you're describing - new advances in mechanical chronometry.

Yes, it's LVMH.

>>13880677
It absolutely does. But I don't put it into the same category as older escapement mechanisms that are made from metals.

In truth, I'm a snob. I love the idea of shaping metal objects, carving them with care to create something that can work at this level of precision. The Daniels fanboy in me.

Once we get to the level that parts cannot be made by hand, that they must be constructed through computerized means, then I stop thinking of them as machines built by hand and they fall into the quartz category, where it really doesn't matter anymore.

Completely irrational, of course, but it is still a feeling. Of course, there are things in a traditional movement that we don't really make. We don't make the gems, though perhaps we could shape them if we had mined them out of the ground ourselves. The metal is not something we really make, unless we have our own foundry. We take blanks and shape them, cut them, and so forth.

While I can and do love the idea of these new escapement systems, I'm quite honestly sad that it's not something we can achieve on our own, and that it absolutely requires technological assistance to a point where we're not the ones shaping it anymore but it's being built by a machine. The value is in the technological innovation, the ingenuity, the programming. But somehow if you can set it up that way, something is lost because you can just reprint over and over again, and the original loses value as a result.

For example, I was thinking the other day...if I were to make my own watch, would I make the screws? Or would I contract out to a supplier of watch screws? I have no fucking clue, to be honest. On the one hand, why would I slave over such a small part, which is somewhat universal in its application, and has no bearing on the running of a watch? On the other hand, why wouldn't I want to have made everything in a watch, including the elements that hold it together?

>>13879854
That one might be old enough to be an Auto/Hand-wind.

>>13878159
still waiting for another run of them or an explorer 3

These are £165 brand new.
Great value.

>>13880846
You're going to be waiting quite a while m8.

so is there analogue watch tech where the date window can determine what month it is so that I don't have to constantly change the date if it's a <30 day month?

step aside motherfuckers, this is the real deal right here.

jk it's an awesome quartz, dont judge me, please.

>>13879848
>>13879854
>>13879881
>>13880322
Fuck me chill cunts, he probably means that the crystal is scratched.
>>13879835
Take it to a watchmaker and they'll let you know, if it's that small scratch at the bottom I'd just leave it personally.

What's the best sub $200 do-it-all automatic watch that can handle most if not all occasions (unobtrusive, fits under cuff)? Preferably durable, none of this 50m WR bullshit.

>>13881145
*ignore "do-it-all". Meant occasions, not complications, though a date would be nice.

>>13881145
Pick a Seiko 5 that you like.

>>13881149
I've had pic related on my mind and was hoping for your answer. I need all the reassurances I can get for my requirements. Based Seiko 5, thanks anon.

>>13881096

Whew lads

>>13881225
That is one boring watch.

Any good chronos under 1k?

>>13881262
This one was £200

>>13881262
1k would probably get you something with a 6s37 off yahoo

>>13881262

Wow, trying to not buy anymore watches is pretty hard. So I put this Vostok together from parts and donors I had laying around. I'm probably only going to wear it like once or twice, I just needed to build something.

I'm almost certain that it's going to stop at midnight though, the cannon pinion is very loose, but it's not easy to tighten it on the 22xx series, I already cracked the original one in the movement. Luckily I have like two dozen Vostok 2209's and 2214's.

>>13881266
fake
>>13881270
>>13881282
shitters

Can you fuckers recommend me something actually good?

>>13881285
>under 1k
>something good
Fuck off

>>13881285
Your mums shitter was pretty good

>>13881289
>>13881290
fuck you cunts

>>13881283
that is really pretty though

>>13881313
Yeah, the case, dial and crystal are almost new. I gave the case a very light buffing with some Cape Cod.

>>13879278
Nice

Rec me blue faced watches, max 200 usd.

If you want to have sex with males too, but only if they're hairless and andro, but you'd definitely suck their dick, does that make you completely bi or just a little bi?

Also recommend me my next vintage Seiko.

>>13881373
I dunno that space chrono from the 70's

>>13877713
All disgusting/child tier watches you are a pleb please leave this board immediately

>>13881373

Thoughts? I want something similar but maybe without the date

>>13881356
I prefer the Zenith elite with the hour markers that point inward and the seconds hand at 9
so beautiful but it's discontinued so everyone wants too much for it now

>>13881461
I assume you're referring to this?
I prefer the captain just because of the pallidum fume.

I'm at a pivotal point where I either get a nice dress watch and a nice diver or I double down and autistically collect g shock squares and other small digitals

>>13881523
Ok

Yea or nay

>>13877713
I own the Casio diver watch but with the metallic wrist. Sad that Casio no longer makes diver watches.

>>13881551
I got one for my dad last father's day and it looks good on him

>>13881403
What do you mean thoughts? It's like 70 bucks, just get it.

>>13881560

But is it a boomer watch or good for a young guy in business casual?

>>13881576
I wouldn’t call that business casual mate. It’s a tool watch from the 80s.

>>13881625

So what would be a good Seiko watch for business casual in that price point or less?

Can anyone recommend a respectable quality military style watch? I like the look of the timex Arcadia watches, but the reviews say that they're kinda loud. The only watches I have now are the weekender and a cheap Casio because I've never really gotten into watches but I'm looking for something nicer but also casual

>>13881660
gshock

>>13881660
>>13881688

>>13881523
Why not both?

What's a really nice inexpensive dress watch, that i can get for formal occasions? I need something that is both business casual but can also go for a wedding or similar events.

>>13881776
Orient Bambino

1958

>>13881786
Nice I want one of those but I can decide between that one or the one with the rose gold markers and hands or the cream face with blue bands.

>>13881752
How much for the ladies led watch?

>>13881797
I have watches over 10 times the price of the cream and blue hands, yet this is my number 1 most complimented watch, so go figure.
I highly recommend it.

Should I get a Patek single watch case from eBay?

If not what's a good case for one watch that I can throw in my bag?

>>13881956
You're overpaying for literally no reason you fucking idiot.

>>13881802
You want to buy it from me?

>>13881965
You seem upset. Maybe you'll feel better if you give me some alternatives?

>>13881956
What? Just get a chink one from Amazon. https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B078JSMHM5/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_t7daCb3WTGTVY

>>13882009
Oh shit I have a bunch of these laying around the house anyway. Nice one anon!

What does /wt/ think of the microbrand NTH?

I currently have the SKX007 and looking for an upgrade. Things would have been so much simpler if not for my absolutely puny 6.5" wrist as that ruled out of most if not all higher end Seiko divers.

So here I am looking at the either the Näcken or Amphion. Are these worth the $600+ asking price?

>>13882055
They're nice, good sizes as well

>>13882055
Why do they have tudor hands?

>>13882055
Isn't something like Squale 1545 or Steinhart Ocean 1 a better value for money?

>>13882064
Seems an obvious homage of the Tudor 9401.

Anyway >>13882055 don't buy homages, they are no better than fakes.

>>13882066
Those are both absolute SHITTER brands.

>>13882072
Fucking pathetic.

>>13882055
That NTH looks great, buy whatever you like don't listen to this cuck>>13882072

>>13878135
I see you're trying to convince /wt/ that your fake Tudor is the real deal.

>>13881956
I'm travelling today with some casebudi cases (top left), they're cheap and work well.

Hello wt

>>13881518
Yes, it's impossible to find new for even MSRP
Fucking BS

what are your favorite Patek Philippe watches?

>>13881104
I was thinking about getting one, mind sharing your thoughts and more pics?

>>13880595
Can I get a quick rundown on Seiko mopping the floor with the Swiss?

>>13881825
Thanks buddy. I was leaning toward that one but it's 30 canabucks more on Amazon.ca so I was trying to talk myself out of it

>>13882186
Sjx has a decent write-up.
http://watchesbysjx.com/2013/06/explaining-seikos-legendary-history-in-swiss-chronometer-trials-with-live-pictures-of-its-landmark-astronomical-observatory-chronometer.html

Basically, in 1967, two years after their first appearance at the trials, daini and suwa Seiko came in second and third at neuchatel, including have the fourth best movement. Neuchatel cancelled any further competitions.

In the following year, Seiko competed at Geneva. The top three movements we're the three quartz movements entered in the competition (beta 21 pieces from CEH). Fourth, fifth, sixth, seventh, eighth, ninth, and tenth places were taken by (mechanical) Seiko movements. Geneva cancelled any further competitions.

There are two sides of this story, of course. One is that neuchatel and Geneva cancelled the competitions because of their increasing irrelevance due to the coming quartz revolution. The other is that they cancelled the competitions to save face in light of seiko's rapid and thorough dominance at the competitions.

>>13881994
Perhaps, depends what you ask though

What's the take on the MGSV watch?
Wired agam404 for reference.

>>13882227
I paid £350 for it when it first came out and I love it. Idk if I'd pay current eBay prices though.

>>13882157

>>13882215
Thanks buddy I appreciate it

>>13882218
I'd probably want at least £50.

>>13882257
Okay, I'll let you know if I want it.

>>13882072
But literally every watch is a homage if you boil it down.

>>13878908
Yes. It's a fine watch. But don't expect it to rise in value. It's a diamond dozen and not as famous as the original Bond.

>>13882301
>a diamond dozen
oh no

>>13880515
Y-you too

>>13881555
Mdv-106

>>13882278
Okay.

>>13877713
id on top right?

>>13882461
Casio mq38-8a

A tough watch for a tough day
How is your day going watch thread?

Can /fa/ recommend me a good watch company? I want something like pic related - simple and elegant. I dont need a overcomplicated mechanism which tell me the date, my gps location, the time in 7 other countries and where north is, just a timepiece which tells me the time.
Also, how much can a pic related gold watch cost? I can invest anywhere from 3k to 5k EUR.

>>13882463
you're the best

>>13882481
Daniel wellington

>>13882468
must be a though day, looking for them eggs in pants

>>13877713

Noice

>>13882481
Fredrique constant slimline, nice simple 2 hands no seconds designs like that for a little over 200

>>13882468
ew

>>13882468
You must need a tough watch to survive such a horrific environment.

>>13881634
Maybe a Flightmaster

>>13882119
Didn't even know fake tudor 58s were a thing yet. How could you tell its fake?

>>13882468
I miss eating pussy

I have a collection of vintage and antique watches, not extremely valuable but some late 1800s early 1900s waltham and elgin, and various 50s wristwatches. They all run fine, but I feel like I should really get them all serviced..

I don't use them very often, is it worth the assload of money it would take to get the things cleaned out and lubed up or whatever the hell they do?

New thread when, fucking tudor retard?
How useless can you be?

NEW

>>13882704
>>13882704
>>13882704

>>13882695
How about you create one and I'll join tomorrow? Am about to sleep for a bit.

>>13882711
Noted. I’m now only posting around this time.

>>13879352
Have this, i cant explain but it looks so good. Maybe because its so small or the proportions but i just love this little watch. Super comfy and light to wear. People wrote about the band breaking after 2 years. But they are just clumsy fucks. I habe it 4 years, wore it to work, while lifting, partying, still no signs of wear on the band.

>>13882741
Look into the Casio analogs that cost about $10 more

>>13880171
That Carrera is hot af

>>13880058
BUMP
U
M
P

citizen is superior to seiko on the low end.

Thoughts on this? yay or nay?

Lol

>>13880058
That watch is inferior to this.

>>13883855
Wearing a watch like this with anything but a suit makes you look like a fuckin loser nerd.
It’s nice though.