/fa/ - Fashion

r8 my latest purchase

>>14275243
desu its not based unless you buy all the colors

Hey /wt/

Does anyone know more about the in house Cartier movements? I like this watch a lot and I am curious about the Santos. I've tried this watch on though and I love the way it looks on the wrist. Anyone have experience or opinions on this? Thanks :)

>>14275263
Seiko is a fashion watch, they keep dogshit time and have no horological significance, how could you get more fashion watch than that?

>>14275275
>they keep dogshit time and have no horological significance
this is either willful ignorance or pure delusion

>>14275308
The low-tier Seikos keep appalling time compared to other offerings in that pricerange.

Also no hand winding or hacking, not even pseudo-hacking.

>>14275311
what price range?
I got a seiko 5 for not much at all

I'm shy, pls rate please.

binge watched watch youtube videos all day

>>14275379
>all those fucking presages

for what purpose

>>14275379
Uhh... lol?

>>14275381
variety?

>>14275383
kek

>>14275380
>mfw latest watchfinder video is a flattering piece on seiko

>>14275379
I hate lazy shitposters.

>went to a GS AD and handled a few of their watches.
>realized that I can't see shit because the indices on a watch are fucking small
Is it autistic to ask for a loupe? Also it kinda makes me realize that finishing is not the most important thing on a watch.

Real thread without tudorfag op this way:

>>14275401
>>14275401
>>14275401

>>14275405
GS watches are fucking nasty shitters for people who collect pozcum in their asses on a Friday night.

>>14275379
i like it anon. i appreciate your commitment to the cocktime seikos,

>>14272719
>>14272919

Someone bought it immediately like I suspected. The case was too beat up and not having a bracelet is a no go for me at that price.

The 356 UTC is something I will buy, but when a better one pops up.

>>14275311
Proof or gtfo. A quartz seiko will keep better time than any mechanical Rolex, AP or breitling, as will a high end auto seiko.

>still posting on the soon to be deleted tudorfag thread

>>14275401
>>14275401
>>14275401

>>14275480
>quartz

>>14275311
>The low-tier Seikos keep appalling time
How many spd?
>compared to other offerings
What offerings, and how many spd?
>in that pricerange.
What pricerange?

>Also no hand winding or hacking,
Depends on the movement.
>not even pseudo-hacking.
If by 'pseudo-hacking' you mean back-hacking, you're wrong.. Even the 7S26C can be back hacked.

>>14275480
he's talking about the automatic ones brainlet

>he doesnt use shortwave radio and the US gov't time for 100% accurate time
pleb

>>14275379
>pressage
>3 of them
megafaggot

>>14275379
I know that this is bait.
But this is the worst type of "watch collector".
Blows, I don't even know, probably 1-2k in a bunch of shitters because they need to fill up the watch box the they bought with an affiliate link, instead of buying a nice watch.

>>14275615
He's like a crack addict, he thinks his next hit will sort him out, it never will.

>€60 canvas strap
>MUH HAND MADE IN ITALY
>literally a piece of cloth sewn together with a piece of leather
>same thing costs €8-€15 in all other shops

Im not saying buy straps from aliexpress, but these motherfuckers are delusional. But I guess people who buy SWISS MADE watches like overpaying anyway, so, good on them if their business works, suckers deserve their money taken.

>>14275594
robo bitch

Threadly reminder that the all angry replies to anything that isn't an Omega Speedmaster Professional or stainless sports Rolex is angry perma-trolling by a small handful of raging, sperging, faggots and should be ignored.

I WANT ONE SO BAD

Threadly reminder that if you post anything in this thread that isn't a steel stunner Rolex, Omega Speedmaster Professional Man on the Motherfucking Moon or Tudor Heritage Black Bay you are a raging, sperging faggot and should be ignored.

>>14275243
>not getting the gold version

Lads I have pic related at home already.
I am planning my next purchase and I have two options:
A) go for a ceramic GMT Master II
B) for roughly the same budget, go for 3 used watches:
A 1999 Explorer II white face, a 2017 Zenith Elite and a 2014 Panerai PAM 111
A nice JLC or IWC could replace the Elite and/or PAM but I haven’t found them yet.
What do you think?

>>14275759

>>14275615
This kind of blind elitism ruins the hobby.

If he pooled all the money he paid for that collection and bought some 2k watch, you faggots would still ridiculed him for buying a "shitter".

To use /o/ analogy, its like you cant be a car eunthusiast until you buy a bugati chiron. Lol, pleb with the Porsche shitter.

>>14275819
He could have bought some tasteful shitters rather than that embarrassing "collection" of dogshit.

>>14275787
My man, what made you decide against the Jaeger LeCoultre Master Ultra Thin Moon?

>>14275787
The Hamilton and Tissot are shitters and the Cuck-Axial is a fake, but nice Sea Dweller my dude.

>Grand Seiko peasants don't know about Reef Tiger

>>14275843
Nothing but I don’t see any in the ads I’m browsing atm. The 3 I listed I can find right now on a legit p2p website for a grand total of about 10K€ (The Explorer II has no box and paper, hence the price, but comes from a serious seller.

>>14275847
Yeah a fake with box and papers I got brand new from an AD lol. It’s 11 years old maybe you guys aren’t used to the first generation POs.
Hamilton and Tissot were purchased at a time when I didn’t have the money to buy more Omegas and Rolexes lol. I don’t regret them as they didn’t get in the way either, but I end up wearing the two divers only.

>>14275264
>Cartier Drive
In that one is the 1904MC-PS. If the small subsecond variant (PS = petite secondes).
It's a well-designed tracteur designed to be modular, durable, and serviceable. 27 jewels, double barrel. 50 hour power reserve.
Interestingly, it uses a winding system very much like Seiko's lauded Magic Lever.
It's not fragile or finicky in any way. They didn't give in to the urge to make it extra-thin or anything like that.

I would not expect problems with it.

>>14275819
No, I don't have a problem with buying a seiko or something like that, if they can only afford that or simply need a cheap rugged watch, I'm all for it.
But when you see collections like the one I was talking about, is stupid buying the same exact seiko 4 times and spending real money, as I said that collection retail is probably around 1-2k, on a bunch of cheap watches.
I think that you're better off simply buying one nice watch. Is not looking down on cheap watches, I just find stupid blowing money on a ton of cheap watches.
Makes you look like a child with no self control, needs instant gratification.
Regardless, people can do whatever they want with their money, is none of my business.

>>14275874
Fake box and papers from a Chinese AD.

>>14275311
So Seiko is shit because they have multiple tiers of watches for different budgets? You know they sell Seiko 5s AND Grand Seikos, right?

>>14275893
Okay bub look up the 221.151.00 and tell me how my watch is fake.

Anybody make a strap with angled links like this one? In 20mm

>>14275901
dont feed the trolls.....
hes just gonna keep saying its fake

i kinda wanna buy this idk why

>>14275894
No, it's not their tiers of products, it's that, since they've been moving upmarket, the quality has not been keeping pace and now they're actually rather shit.

Take something like the 3rd generation Seiko Monster. It has a Hardlex crystal instead of sapphire. The 6r15 is not hand-regulated out of the factory. There are some astounding lapses in QC, like misaligned chapter rings and hands.
It's about 550 (that's the cheapest I've found, not the list price)

Now look at some lower-tier Swiss brands like Oris, Hamilton, Longines, Tissot, Mido, etc. None of them would ever put a watch like the Orange Monster on the market.
The Tissot Seastar 1000, for example, costs only 470 (again, lowest price I found, not the list price)

This is the case up and down the mid-tier Seiko range. They are all priced about 200-500 dollars more than they should.

>>14275928
Wonder how they feel when they take time and reflect on their lives, their purpose and what they bring to society...

>>14275933
>idk why
You're American and its name "Cologny" rhymes with "baloney" and it reminds you that you're never more than an hour from eating a sandwich.

>>14275936
There's a surprisingly wide breadth of people who troll online.
Sometimes they're miserable fucks who want others to be unhappy too.
Other times they are caring, helpful people IRL and just have to vent some aggression that they would otherwise never get to.

In the case of "it's fake" trolls, I would wager that it comes from posters of lesser means who assume everyone on 4channel is of similar means. The same way it's commonly assumed that people over 30 don't post here.
Thus, the idea that anyone would actually have a nice watch that is the genuine article doesn't compute and, of course, people who try to pass fakes off as the real thing deserve all the scorn they get.

>>14275936
i dont think he has enough brain cells left to understand how sad his life is.

>>14275937
cool.... youre mostly wrong (i'll admit I do enjoy the occasional sandwich).

Are Junghans watches any good? I think they're neato looking.

>>14275972
The Max Bill (as you pictured) is a design icon, but the watches themselves are nothing special beyond that design.

>>14275988
So then would you say they're not worth $700 or so? I'm trying to sort through babbys first nice watch, and the Max Bill certainly appeals to me the most.

>>14275951
>people who try to pass fakes off as the real thing deserve all the scorn they get
Good thing no one on /wt/ does that.

>>14275996
700? No. I would not pay that. You can get them much cheaper (eBay, for example). And, truthfully, since Junghans doesn't actually do their own movements and the Max Bill design is the important part, I'd go for quartz version and end up with a thinner, more elegant overall piece.

If you're dead-set on a mechanical, though, go for that.

If you're looking for babby's first nice watch, I would still be inclined to get something sportier so you can wear it in more situations.

>>14276010
I am deadset on an automatic for my first nice watch, yes. But given what you said about the Max Bill, it sounds like I could probably pick up the quartz version and still be able to pick up a nice timepiece, so I will go that route on the Junghans.

What would you suggest around $2000-$3000 thats a bit sportier? I love the Navitimer, but I don't like the cheaper models and not sure if I want to go with a used one. I know about the hydromemequest, but I'm a bit hesitant to go for a diver as my first watch.

>>14276037

>>14276037
>and not sure if I want to go with a used one.
Why? I bought my first Swiss watch new and regret it massively. Lost 700 on it.

>but I'm a bit hesitant to go for a diver as my first watch.
Longines is shit, but why not a diver? It's the most versatile Swiss watch overall.

>>14276037
>not sure if I want to go with a used one.
You should. Let someone else take the brutal hit of depreciation. You just have to do a little more homework in terms of making sure it's in good condition, has all the accessories, etc. but you get the same watch and you can then sell it for what you bought it for.

You can get totally nice Navitimers (and even Cosmonautes) in the 2-3k range.
Then there's also the obvious (but obvious for a good reason) choice of the Omega Speedmaster Professional.

You don't have to worry about Longines at all if you've got 3k to spend. That would be a step down, like cross-shopping a 911 Turbo and a Corolla.

>>14276054
Speedy Pro is quite delicate, it wouldn't be my beginners watch. He'll probably fuck up the glass and use the big seconds as actual seconds hand.

>>14276061
>it wouldn't be my beginners watch
It was mine. They're durable as fuck. And if you spend that much money and don't bother reading the instruction manual, you deserve what you get.

>>14276044
I actually kind of like that...

>>14276047
>Why? I bought my first Swiss watch new and regret it massively. Lost 700 on it.
Suppose I don't want to get stuck with a lemon. That's my main concern. I'd hate to drop that much on a timepiece and have it die on me in a year because I have no idea how well the prior owner cared for it. I'd rather get new and know it will be cared for.

>Longines is shit, but why not a diver? It's the most versatile Swiss watch overall.
Aren't divers a bit too casual to really dress up? Or is it a bit of an overblown meme to not wear one with a suit? My autism isn't really in horology... I'm more a shoes guy so I've been learning more as I go along researching this investment.

>>14276065
>Suppose I don't want to get stuck with a lemon. That's my main concern. I'd hate to drop that much on a timepiece and have it die on me in a year because I have no idea how well the prior owner cared for it. I'd rather get new and know it will be cared for.

Buy from a trustable dealer, not private, as a beginner. That way you should get some kind of warranty and won't be fucked over. I never bought a used watch privately either. Full of snakes. Thankfully dealers do discount used pieces and generally aren't overcharging (except Rolex pieces). Buying from dealers is fine, selling to them is a problem.

>Aren't divers a bit too casual to really dress up? Or is it a bit of an overblown meme to not wear one with a suit? My autism isn't really in horology... I'm more a shoes guy so I've been learning more as I go along researching this investment.
They aren't. Any analog watch is a dress watch nowadays, and a steel Swiss diver is dressy enough for any suit. Just don't get an ugly gaudy one. Never seen James Bond wear a suit with a Seamaster?

>>14276037
>What would you suggest around $2000-$3000 thats a bit sportier?
Save up a little bit more and get a Rolex OP ref.114300. There are tons out there in the 4.5k range.

Super versatile watch and a great place to launch a collection from. It can be your sporty watch if your next piece is a dress watch, it can be your dressier watch if your next piece is a diver or a chrono, etc.

>>14276084
Datejusts are ugly pieces of shit. I would recommend a Seamaster or AT any day over a Datejust.

>>14276065
>Or is it a bit of an overblown meme to not wear one with a suit?
Those are old, old rules.

As long as it's not some 50mm monstrosity or a G-Shock, you can wear basically any watch with a suit.

>>14276085
>114300
>DJ
Oof.

>>14276089
Oyster then, who cares. The shitters all look the same and the cases are ugly as fuck. You should know better than to recommend a non sports Rolex. You're probably peddling the shit you own yourself.

>>14276037
Omega Aqua Terra

>>14276054
>>14276073
>>14276087
Alright, thank you friends. I really appreciate the advice. Looks like I'll reevaluate my stance on purchasing used. I'll start researching dealers, and aim to try for a Navitimer in that case. Sounds like going used will open up way more options for me.

>>14276097
Good luck, fren. Keep us posted on the hunt.

>>14276097
>aim to try for a Navitimer
Thank god. Entry level rolexes are a snore fest

>>14275819
>If he pooled all the money he paid for that collection and bought some 2k watch, you faggots would still ridiculed him for buying a "shitter".
Not true, you can get a Speedy for 2k.

>>14276115
Then you fags would just be crying that it's not the right kind of speedy.

>>14276123
Or he'd get the "right" Speedy and they'd be crying that he took the single most boring, predictable option.

/wt/ is full fags. You just have to dig through a lot of shit if you want to find the peanuts.

It it worth shelling out big dosh for a strapcode superengineer, or is a mayhofer for half the price good enough for a daily beater?

>>14276037
>What would you suggest around $2000-$3000 thats a bit sportier?
Save up a bit more and get a Tudor BB58, it's a much better made watch than a Navitimer. Don't buy a Speedmaster Professional unless you actually give a shit about its history and want a time capsule of a 1960s chronograph.

>>14276094
Why would anyone buy an AT over a pre owned Rolex Oyster Perpetual or Datejust? The Rolex will be better made, more robust, and have better resale value.

>>14276145
depends what you're putting it on.

I personally hate Strapcode bracelets. Too heavy and dogshit clasps.

>>14276157
>get a Tudor BB58
>Aka I can't afford a rolex submariner: the watch

>>14276164
>aka I want a rolex submariner but without the fag shiny gay beezel and asshole brand association: the watch

Sounds pretty based and redpilled in my humble opinion.

>>14276164
Tudor makes the watches that Rolex used to make. The BB58 is perfectly respectable. You really shouldn’t fall for the memes that /wt/ posters perpetuate.

>>14276157
>Save up a bit more and get a Tudor
Then save up a bit more and get a real Rolly.

>>14276171
>>14276172
Woah little bit insecure there lads

Save up more and get a Patek

>>14276172
>Tudor makes the watches that Rolex used to make.
Rolex used to make budget-oriented watches? When was this?

What is the quintessential:

>I wanted a nice watch but my credit card's limit isn't very high

watch?

>>14276184
If you need to save up for a watch you probably shouldn't be buying it.

>>14276164
The BB58 is quite different in style than the modern sub, and I don't think many people would like both. If you like the BB58 you probably don't like the maxi-case Sub, and vice versa.

>>14276175
Saving a bit more for a BB58 is worth it for the better quality of watch you get over what's available for $2k-$3k, a Rolex only offers more bling and branding as improvements over a BB58. Some people care about the quality of the actual physical object being purchased rather than the fake imagined "prestige" and "cachet" that desperately aspirational buypig brand whores chase buy buying wrist mounted status totems.

>>14276157
>Why would anyone buy an AT over a pre owned Rolex Oyster Perpetual or Datejust?
A new AT vs a used OP? That's a bad comparison. If one is used the other should be as well. Now you're talking a watch that only costs 2 grand vs a watch that costs about 5 grand.
The AT also has a more interesting style than the OP or the DJ. Rolexes have very conservative style to appeal to their older customer base.

>The Rolex will be better made, more robust, and have better resale value.
The "Rolexes hold their value" is more a sports Rolex thing. DJs plummet pretty quickly because there's so many of them and then they settle into a nice 4-5 grand price range.
ATs are in the same boat. Tons of them in the 2-3 grand range. If you can't sell it for what you paid, you must have destroyed it.

In terms of better made and robustness, you'll have to compare specs, because the AT was made to be just slightly better than the OP/DJ at everything.

>>14276194
>Some people care about the quality of the actual physical object being purchased rather than the fake imagined "prestige" and "cachet" that desperately aspirational buypig brand whores chase buy buying wrist mounted status totems.
Could've just said you're poor m8.

>>14276159
A 40mm Geckota K1, the leather strap it came with feels cheap and Im over the whole leather strap thing anyway. Tried it on a cordura strap, somewhat better, but still not quite it. Put it on a 3-link metal bracelet I had laying around and the toolwatch aesthetics worked well, only the end link didnt fit, and I like the look of a 5-link more. The watch is worn just to and from work, so 0 dressiness. You think I should get the meyhofer and maybe later get a better clasp for it down the line?

>>14276199
I love how hard he's pretending that he doesn't care about branding and imagined prestige while the only reason he even likes the BB is because of the rolex connection.

Does anyone have any ideas for a good watch for a wristlet?

>>14276224
36mm Rolex Explorer I

>>14276222
Modern in-house Tudors are very well made watches, with very good external finishing and in-house, robust, balance bridge, free sprung escapements.

At $3,575 the BB58 is priced competitively with in-house offerings from Nomos (DUW models), Damasko (a35 powered models), Grand Seiko, and Omega's master co-axial models.

Branding has nothing to do with anything except in as much as Rolex's extensive manufacturing facilities in Switzerland mean the Tudor is less likely to be outsourced to the extent an Omega in that price range would be.

>>14276234
I also love the way "swiss made" outsourcing to china is irrelevant until you can use it to score points for the poor mans rolex.

>>14276234
>Branding has nothing to do with anything
And then goes on to flog the Rolex connection again.

Tudor has only ever been and only ever will be the "...but it's basically a Rolex" watch for people who can't afford the real thing.

Just got this, gonna have to get a case since I have a few now.

>>14276246
The only way Tudor could ever differentiate themselves is if they made something that had no Rolex equivalent, like if they started making quartz watches or digital watches or something.

>>14276249
cool. make sure the case costs more than the collection you're storing in it.

Am I the only one that hates those videos that start by filming the wrist (the buckle) and then flip the arm slowly until showing the dial?
Is fucking retarded and a waste of time, just show the fucking dial, no one wants to stare at your wrist veins.

>>14276264
It's because you have to pad it for monetization.

>>14276069
Nvm. Thought it was two faggots, the account is named Mika

Tudor is confirmed to have their own separate booth at Baselworld 2020, just fyi.

>>14275877
So what makes this better than an ETA, a 6r15, and a 9011 (9015 with better finishing)?

>>14276292
the fact that it's fitted in a Cartier. The movement means you can now buy a Cartier with a proper in-house movement instead of some off-the-shelf ETA or Sellita.
Although it does have pretty good good power reserve and an efficient winding mechanism design, which is something it has over the ETA and Seiko movements.

>>14276288

Will they launch more based and redpilled watches next year?

Where do you guys see watches and the watch industry in general in the next 10 years?

>>14276307
>it uses a winding system very much like Seiko's lauded Magic Lever.
>an efficient winding mechanism design, which is something it has over the ETA and Seiko movements.

>>14275927
Jaeger LeCoultre Kryos

>>14276316
go read up on the Magic Lever first, kiddo.

>>14276311
>crown guard
Ok I'm listening
wtf is going on with those end links

>>14276312
Luxury wristwatches will probably be banned due to their contribution to the white male patriarchy and the fact that they symbolise the oppressive capitalist societal structure which exploits the poor.

>>14276320
If everyone went and read up on everything there'd be no need for a thread would there you stupid cunt

>>14276311
>We get it. It's not what anyone was expecting.
Honestly, who didn't expect they put out anything other than more "vintage inspired" pablum?

>>14276323
Nigga those aren't the end links, those are the things you lock the bezel in place with, so that when you're diving at 2000 feet and fighting off sharks you don't accidentally bash your watch off a rock, turn the bezel and lose track of how much time you've got left.

>>14275843
I have this beauty, 10/10 would recommend as a dressier watch

>>14276327
Oh, I get it. You want it spoonfed to you. Well...no. I am not responsible for your shit-even-by-American-standards lack of academic habits.

>>14276311
Oh good, another dive watch that will never, ever get wet.

>>14276307
>slightly different winding
>power reserve slightly under a 6R15 but better than the rest

I was kind of hoping there would be more, but at least it isn't exclusively bragging rights or being different just for the sake of being different.

>>14276338
So in other words you can't explain how this mechanism that is "very much like the magic lever" has an advantage over the magic lever so you're dribbling shit instead.

>>14276347
No, it's more a move towards independence as a manufacturer, rather than being reliant on ETA or whomever for movements and parts, which is a great sign that Cartier is taking itself seriously as a watch manufacture and not just a jeweler.

>>14276355

Any of you anons got any Soviet watches?
Such as Slava, Raketa, Poljot?

>>14276367
That's cool and all, but why does it make the end product better? And don't just reply with another variant of "because it's different"

>>14276385
>That's cool and all, but why does it make the end product better?
Better than what? Better than if there was an ETA/Sellita in it? Yes, higher power reserve.

Also, better because because In-House movement > ETA/Sellita
That's a big part of why brands like Zenith, JLC, Rolex, etc are held in higher regard than brands like Omega, Breitling, TAG Heuer, etc. It's why all those brands are working very hard to create their own in-house movements so they can't be accused of simply printing a dial, milling a case, and slapping an ETA in there.

My last purchase

>>14276403
You seem to be suggesting that because it is different, that you can charge a higher price for it because of the novelty, and that performance is important but not too important. Am I getting this right?

>>14276418
You're being obtuse. An in-house movement elevates a manufacturer from a glorified jeweler to a legitimate watchmaker.

>>14276418
>Am I getting this right?
No, you're getting it backwards and you're fixating on the word "different" to a degree that I'm wondering if you've suffered a head injury.

In-house is a business decision, not a "novelty".
You can charge whatever price the market will bear.
The performance of the in-house movement is demonstrably better than the ETA 2892 that was previously used. I don't know if it's "better" enough for you. You should probably take that up with Cartier's design team if it's really bothering you that much.

>>14276418
>in-house is irrelevant.
Honestly, why are you even in this thread?

>>14276336
Based, a true connoisseur.

>>14276443
too large.

>>14276422
>>14276426
>>14276428
I'm just asking if paying a whole lot more for someone that reinvented the wheel for gains that are still less than other movements is rational. There are tons of cheap watches with lots of power reserve (powermatic 80, 6R15). It doesn't make sense to me, but clearly by this thread it works out just fine.

>>14276243
"Swiss Made" outsourcing to China is always relevant. It's why I'm consistently critical of $750 - $3,250 uncanny valley "Swiss" watches, as the outsourcing results in reduced quality because Chinese factories don't believe in quality control or material workmanship.

>>14276246
The Rolex connection matters from the perspective of the actual manufacturing production chain that makes Tudor watches. Damasko gets just as much credit for making their in-house movement models under their own roof entirely in Germany and Grand Seiko similarly controlling the whole production chain in Japan. Nomos too, does virtually all the manufacturing of their DUW caliber models in Germany.

>>14276457
Pathetic watch cuck.

>>14276459
put very clearly: the respect a company garners is in proportion to the amount of production that it is able to accomplish on its own.
Rolex, for example, is hugely respected, in part because they manufacture nearly every single component of the watches that bear their logo.

Does buying a credit card on a 0% credit card make me a fucking loser?

>>14276459
You should probably learn about the relationship between the beat rate of an escapement and power reserve before you try to compare movements like the Powermatic-80 and the 6R15 to the Cartier Caliber 1904-PS...

>>14276157
>The Rolex will be better made, more robust, and have better resale value.

Nice myth.

>>14276187
T U D O R

Which is why the market is tanking, people have caught on. Besides they're all unattractive.

>>14275766
>gold version
>0 oz of gold

???
things just aren’t adding up anon

>>14276471
Ah the 'there aren't any interesting watches between $750-$3250' autist. Nobody gives a shit what you think when you adhere to such a retarded belief.

>>14276471
OK, so when you flash your Tudor and tell people that "It's made in the same factory as the Rolex" that's not bringing up a more prestigious brand and tying it to your watch?

Here's a challenge for Tudor owners: make the watch stand on its own merit without having to resort to the Rolex thing. If you can't do that, then it comes back to the classic Tudor owner's line
>I got 90% of a Rolex for 50% of the price

watch discord with no 999 jannies and 999 rules still high quality

https://discord.gg/wTK3TGP

>>14276491
This. Tudor is selling on the strength of ROLEX's marketing. Tudor don't even have fucking marketing of their own. Seriously who even wears that cuckwatch as far as famous people go?

>>14276494
>>14276491
>>14276485
>>14276471
Okay guys you've had your fun, enough with the Tudor-bashing.

>>14276493
>do it for him
>some guy who utterly destroyed his line by marrying a nog
Ha ha no.

>>14276481
Alright, I kind of get it now. It's a prestige thing like "American Made" which implies it was made with care rather than being about having superior specs (which it might).

So, if I take that information and go with information from
>>14276471
Rolex, Damasko, Grand Seiko, and Nomos are the good ones? Which is the best?

>>14276483
my b

>>14276495
It's not even bashing. Tudors are great little watches. It's just a small handful of anons who won't admit the truth that the appeal of a Tudor comes in large part from the brand's connection to the desirability of a Rolex.

>>14276500
>Rolex, Damasko, Grand Seiko, and Nomos are the good ones? Which is the best?

Rolex is obvious.
Grand Seiko is an oddball that's still trying to find its place in the Western market. Their watches are excellent, though.

Damasko and Nomos are fine brands in their own right (Nomos is better, though) but they aren't in the same league as Rolex and GS.

>>14276407
I like it! :)

>>14276489
I never said there weren't any "interesting" watches within that price range, nor even that there aren't any reasonably well made ones with sensible price to quality ratios. There just aren't very reasonably priced watches for there quality level in that price range.

>>14276531
>There just aren't very reasonably priced watches for there quality level in that price range.
You're wrong. Eat a dick, because your Tudor is a pussy repellent.

>>14276491
You still don't understand. The relevant part is that the manufacturing is done to a high standard in Switzerland by a company that appears to care about putting out a good quality product at a reasonable price.

Rolex having all their manufacturing in Switzerland is relevant because it makes it more economical for Rolex to just make the Tudor's in Switzerland using their existing production chain rather than creating a whole separate production chain heavily using Chinese outsourcing for Tudor. The part that matters is that the watch is manufactured directly by the company whose name is on the dial and that they don't cut corners in manufacturing the watch to increase their profit margins.

I'd make the exact same quality argument about Grand Seiko, Nomos, or Damasko in the same price range as in-house Tudors, and none of those three have any connection to a brand you'd consider "prestigious".

>>14276500
>Rolex, Damasko, Grand Seiko, and Nomos are the good ones? Which is the best?

There is no strict "best" high quality mass production watchmaker. Rolex makes excellent quality watches, so does Grand Seiko, so does JLC with their entry level models, so does Zenith, so does Nomos with their higher end DUW caliber powered models. Damasko makes amazing tool watches with an extremely advanced in-house movement design. Tudor's in-house models are great as well.

All of those watchmakers produce good quality watches that are priced relatively fairly for what you are getting (barring Rolex, which is able to get a significant price premium for its brand, but the watches are still excellently made regardless).

Compare to a brand like Breitling, which has extremely cheaply finished cases, hands, and indices that are a massive quality let-down compared to the intricate dials and in-house B01 chronograph movement. Or to Omega's from 5 years ago that had a first generation co-axial movement prone to eating itself and Brietling tier external finishing. Or to oversized IWC watches costing several thousands of dollars with barely modified ETA movements found in watches 1/7th the price.

>>14276549
You are clearly unable to say anything about Tudor without bringing up Rolex.

And, truthfully, being manufactured in Rolex's factory doesn't mean that it's made to the same standard, otherwise Tudors would cost what Rolexes would cost.
So it's made in the same factory, just with lower-grade materials and looser tolerances?

>>14276566
>Breitling, which has extremely cheaply finished cases, hands, and indices that are a massive quality let-down
Confirmed for having never even touched a Breitling.

>>14276570
>manufactured in Rolex's factory doesn't mean that it's made to the same standard
Not him, but rolex doesn't even do beveling on the case sides or angled brushing on the lugs anymore.

>>14276566
>Or to Omega's from 5 years ago that had a first generation co-axial movement prone to eating itself and Brietling tier external finishing.
This. I can't think of any brand that has jumped much in quality as Omega has.

The problems with the first co-ax movements was that the escapement was crudely bolted onto a 2982 that was never meant to have it. The 8xxx-series movements were built around the technology from the start and the latest 8900 is probably one of the best movements in the world.

Of course, the prices have kept pace...

>>14276566
>Compare to a brand like Breitling, which has extremely cheaply finished cases, hands, and indices
Funny, Breitling is actually renowned for its superb finishing and that is its main selling point.

Do you want to keep proving Tudorfags don't know shit about watches and it's babbys first Swiss watch?

>>14276585
The early co axials were dogs cause Omega ran them at 8bps instead of the 7 advised by Daniels. It doesn't have so much to do with the ETA base at all.

I feel as though people with watches as a hobby would find a lot more enjoyment in it, were they only to go after their own intuition and DO THEIR OWN RESEARCH, instead of bending over to oftentimes trollin posts on a bangladeshi mudcake recipe sharing sewing circle or the watch community in general. I believe that, if you do your homework, and maintain or adjust your selection process, you cannot do completely wrong. Want that Festina, Certina, Jacques LeMans, whatever? No other "reputable" brand makes something similar in design of better value? Are you getting your moneys worth or overpaying massively? Some purchases are a hit an miss, though, that much is clear. Ive dreamt of a watch until I got it and found out it sat like ass on my wrist, sometimes even the most thorough research will not be enough untill you experience it in the flesh, be it for better or worse. At the same time, rationalizing each watch purchase can be a pain. Do you really NEED that 1940s art deco square hand-wound Elgin with a busted finish? No, but the sheer intrigue of the experience, I guess, is what counts.

tl;dr buy watches you like, you colossal faggot, noone else will have to live with it, but you - Buddha

>>14276583
Look at the flat case sides and straight brushing on the lugs. Honestly the rolex has less interesting/complicated finishing than the tudor.

>>14276262
what do you mean?

>>14276605
He means:

YOUR WATCH IS A FUCKING SHITTER AND YOU SHOULD HAVE SPENT A BIT MORE THAN YOUR FUCKING LUNCH MONEY ON A PROPER LUXURY TIMEPIECE

>>14276605
>>14276609
if your collection doesnt warrant buying something like picrel then why even own any watches?

>>14276598
That's not really an indication of quality so much as it is of style. The grain of the brushing is still very tight and even. The case edge is still perfect, though. Those polished bevels are actually easier to produce.

>>14276589
>Funny, Breitling is actually renowned for its superb finishing and that is its main selling point.
Maybe by people who literally don't know anything about metal finishing. Breitling cases are polished by shoving the entire case under a high speed buffing wheel loaded with polishing compound until the whole thing is rounded over like a half finished cough drop. The hands are stamped out of thin flat sheets with absolutely zero subsequent cleaning up of the edges.

In-house Tudors have much better external finishing than that. At least they take the fucking time to do the polishing on their cases with felted lapidary polishing machines, apply some contrasting, tightly grained brushed finished with clean, sharp transitions between polished and brushed surfaces, and have decently thick hands and indices with much cleaner edges.

>>14276627
How is rounding off sharp edges harder than a bevel? C'mon m8.

>>14276570
Yep, it's definitely Grand Seiko's connection to Rolex that indicates they manufacture good quality watches in Japan with direct control of their manufacturing and supply chain. Same goes for Damasko, Nomos, Zenith, and JLC. In each case it's their connection to Rolex rather than the non-outsourced, good quality manufacturing in a first world nation with direct control of their manufacturing and supply chain that leads to good quality watches.

>>14276186
No you idiot, they used to make reasonably priced for their quality tool watches.

>>14276634
You can easily slap the brushing on the top and sides when you know you can just grind off and polish the edge later.

>>14276638
Rolex was never reasonably priced. They always had Tudor for the poors.

>>14276622
and when youre traveling you will need both things in picrel

>>14276639
So you can cover up mistakes right on the edge with a bevel but not with rounding the corner (which is essentially just a small bevel)? Now this is just sounding silly.

>>14276635
Wow, you are positively seething.

You should step back and take a break. Maybe hop in your Toyota (which is basically a Lexus) and drive over to the liquor store to buy a bottle of Johnny Walker Red (which is basically Johnny Walker Blue) and share a drink with your anime body pillow (which is basically a girlfriend).

>>14276650
>your anime body pillow (which is basically a girlfriend).

>>14276609
oh, he sounds like a fag
>>14276622
i want to slam on my brakes with that in the trunk and have it come bashing through to the front seat, crushing my passenger

>>14276650
Ah, I see (You)'ve given up any pretense of actually trying to argue the substance and have decided to retreat into the safety of pure, substance free trolling then.

>>14276662
There is NO FUCKING SUBSTANCE to your argument because we're going around in circles.

Step 1: Me: "Say something nice about Tudor without mentioning Rolex."
Step 2: You: "Blah blah blah Rolex."
Step 3: Goto Step 1.

>>14276635
It is functionally impossible to separate Tudor and Rolex because Rolex set Tudor up with the express purpose of making them impossible to separate.

Tudor only exists because Rolex wanted to sell watches at a lower price while still maintaining Rolex's standards. Early Tudors even said "Oyster case by Rolex" on the back (picrel).
>It says Tudor on the front, but it REALLY says Rolex (on the back.)

To try and have the brand stand on its own merits one way or the other is like trying to separate Coke Classic and Diet Coke.

>>14276642
Rolex is pretty affordable. The mistake is thinking it's "luxury", when it's only entry-level luxury.

When you enter the ring with modern luxury watches, Rolex is nothing next to AP, VC, GP.

Then you have the dress watch connections and real money luxury pieces in excess of $1M per piece (think Philippe Dufour etc.), and I'm not talking vintage.

So really, what are rolex and tudor but high-end affordables?

>>14276689
>Rolex is pretty affordable. The mistake is thinking it's "luxury", when it's only entry-level luxury.
Who the fuck thinks Rolex is luxury? It's babby's first real watch.

>>14276689
>So really, what are rolex and tudor but high-end affordables?
aside from one being a slightly cheaper, shittier subset of the other?

>>14276684
so tudor is diet coke or mountain dew? im confused

>>14276693
>confusing what you think vs what the majority thinks because you're SO SMART and enlightened
unironically neck yourself.

>>14276700
No, Diet Coke is "nearly all of the flavor of Coca-Cola but none of the calories." Diet Coke is thus defined by relationship to Cola-Cola.
Similarly, Tudor is "nearly all of the quality and prestige of Rolex at half the cost."
Tudor, by the way, benefits enormously from this link. No one ever doubts the quality of a Tudor because, after all, it's made in the Rolex factory.

If Tudor was, say, Oris, we'd be wondering why Tudors are even as expensive as they are (especially when they were still all ETA-powered)
Why, for example was the ETA powered BB so much more expensive than an Aquis?

We didn't ask this because we all understood that we were buying Rolex's quality.

>>14276684
So Tudor is to Rolex like Armani Exchange is to Giorgio Armani?

For 100€ what would you buy ?

>>14276734
Twenty whoppers

>>14276734
112 US Dollars, then buy the Euros back when it bottoms out following Brexit.

>>14276673
Tudor manufacture very good quality watches with good quality robust, in-house, silicon hairsprings, balance bridge, free sprung escapements and very good external finishing in Switzerland, with minimal outsourcing, giving them direct control of their manufacturing and supply chain and enabling them to achieve that quality standard.

This puts them in a class of watchmakers offering good quality production watches with in-house movements manufactured in first world countries with minimal outsourcing with control over their production chain and a commitment to achieving good quality without undue corner cutting. They also price their watches competitively with other makers in that class.

>>14276734
Lottery tickets.

>>14276745
>Tudor manufacture very good quality watches...
Ehm...Tudor is a marketing division of Rolex. Tudor doesn't actually manufacture anything. Rolex does that part.

They really just sound like a more expensive Longines to me.

>>14276734
citizen eco drive or a seiko

>>14276693
"Rolex SA is a Swiss luxury watch manufacturer based in Geneva, Switzerland."

>>14276755
Except the part where Longines are >50% Chinese outsourced mall shitters with disposable movements that are not in-house, do not have a balance bridge, are not true free sprung balance wheels with a full adjustment range, do not have silicon hairsprings, and which have external finishing which exemplifies the pitfalls of Chinese outsourcing.

Tudor's in house models are excellent quality at a a reasonable price. Longines are not.

>>14276755
I'm actually pretty interested to see where Rolex cuts corners. Aside from the 904L steel, where's the difference?

>>14276774
So why would anyone ever buy a Rolex? Why buy an Explorer when you could have a North Flag?
Who would buy a Submariner over a Black Bay unless they'd taken leave of their senses?

>>14276774
When you buy a Choooodah, does it actually come with a brochure entitled
>How to respond to the question "Couldn't afford a Rolex, eh?"

>>14276774
>Tudor's in house models
Except there ARE no in-house Tudors. Tudor has no manufacturing capacity. It's just a de-spec'ed Rolex that they slapped a different name on to prevent brand-dilution.

>>14276788
Because Rolex is the most recognizable status symbol in the world. It shows literally everyone from Antarctica to Zimbabwe that you're not a loser.

>>14276774
>Tudor's in house models are excellent quality at a a reasonable price. Longines are not.

Longines has an in-house column wheel chronograph in watches selling under 2k.

Come again?

>>14276809
And a Tudor shows everyone that you are a tasteless virgin.

>>14276809
>everyone from Antarctica to Zimbabwe
so, penguins, seals and stone-age level bushmen?

>>14276820
>Longines has an in-house column wheel chronograph in watches selling under 2k.
Not him, but which ones?

>>14276826
https://www.hodinkee.com/articles/the-longines-column-wheel-chronograph-a-horological-purists

They're dirt cheap on the used market. I still won't buy one just for the sake of the movement, but you can't deny it's cool as fuck.

>>14276834
>that damn 4:30 date
So close, yet so far.

>>14276843
Consider the Big Eye, probably the most popular Longines at the moment. Same movement.

>>14276457
Its 39mm? And pretty thin as well, unless you've got the twinkiest of wrists I don't think anyone would call it "too large"

>>14276850
Much better.

>>14276854
My favorite pilots chronograph. If I didn't have a Speedy, that would be my chronograph for my collection.

>>14276854
>cut numerals

>>14276874
The vintage piece was the same.

>>14276850
>>14276854
>chrono dials cutting into the hour markers

Nah, senpai. Come back when the design isnt shit.

>>14276820
>Longines has an in-house column wheel chronograph in watches selling under 2k.
Ah, you mean the ETA developed A08.L01, which is a Valjoux 7750 with the cam switching and horizontal coupling replaced by a vertical clutch and column wheel actuation? That's also used by Omega?

It's not an in-house movement.

>>14276788
>So why would anyone ever buy a Rolex?
Some people care for the perceived prestige of brand names. Some people prefer Rolex designs. That has nothing to do with whether Tudor produces good quality watches with in-house movements at a competitive price.

Look, I personally find all maxi-case Rolex models hideous, but I don't use my personal aesthetic taste to try and argue that Rolex doesn't make excellent quality watches.

>>14276808
This.

>>14276808
>Except there ARE no in-house Tudors
Wrong.

>Tudor has no manufacturing capacity.
Wrong.

Next time, please try to have some idea of what you are talking about before you claim false things on internet.

>>14276893
uh, wrong.

Show me the Tudor factory then, tough guy.

>>14276893
ITT: absolutely seething Tudor poorfags

>>14276798
>How to respond to the question "Couldn't afford a Rolex, eh?"
A lot of Tudorfags will casually mention off-hand something like "This is my beater when I don't want my Sub damaged." or "My Day-Date is a little too stuffy with this outfit." or "My Daytona is in for service."

Then pray they never run into that person ever again.

>>14276904
>The brand was set up by Rolex founder Hans Wilsdorf in 1926 to offer a Rolex-quality timepiece at a more accessible price. Its early advertising billed Tudor firmly as a watch for the working man, depicting coal miners, stone masons and construction workers alongside straplines highlighting durability: “Shock treatment at the coal-face”; “Punished without mercy!”

>>14276901
https://www.hodinkee.com/articles/tudor-headquarters-manufacture-visit-2017

>While the parts that comprise Tudor's current selection of in-house movements are manufactured offsite at a Tudor-owned facility several miles from the Geneva headquarters, a great many operations, including R&D, assembly, and quality control take place right in the heart of Geneva.

>Like its larger sister brand Rolex, Tudor operates its own movement manufacturing facility in another part of Switzerland. The movements are completed, and their escapement is added and adjusted, by watchmakers at the Geneva HQ.

>>14276904
I don't even own a Tudor, it just annoys me when people are factually wrong and sperg out with shitposter and bait when corrected.

>>14276917
But those are Rolex-owned facilities, anon. Tudor isn't making them. Tudor is not an independent entity, anon.

You DO understand this, right?

>>14276924
Of course he doesn't. He's trying to somehow squish reality into this idea that Tudor is not poor-man's Rolex.

>>14276924
>Presented with facts
>Sticks his fingers in his ears, stamps his feet, and insists those facts aren't true because they don't fit his preconceived biases
(You)

>>14276993
No, you're right anon. Tudor is a completely independent manufacture that produces their own products entirely independent of Rolex and people who buy them are in no way buying them simply because it's 90% of Rolex quality at 50% of the price.

It's the smart buy. :^)

>>14276993
What are you even on about? Do you honestly think Tudor and Rolex are separate entities? Tudor is a LABEL, no more no less. Rolex doesn't even try to hide the fact that they're shitty watches for poor people. You're literally just paying extra for the fact that Tudors were made in a factory that also happens to make the watch that you actually wanted but can't fucking afford.

Get the fuck over yourself, you poor fuck. Enjoy your Tudor and don't die of a fentanyl overdose.

>>14277177
>>14277191
>I got BTFO'd by the facts so I'm going to retreat into shouting 'poorfag' repeatedly.
>I also have no idea how corporations are structured to minimize unnecessarily crossing risk pools and believe Rolex exposed themselves directly to the assets and liabilities of Tudor.
>Also, if it was true Rolex directly manufactured watches in Switzerland using its own production chain it sold as Tudors, this would somehow aide my fruitless attack on Tudor's manufacturing quality and competitive pricing
>'Oh yea! You're Tudor is shit because Rolex made it!!!'
lmoa

>>14277210
What """"facts""""

Who do you think you're even responding to?

Honestly? This is getting a little sad. Keep going, though. It's still funnier than it is sad.

Actually, do you even own a Tudor or is it your grail?

ell-emm-ay-oh at your life.

There is LITERALLY nothing anyone can do to change the fact that Tudor was founded to sell watches to working-class people without having to compromise Rolex quality.

In car terms, Tudor is a Golf GTI to Rolex's Porsche 911.

Why don't you have a steel vintage lcd, anon?

the Tissot watch brand has a storied history. They were founded in 1853, have all kinds of endorsements with several of the most well known organizations in the world. Look up their history on Wikipedia.

As mentioned earlier, they are owned by the Swatch company who produce all of the ETA movements, which are in most of the high end watches in the world.

I am about to purchase the Tissot Couturier. It has a Valjoux 7750 movement in it, one of the most prestigious movements in the world for chronograph watches, which have been used by Rolex, Panerai, and Tag Huer.

Tissot was just featured in the latest Tom Cruise Mission Impossible movie, and what a prestigious product endorsement that was. They showed close-ups of the Tissot watch on 2 separate occasions.

>>14277265
Many people may not be aware of Tissot's rich and long watch making history since 1853, but in my opinion it is a very respectable watch, if not slightly prestigious. And if you get the Tissot Couturier with the Valjoux 7750 movement in it, at about $1,000.00, you will be wearing one of the most prestigious watches in the world, because it is primarily the movement in the watch that establishes its quality, and thereby it's prestige.

Likewise, the JazzMaster Lord Hamilton watch by Hamilton, also has a Valjoux 7750 movement in it, at about $1,00.00, if you're interested in looking at that watch also.

When you think of it, Tom Cruise and the producers of the Mission Impossible franchise are making movies at the highest level of movie making. The mission Impossible movies are all about the most innovative technology in the world. For them to choose Tissot as a product endorsement watch in that movie was a huge endorsement of how much respect they have for the Tissot brand.

Now, to all of you judgmental A-Holes who are trying to judge this man on his desire to have a watch that will represent him in a respectable manner, F-Off! He asked for your opinion on the watches, not for your judgment on him as a person.

If you're not a watch aficionado, that's fine, but don't judge those who have been seduced by the history of watch making, and who can appreciate the fine craftsmanship that goes into making a superior luxury watch, and don't judge those who want to make sure that they are representing themselves in a fashionable and respectful manner.

After all, we live in a superficial world. That's the way it is, and if you desire to get a watch that others will respect, then that's what you have to do, because those superficial people in the world who are already successful, only want to deal with others that they perceive to be successful also, and those are the people that they will give opportunities to for future successes.

>>14277267
The proper Tissot watch for the situation will preform flawlessly
Tissot great watches never had any problems.

I originally came to Styleforum for footwear. I found myself coming to site daily and wondered what else was on the site.
I enjoy watches and have a few Tissot's. I had a Rolex Sea dweller as my only watch and a daily wear watch for a dozen years, it was a work watch. During my divorce she sold my watch.
After the divorce i had my work watch and a dozen watches i would swap out daily.
This is where the tissots come in. Great watches.Cheap and one for every life style. I can not recommend the brand enough. A few pages back someone was saying how his Tissot was bad buy Seiko. My experience is opposite. The proper Tissot for the job works flawlessly. My Seikos all ended up in trash can as their inability to function.
Evey once in a while i hear someone talk about watches as a status symbol. That may have been true at one time. But now cars, phones, and sneakers are a status ststememt. Only watch lovers even notice a watch.
I never wanted my watch to be noticed. Made me uncomfortable when someone would comment on it. My watch was for me and not a fashion statement. Was not to be noticed.
Today after years of looking. i finally found a watch I enjoy enough yet strong enough for daily abuse. The Ball Hydrocarbon Alligator.
I switch out watch occasionally with Tissot, and Oris watches.

>>14275877
Thanks man! Seiko's magic what? I have not heard of such a thing. Pardon my newfag-ness

>>14277241
Seiko if mechanical
Casio if digital

>>14277294
It's their way of making automatic winding bi-directional.

I need a good beater field watch that has more than one knob like that one Seiko that's discontinued. Any suggestions?

Turtle or Samurai?

>>14277441
samurai

https://youtu.be/UtwmRdGPwxU?t=134

Is the inverted G-shock any good? I keep hearing that it's not very legible.

What do you think about this /wt/?

>>14277522
It looks good, though I don't like the choice of hands

>>14277527
This is literally the only field-looking chrono I've found that doesn't have bullshit like cut off numerals or a huge 9 or that sort of thing, it just looks like a regular properly designed watch (even a lot of other Hamiltons have issues like that).

>>14277531
How much is it?

>>14277553
>look it up
>it's been discontinued for years
>the new version is the one with the big 9
Kill me.

>>14276194
>Rolex only offers more bling and branding as improvements over a BB58.
> "prestige" and "cachet" that desperately aspirational buypig brand whores chase buy buying wrist mounted status totems.

Wait you're saying that the Sub isn't prestigious? Despite the over saturation of subs by Pajeets and Persians I can assure you that you're wrong. Are you also implying that the BB58 is a legitimate alternative? That would be the Planet Ocean. There are build quality questions and if you're honestly looking for a "cheaper alternative" to the Submariner than you would be a fucking fool to not get a second hand PO2500 or 8900.

Poorfag cope is the worst.

>>14277553
>>14277531
>>14277559
>>14277527
>>14277522
Is there anything that's currently available that looks like that?

Yesterdays pic, on the flight to Istanbul with sister. Completely forgot about time zones, should have brought my pre-Bond Semenmaster that has an independently adjustable hour hand.

>>14277681
a/s/l of sister?

>>14277681
Also gonna try to find fleamarkets and antique shops in Istanbul, and bring some old shitters back. Wonder what were some common vintage brands here, Swiss or Jap.

>>14277241
I do.

>>14277531
Uwot? There is even a Seiko version. Albeit quartz, it is a field watch with a chronograph none the less.

>>14277748
This one looks like it's made of paper compared to the Hamilton though.

I paid a little over 800 for an immaculate one of these and it's excellent imo. This one will probably be cheaper since it has some marks on it.
https://page.auctions.yahoo.co.jp/jp/auction/m329884246

>>14277817
>paying nearly a grand for a fucking gook watch Carrera ripoff

>>14277892
>tag actually sells a carrera with the same movement as the "gook ripoff" for over 6 grand

>>14277817
Why, oh why are Seiko chronos always so incredibly thick?

>>14277241
I have several

>>14277608
No, I'm saying that the material workmanship, external finishing a technical merits of movements and their workmanship are external, objective, real physical properties of watches while things like 'prestige' and 'cachet' are subjective feels with no real external objective substance, and watch buys who value the latter over the former do so because they are desperate to increase their self perceived social status, making them easy marks to be manipulated by marketing.

The great advantage of being a total autist in this hobby is that I don't give a shit about the subjective, fake social status oriented marketing driven bullshit and can focus entirely on the objective properties of the watches and whether their aesthetics appeal to me personally.

>>14278035
>Why are watches with date, multiple chronograph hands, vertical clutch and automatic winding thick?
What do you think dumbfuck?

>>14278103
thicker than other makers' automatic chronographs, you fucking asshole.

>>14278121
What other makers, fucking basic bitch Valjoux shitters?

>>14278103
>you, in charge of reading comprehension

Weeb general up in here. Banzai Japan motherfuckers

Does this guy have the biggest collection of fucking shitters on the planet? Anyone who can compete with him?

Day 2 update: wanted to buy a fake Rolex at the bazaar as an authentic Istanbul souvenier, but for the price they were selling them you could buy two F-91W's. So no thanks.

>>14277522
I think there is a similar Mathey-Tissot I remember seeing a while back

>>14278173
Retards throw 'weeb' around so much it's lost all meaning.

Just bought a seamaster 30 this week and as I'm learning more about watches now I'm curious to know if automatic models (I've seen a seamaster automatic from the same year go for a bit less) is considered to be more or less desirable? Or is it just a preference that has the same second hand value?

>>14278035
The display back and automatic winding add some thickness. What are some examples of column wheel chronos with automatic winding and display backs that are significantly thinner?

>>14278279
What I meant was manual, not mechanical

>tag huehue licensed the 6s37 movement from seiko, removed the power reserve complication, put it in a watch and charged 5k for it.
>you can get basically the same watch (6s28, which is a 6s37 without the power reserve complication) from seiko second hand for $800

>>14277681
I am having a hard time guessing who’s the sister

>>14275251
They're next to impossible to find though
:( Tbh I really wanted the orange one but settled for yellow

>>14277817
I like it but it's weirdly designed, the font on the 3/6/9/12, the Seiko automatic lettering, the date window, the big gaps between stuff, it's all over the place.

What will it cost approximately to serve a vintage omega that has a low mainspring power reserve? I noticed I need to wind it every 6 hours or so

>>14278328
I agree the fonts are a mistake but I don't have a problem with the date window. I don't like it when watches use the date window as a 3 oclock marker the fact this one has the date window *and* a 3 oclock marker is a plus imo.

>>14278314
That is so embarrassing. I’m sure it’s a good movement but come on.

>>14275487
>quartz
>superior to mechanical watches in numerous ways
>gets hated on because fags buy watches now to show off

>>14278314
To be honest TAG actually looks really good compared to the Seiko. If the Seiko looked like that I'd buy it right now.

>>14278333
Seiko can never seem to get a dial just right. There's always something wrong.

>>14278364
Yeah. Embarrassing for tag.
>new 100% IN-HOUSE movement from tag
>oh wait we lied it's actually a licensed movement from seiko that we charge you suckers thousands of dollars extra for.

>>14278373
I agree with this too. There's always something wrong with seiko dials. Sometimes I think they do it on purpose like when a seiko and a grand seiko share the same movement they deliberately make the regular seiko look like shit.

>>14278374
Nah, embarrassing for people who bought it. (((TAG))) is only doing what's in their people's nature.

>>14278376
I think they do it because their lineup is so idiotically huge. They're just cranking out new designs constantly instead of really sitting down and trying to perfect one design.

I’m seriously considering buying a GS 9F quartz. Is this stupid? I can get an automatic from them for not much more money. Does anyone here have a 9F?

>>14278387
If you're considering a quartz or an auto the spring drive should really be on the table too since it's the best of both worlds.

NEW

>>14278394
>>14278394
>>14278394

>>14278394
>>14278394
>>14278394

>>14278394
>>14278394
>>14278394

>>14278204

So €20,-? Doesn't seem all that much for a real fake Rolex..

>>14277681
post sister