/fa/ - Fashion

I was out today buying groceries and some roastie pointed at me and whispered to her friend "omg that guy is wearing his watch over his ulnar styloid process. what a fucking incel freak!" and then they both giggled and walked away. Why didn't you warn me about this, /wt/?

Cope if you must, and you will

Also this version is gay retard ESLs so don't even try

Why do mineral crystals exist? Acrylic and Sapphire are both superior.

Why do minerals exist? I want to dress up like a clown and have sex with children and kill them.

>>17218494
Honestly after wasting so much money on watches over the years I find myself just wearing the f91w most of the time as my daily. It's light weight and the timer comes in handy

Tbh for a daily all you really need is either a citizen ecodrive that suits your style (i like pic related with a black leather strap) or an f91w. Then maybe treat yourself to another watch for special occasions. Unassuming, doesn't look try hard cringe, fits most lifestyles. And dont have to worry about getting mugged, damaging or scratching it etc.

The whole idea of the automatic meme is so cringe when the device literally does 1 job, something a $10 watch does more accurately.

>>17218544
maybe
but the sweeping second hand is kino, so I think I'll keep wearing automatics

>>17218544
Maybe, but I like getting flexed on by poor people every time it needs a service.

>>17218549
>sweeping second hand is kino
I get that, but it's also a retarded cope reason to justify spending 1000% more for a watch. The way people talk about the swoop is like they're actively experiencing it and noticing it the whole time they have the watch on. You will barely even notice the swooping when you look at your watch for a split second went you check the time. Main reason you should get a watch is simply because you like the style and look.

Why can't people say they just got that Rolex or omega for the looks and presitge associated with the brand. Or that they got the automatics because they got memed into it by watch communities instead of coming up weird reasons. Like really guys?:
>"I am willing to spend hundreds and even thousands more for a watch that tells time less accurately, requires maintenance, I'd be to worried whence ri wear it or knock it about, just because the seconds hand swoops instead of ticks"

>>17218558
I think this point is best demonstrated by the Tissot PRX, it's nearly twice the price for the automatic version when the original watch it homages is quartz anyway and people actually bought it.

>>17218558
>all this seethe because Orient makes a $100 automatic or something along those lines
get help

>>17218558
>Why would someone buy a Mercedes when they can just buy a Ford?
>Why would a man buy a suit from Brooks Brothers when he could just go to Men's Wearhouse?

>>17218562
He's clearly not talking about a $100 Orient, that's a strawman argument. If a watch is cheap it really doesn't matter whether it's quartz or mechanical (although I will say it's dumb to buy a $100 automatic if the servicing is going to cost nearly 100%, or possibly more, of the entire watch), anon is talking about paying $10,000 for what is basically an obsolete form of timekeeping, you can get a good quality quartz watch with all the specs you'd want in terms of materials, finishing and accuracy for a few hundred or a couple grand if you go for a GS 9F watch but people generally don't because muh sweep which is really dumb.

>>17218564
Because consoomerism is degen and real men would have an F-150 over a girly Mercedes convertible

>>17218564
They have other functions and creature comforts, or for the clothes, fit and design that add to it and even then people can get a cheaper suit and have it look good or still look frumpy in a bad fitting Brooks brothers.

Not like watches where it was one function (tell time) and then using the swooping hand to justify it .

Like I said just admit you got the luxury item for the looks or prestige and not try and justify it with "muh swooping, muh craftsmanship" nonsense.

And either way, all luxury items at that calibre is pretty cringe to begin with unless you are legit rich.

Does anyone have any experience using the fish finder on the casio?

>>17218572
its fake bro it shows fishes in my swimming pool

>>17218502
Hide all charts

>>17218570
my man, do yourself a favour and stop projecting your insecurities all around you

>>17218574
no that’s correct, they’re just invisible fishes but you can catch them using the watch. i have 12 of them.

https://www.tiktok.com/@djdowager/video/7136571182333152513
rolex bros? why didnt they take the box?

Don't know it it's because it was made in the Soviet Union, but it's a crying shame that Vostok's o-ring style seal is not the industry standard for divers.
A rubber gasket kept in place in such a way that you can open and close the caseback as much as you want without compromising water resistance should be talked about in the same breath as screwdown crowns and unidirectional bezels, in my humble opinion.

pardon my English, but are Rolex good watchs?

>>17218596
Agreed, I think the way the crown isn’t directly attached to the stem and therefore you can’t break the movement by hitting the crown is also ingenious, but never going to catch on because muh tactility and people thinking it feels broken when winding.

Still, at least Vostok actually still make tool watches, rather than expensive homages to long since discontinued tool watches

Be honest, this is a pretty decent watch, right?

which model is this multidick dial?

>>17218599
I agree about the crown, but in that case I also can understand why it wouldn't catch on from a marketability perspective.
Still, one of the last greatest brands out there, did you know the applied indices and lume pips are manually applied by russian workers in the Christopol factory?

>>17218602
Yes. Would wear.

>>17218544
this guy gets it

>>17218598
Yes, Rolex is very good for their clientele, they’ve really worked with the insecurity of Rolex customers to provide a bespoke buying experience that actually utilises the insecurity a Rolex watch is supposed to satisfy by making the customer feel like purchasing a Rolex is more than a mere monetary transaction, it’s a symbol of your superiority, you were in a high enough social strata that you were chosen to buy a Rolex.

It works like this
>You want to buy a Submariner, because James Bond wore them in the books and earlier films
>Yeah right though, EVERY schmuck wants to be like James Bond, back of the waiting list sunshine and maybe a pleb like you can have the chance to buy one in 2038
>You get a clever idea though, what if the AD just doesn’t realise how rich and therefore important you are? “Sir, I think I’ll take three oyster perpetuals”
>Oh the AD liked that, he can tell you’ve got some walking around money, up the list you go!
>Perhaps if you start to befriend the AD, you can shower him with information about how important your executive job is and how every year you take the Doxa on a scuba diving holiday, it’s in Bora Bora this year
>AD is rolling his eyes and looking bored, but he spots your wife, yowza!
>This is it anon, time to demonstrate what a chad you are and like a true man you don’t respect women at all
>”would you fuck my wife if I can have a Subby this year?”
>Dingdingding! You go up the list as quickly as the AD’s erection, your heart is pounding as hard and as quickly as the desk in the AD’s back office as you consider how jealous the fellas are going to be on fantasy football night

So yes, very good.

>>17218598
>not overpriced like patek/vc/als
>equal quality
yep its the best watch brand in the world.

>>17218616
I was entertained.

>>17218605
I wish the stole the bezel clamp from Yema, it’s a pretty cool way of securing a bidirectional bezel which is kind of redundant on modern Yemas that already have unidirectional bezels

>>17218574
Maybe you have fish in your pool? The watch can tell.

>>17218472
they used to, from the late 70's to i think 2002. they weren't very popular at the time despite being objectively the best rolex' ever produced

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t0gkzLHONXk
Rate

>>17218633
jlc invicta collab? based

Rolex Invicta collab would be the best.

doez any1 have a casio infographic?
man they came out with some zany stuff

>>17218661
sorry more specifically a guide to their classic digital stuff

Guys, this looks like a reprinted dial to me, but I'm no expert. Anyone here that knows about this stuff?

>>17218672
Looks like a compressed to shit photo from a phone to me. Tell the seller to stop being a poorfag and get a real camera.

>>17218603
Some anniversary one.

>>17218622
Thats actually a brilliant idea.

Why do you nigs keep trying to mess with the BEST chart™?
>Cope if you must and you will.

>>17218596
The explanation is the image itself: it is very ugly to look at, looks like a bad quality filler.

>>17218699
That's retarded, but so is the average consumer. You might be onto something.

>>17218676
That's cute.

>>17218695
Stop posting your doctored chart, you french piece of shit

>>17218699
I think anon is referring to the two-piece caseback that Vostoks have, where the piece that makes contact with the gasket remains still, while a separate ring goes on top and screws down clamping the first piece to the gasket. The benefit being you’re not twisting and tearing the gasket when screwing off the caseback

>>17218710
Yeah, but that only works with the wider, flatter gasket

>>17218710
I understand that, and I think it's clever, BUT my point Is that it's ugly to look at, and therefore swiss watchmaking would never pick it up, as it would probably hurt sales because it's too similar to an ugly filler.

>>17218714
Well it is a tool watch, the ability to service the watch without knackering the gasket surely matters more than the aesthetics behind a solid case back

>>17218719
Not for the luxury niche.

>>17218719
I will reiterate myself: consumers are retarded

>>17218723
You're right. Also, your mom.

>mfw I'm starting to feel the itch to buy another watch, yet again.
Hell never ends, my brothers.

>>17218730
What are you thinking of? An upgrade or a shitter?

>>17218739
Neither. I'm thinking of buying another historic watch, for the collection.

Fucking hell these threads are terrible.
Why do you retards keep shitting these threads with your dumb ass charts and cringe brand worshipping? Half of the posts are about charts YOU ABSOLUTE MORONS. Do you even realize how stupid that is?
You'd think watch threads would attract mature people, with more money and refined taste. But no. You're even less civilized than a pack of feral niggers. Unironicall kill yourselves, you brand whores.

>>17218761

good morning, please don't cry and always refer to the charts

>>17218761
>t. Reads “The Art Of Manliness”

>>17218761
>complains about shitting up the thread
>by shitting up the thread
learn to filter and stop being mad at strangers on the internet

>>17218519
Less crystal glare than sapphire while not being as scratch prone as acrylic. For me, personally, the reduced crystal glare leads me to prefer hardlex on dark dialed Seiko dive watches. Should it ever happen that I damage a hardlex crystal I'll just have to bear the cost of replacing it as a trade off for getting that reduced crystal glare every day. I only get watches with sapphire crystals (that don't have dual layer AR coatings) ok light coloured dials because crystal glare annoys me so much.

Chart question:
My collection is now entirely high-end and ultra-luxury, but I find myself wanting to buy a Cartier...what do I do?

Are you allowed to make steps down?

>>17218549
The smoothest sweep comes from a quartz like a precisionist or a sprong drive. Yes they are ugly but smoother than any mechanical will ever be.

>>17218806
But acrylic is really easy to buff scratches away while having basically no lens glare

>>17218572
It doesn't have a radar or sensor of any kind. I can only logically assume it has a simple calculator similar to a tide graph or moon phase that tells you the best time to fish. If it's anything like the tide graph it will be limited if you can't put your specific location. I think it's just a neat general guide not something exact.

>>17218811
36k is pretty dang smooth also

>>17218815
Most people would rather have something not scratch than be constantly polishing it. It's simply better.

>>17218808
Cuck. Sell them all and just buy the Cartier, you’ve clearly bought them to impress others

cartier more like cucktier

>>17218829
But when you inevitably scratch the mineral glass you have to replace the entire thing, besides it’s just another task of using a watch alongside keeping it wound, setting it every month and setting the date when required

>>17218831
>Coping and seething.

>>17218808
Cartiers just look so based. Their design transcends materialism and luxury. I want one.

>>17218845

I'd rather get a Cartier Santos than any Rolex

polaris anon please post it again
im close to pulling the trigger

>>17218835
Mineral rarely scratches and it if does it's easy to ignore unless you have OCD. Acrylic can also get deep scratches more easily that can't be buffed out without significant effort and loss of material. Those tasks are not equivalent at all. Setting the time and repairing damage are worlds apart.

>>17218849
I don't think that will age well

>>17218815
In my opinion, acrylic is too prone to damage for use in a dive watch context, and that's the only context where I prefer high quality mineral crystals (because dive watches also usually have dark dials and shouldn't have dual layer AR sapphire because of the risk of scratching the coating on top of the crystal). In all other contexts I prefer acrylic or sapphire.

>>17218845
>>17218849
I have my eye on the lacquered Santos Dumont.
I owned a medium Santos and if it was my only watch, it would have been perfect, but as it was, it was too sporty to be my dress watch and it was too dressy to be my casual watch.

The Santos Dumont is much dressier, which is what I'm looking for. These have the Piaget Altiplano movement in them.

>>17218863
Looks like fag shit for gays.

>>17218857

Age well how? It has a PVD bezel so it won't really scratch

Or do you mean my tastes will change? Unlikely

>>17218869
>PVD
>won't really scratch
ummmm anon

>>17218855
>you have to have OCD to care about scratches
>I like mineral crystals because they’re harder to scratch
Okay..

I just don’t see why mineral crystals don’t just get upgraded to sapphire if AliExpress shitters can do it for less than $100 then surely anything at $200 or more should have sapphire, less than that Acrylic is something you can fix at home without needing to pay a watchmaker to replace a scuffed up crystal. Mineral crystals are just a compromise I can’t see a need for in the current year

>>17218544
>The whole idea of the automatic meme is so cringe when the device literally does 1 job, something a $10 watch does more accurately
There are two main sets of reasons that mechanical movements still have a market in watches:

1) It is so cheap to make a decent-ish quartz movement that it ends up strongly encouraging cheaping out on the rest of the watch in a race to the bottom, leading to 99% of quartz watches being cheap trash. Mechanical movements of any half decent level of quality are unavoidably much more expensive to make and thus encourage at least *trying* to make the rest of the watch nice enough to justify the kind of prices that need to be charged. This is the thing that leads into almost all luxury watches being mechanical and the ability of brands to establish themselves making men's jewelry.

2) It's much more interesting and fascinating to most people that a little mechanical machine made up of gears and springs can keep time to better than 99.99% accuracy. It just captures people's imaginations more to see the smooth sweep, hear the tick-tick-tick and know a mechanical machine is causing it. And since even a basic mechanical watch will usually tell the time accurately enough for most people's needs there isn't too big of a functional drawback to get that fascinating quality.

>>17218863
Beautiful. How much?

>>17218596
Agreed. Vostok's approach to the caseback should have been adopted universally for dive watches and it's a shame it wasn't. It's vastly superior to what everyone else uses.

>>17218835
>But when you inevitably scratch the mineral glass
I've been regularly wearing a Seiko solar tuna dive watch with a hardlex crystal for a couple of years now and the crystal still looks brand new. And mind you, I bought that solar tuna specifically to wear in situations where banging the watch into stuff was a risk.

Of course, the tuna style design helps as the crystal does not protrude above the bezel at all, and the bezel has literal armor around it. It makes it functionally impossible to hit the crystal side-on, so unless I'm flapping my arms in some weird way where I could bang the the crystal into something face first, I'm pretty unlikely to damage it. Same idea applies to the SRPH77 I just bought.

>>17218544

Dude, it’s just jewelery. Why do people wear gold necklaces? Diamond rings? It’s the same, which a little bit of autistic engineering in there as well.

>>17218894
Mechanical art

>>17218880
>It's much more interesting and fascinating to most people that a little mechanical machine made up of gears and springs can keep time to better than 99.99% accuracy. It just captures people's imaginations more to see the smooth sweep, hear the tick-tick-tick and know a mechanical machine is causing it. And since even a basic mechanical watch will usually tell the time accurately enough for most people's needs there isn't too big of a functional drawback to get that fascinating quality.

Lmfao, man shut up with that shit. Literally no one genuinely gives a shit about that stuff and clocks (besides a very legitimate autistic few) until they stumbled across a watch forum and those crabs pulled them in and tried justifying that's the magic of spending hundreds or even thousands on a device a $10 one can do better.

If anything it's more of a disappointment that a lot of cheaper watches with a nice looking design are ruined by having an automatic movement than somehting that just werkz and not have to worry about re-adjusting the time all the time.

It's just as bad as the mech keyboard community. Why cant ppl just say they have extra cash which often means your life is scaled up with it to blow on frivolous things for no real good reason. Everyone does it to some extent, it's natural. Like I said, they're a nothing wrong with owning these things but the way people try to romanticise it to justify spending hundreds or thousands on sounds like such a cope most of the time. Just say you liked the look or the brand

"Artisan and craftsmanship" is 99% marketing.

Yet these same people who pull this muh sweeping , muh mechanical gears shit all use battery operated quartz clocks in their homes

>>17218863
These are sold out. Cartier only made 300 of these and they were all gone in 3 days.
Same for the Tank Chinoise.

>>17218905
Also expect Cartier to jack up the price of all their watches by 10%.
The 35mm Santos will be 7700€ in 2 days.
It was 6600€ 9 months ago.

>>17218880
>It is so cheap to make a decent-ish quartz movement that it ends up strongly encouraging cheaping out on the rest of the watch in a race to the bottom, leading to 99% of quartz watches being cheap trash. Mechanical movements of any half decent level of quality are unavoidably much more expensive to make and thus encourage at least *trying* to make the rest of the watch nice enough to justify the kind of prices that need to be charged. This is the thing that leads into almost all luxury watches being mechanical and the ability of brands to establish themselves making men's jewelry.
>quartz are made as cheap as possible but not mechanicals
In my years on /wt/ this is the dumbest things I have ever heard.

>>17218904
>Literally no one genuinely gives a shit about that stuff
And yet there are sizeable communities into mechanical keyboards, mechanical typewriters, clocks, mechanical calculators, etc.

Look, there are plenty of people who are only interested in watches for aesthetics and flexing potential, but that doesn't mean *everyone* who is into mechanical watches is into them for that reason. There is no flexing potential in mechanical calculators and yet those have a whole community of people interested in them, for instance. Actual autists exist.

>>17218904
Cheap watches are generally an eyesore. Mech keyboards are superior in most every way except noise factor.

>>17218909
That is exactly what happened historically to the watch industry after quartz was popularized. A race to the bottom in quartz watches led to flooding the market with cheap crap quartz watches, almost destroying the market for high quality watches and driving a ton of traditional watchmakers into bankruptcy.

>>17218914
Mechanicals were also in a race to the bottom which is precisely why they were destroyed by quartz. It had no effect on high quality watches. Today you can find cheap mechanicals just as easily as cheap quartz. Your argument makes no sense.

>>17218920
>It had no effect on high quality watches.
When i say high quality, I'm not referring to haute horlogerie watches, which were basically unaffected. I'm talking about high quality mass market mechanical watchmakers who mostly all struggled to compete in the quartz age because they could not compete with quartz watches on price, but they had not yet realized that they could pivot to marketing based on luxury.

It was the formation of the Swatch Group out of the assets of a ton of bankrupt brands and their rationalization of manufacturing cost structures through conglomerization and their heavy investment on marketing mechanical watches based on luxury that was central to saving the market for mid to high quality mass market mechanical watches in the face of a quartz race to the bottom.

Cheap mechanical watches were also largely driven out of the market because it was both even cheaper to make quartz movements and because those dirt cheap quartz movements would massively outperform cheap mechanicals.

In the 90s there were very few cheap mechanical watches on the market besides Seikos, Orients, Citizens, and Vostoks, and they all had/have the cheapest possible mechanical movements, made in third world countries, to get to those price points. For many years, those watches were mostly sold in third world countries where getting regular battery changes wasn't considered a good idea but lots of people still knew how to repair cheap mechanicals. Sure, today there are tons of entry level mechanical watches out there aimed at enthusiasts from microbrands and big brands, but that wasn't really the case in the 90s and early 2000s.

>>17218893
That’s pretty anecdotal anon and surely the design of the watch would protect an acrylic crystal as well

>>17218905
Ah well. The rose gold Santos Dumont is still nice.

Opinions on pseudo-vintage watches. Fedora tier or not?

>>17218695
Dude, cut it out with editing the chart. For real.

>>17218932
The Swiss watch industry was always a race to the bottom in costs and quality which is how they destroyed every American watch company like Bulova. Until quartz they were the cheapest watches in the world in quality and cost.

I’m an omega male

>>17218939
>Opinions on pseudo-vintage watches. Fedora tier or not?
Reusing old designs, like picrel, is fine.
Deliberately putting fake aging on the dial like in your pic is cringe.

>>17218682
SBGN009

>>17218985
>quartz

>>17218970
Think you messed up the proportions a bit on that photoshop sport

>>17218898
>Appreciation of horology
>The science of keeping time
>History and heritageh2rk8

Would it be possible to replace a Hamilton Khaki that came with a "disposable" H-10/co7.111 movement with a longer-lasting ETA 2824-2 one when it shits the bed? Movement seems fine so far but if it's gonna shit the bed in 5 years and can't be replaced with something better, I'll say fuck it throw this watch in the trash today and just wear a casio from now on.

>>17219034
Why don't you just fix it? Do you not like the watch?

>>17219034
Yes, they're the same size. Same caliber, same thickness, same canon pinion size. If you swapped it out, however, there'd be a 'dead' click where the you'd normally adjust the date function, but that would go nowhere in a no-date watch like yours. That's the only thing to bear in mind.

>>17219040
No, I really like the watch, it's tough, keeps great time and I want it to outlive me. But I think I'm actually just retarded, because looking it up the movement this thing has is with a regular escapement, not plastic shit (co7.611, not co7.111)

>>17219053
Standard selita movement is probably 160-180. Wonder how much service on that movement costs

Best watch for a sigma male?

>>17219059
guess I'll find out in a few years from now

>>17219034
>Would it be possible to replace a Hamilton Khaki that came with a "disposable" H-10/co7.111 movement with a longer-lasting ETA 2824-2 one when it shits the bed?
Yes it would be easy. You can use an sw200 and a few other more obscure swiss movemnts as well. You can get them pretty cheap new from swiss sellers on ebay. It would be funny to get an undecorated top grade or chronometer grade one.

>>17219047
>If you swapped it out, however, there'd be a 'dead' click where the you'd normally adjust the date function, but that would go nowhere in a no-date watch like yours.
You can just buy a no date version of the movement, they are more obscure and a bit harder to find but they are out there

>>17219073
Cool, so it looks like the movement I have is both higher quality than I thought when I made that post, and easy to replace even if it shits the bed anyway.
Looks like I'm sticking with the hamilton for as long as it'll hold together, then.

The Aquaracer would be a pick up if it was priced as well as the hydroconquest.

>>17219081
Yeah, the watch you have has the 25j version of that movement, so it doesn't use the plastic pallet fork and escapement that the cheaper versions use.

>>17218942
You say this as if it contradicts my points about the 'quartz crisis' but it does not. I am aware that the Swiss used the same strategy against other watchmaking centers. When quartz began to do to them what they'd previously done to others, they tried and failed to compete on price with quartz watches (because quartz watches can intrinsically be made much cheaper than any decent mechanical), in the end they were only saved by pivoting to competing on quality and perceived luxury and status rather than on price, since obviously they couldn't compete successfully that way.

>>17219093
quartz sucks because rolex doens't do it. refer to the chart.

>>17218544

I do what I want with my money, that's why. You can't do shit about it, you are completely impotent and your opinion is like everyone elses' (irrelevant), so why do you care? Why do you let it bother you so much that people buy things you don't like and/or don't agree with? If people have disposable income people will dispose of it through things they enjoy. Period.

>>17219114
>he buys what he wants
>it's not a ROLEX
refer to the chart.

>>17219116

Nah.

Getting that Longines Conquest in less than a month.

>>17218905
No they aren’t, the gold & platinum dumpers were limited, the steel one wasn’t.

>>17219120
Solid watch, anon. Enjoy.

>>17219146
Thanks. Getting it at the airport when I travel.

>>17219149
Is there any benefit to buying at the airport? I guess less duties right? But people buy fragrances at the airport for the same reason and its usually the same price you would find at a department store if not more expensive

>>17219160
Not really, it's just convenient. I don't have an AD near me at all and I have to be at the airport in a month anyway. I'd really like to try it on before purchasing so I'd rather get it there than buying grey.

IO like it.

Poorfag here. Is there a significant difference between a $200 seiko and a $400 Hamilton?
Also, can I wear a khaki field watch in a professional setting/attire? Can I put it on a metal band?

>>17219195
Khaki is good for semi professional/attire yeah. Other than movement/finishing no one is gonna care about hamilton vs seiko irl

>>17219064
Bump
I'm serious, need reqs that go with the grindset

>>17219210
Timex weekender with snoopy on it

Quartz PRX in this colorway, sneed it or chuck it?

>>17219210
Your phone, sigma males don't spend money on jewelry #reinvest #grindset

>>17219216
sneed it all day long

>>17219195
No one cares about your watch unless it's a Rolex anon. Just get the Seiko.

>>17219230
even then, if you live in a city the only people who care about your rolex are people wanting to mug you for it LOL

>>17219210
Since when do sigma males have to ask for recommendations

>>17219216
Chuck it, then sneed it.

>>17219230
>>17219201
For the seiko v. Hamilton question I meant is there a noticeable difference in quality or longevity

>>17219234
Not really. Hamilton has better movement if you get the automatic though.

>>17219195
Get the Hamilton, is a better movement.

>>17219232
This, it's their main characteristic. Just him asking makes it clear he isn't one and doesn't understand one either.

>>17219015
What

anyone have tank watch recommendations?
i'm looking for one that's dirt cheap without being total trash - naturally i looked to Casio™
and i discovered they make this (picture related) but it's quite small (only comes in ladies' size)

>>17218845
it's an incredible design

>>17219421
Seiko SWR049?

It's a hot one today, /fa/ggots. Got to meet a code consultant tomorrow to pry some more of that sweet insurance Jew cheddar out of Cincinnati.
>>17218808
Buy what you like
>>17218857
>>17218869
>>17218872
Pretty sure it's ALDC, which is supposed to be way more durable than PVD.
>>17218970
Based Ass n' Titties enjoyer

>>17219438
Age well as in it's trendy and not timeless. Or tasteful.

>>17219443
yeah, blue watches are just a fad

>>17219436
not "dirt cheap" but thank you

>>17219462
Sure it's on trend right now, but calling it a fad might be too much. Blue done well will always look good

>>17219438
I enjoy your job updates but that Omega looks so plain and cheap it makes a Rolex Explorer look exciting.

>>17219478
>Blue done well will always look good
No argument there.

>>17218494
>Hublot high end luxury

>>17219478
>>17219484
Are blue dials considered dressy or can they be worn everyday? Obviously I'm not talking about blue dials on divers

>>17219462
The bezel is the problematic area. Blue dial looks good.

>>17218863
Just stunning. I'm having a hard time choosing a favorite.

>>17219494
I think blue es more flexible. It can be dressed up or down depending on the outfit and the case shape. Works well as everyday too.

>>17219500
>I think blue es more flexible
So are there dial colors that are considered inflexible?

>>17219502
Yes. Green, red, yellow, orange, etc...

>>17219502
Dark blue is more flexible, light blue isn't.

>>17219510
orange/green can work but yellow/red hell fucking no

Why would anyone ask questions to a retard that says blue is a fad and rocks some plain Jane omega lol

>>17219530
>plain jane

Ook ook OOGA BOOGA

>>17219534
??

That’s a super old phrase, retard

>>17219438
ignore the haters. that’s a 36mm correct? I think its an understated but fun reference.

>>17219534
ESL schizo

>>17219488
Yes.

>>17219559
Oooh blow

>>17219559
...the time, Mattia?

>>17219564
It's chazzin time.

>>17219480
Work beater, friend. It's just a nice work beater.

>>17219510
Inflexible as in these can only be casual or only dressy?

>>17219093
Mechanicals can be made just as cheaply as quartz.

>>17219462
They were a fad a few years back. They are over-saturated now.

>>17219564
>7:01
It's actually labeled if it wasn't a picture for ants.

>>17219586
Ya, the worlds fav colour by a large margin is definitely a fad, you retard

>>17219598
its a liberal color associated with anti trump

>>17219613
Is that what you see/think when looking at a watch? Lol

It’s kinda funny if y’all do.. even republicans wear blue

>>17219614
Cope, if you must. And you will.

>>17218719
>the ability to service the watch without knackering the gasket
Who cares? You're servicing it anyways

>>17219616
charttard on a whole new level of stupid

>>17219484
Nnngggg
This is my dreamwatch, but I'll never have one. :(

>>17219613
>associated with anti trump
Now I want a blue watch even more.

Cope, if you must. And you will.

>>17219627
Don't see the problem with this. At least he has Rolex.

>Saul wearing a LED watch
>LED watches are now based.

niggers

>>17219613
>a liberal color
This must be bait.

>>17219484
Can't believe Kevin O'Leary put a red band on this, the blue on blue is the best part

>>17219640
Not bait, just retardation.

talk me out of it bros

>>17219682

i want nato wearers to leave

Hey, anyone got any idea what model and year this is? Or whether it looks genuine at all?

>>17219715
Just doodle some numbers on a matchbox and wrap it in tin foil lmfao.

>>17219682
Why is it named after a color but isn't in that color?

>>17219733

That's a worn example. Brand new it says BuKhaki on the dail.

Guys I wanna show you my watch but i'm afraid you'll think it's cringe

>>17219756
Don’t fear anyone. Post your watch.

>>17219765
Love this little guy. Has everything I could ever want in a watch. Analog but with digital that isn't in the way and a stopwatch and timer.

>>17219756
Post it already. We all cope and cringe in here.

>>17219799
Neat. Dimensions?

How much does a service for a Seiko Turtle cost? How often would it need to be serviced?

>>17219811
idk but I need to send my 775 back under warranty. Had a very small impact (baby shoe tapped it) and it stopped working 5 min later.

>>17219811

Every other week, about $15

Whatcha think of these rings? Is it just a fad?

>>17219822
those are cute

>>17219822
How's the wait list on Rolex rings?

>>17219598
In watches? Yes it was a fad a couple years ago. Weren't you around?

>>17219828

I'm getting around the waitlist by letting the AD have my daughter for next weekend

>>17219829

dont fads imply they were short lived, I think blue watches are still a thing

>>17219836
Not like they were. The blue fad was before the green fad and before the similar tiffany dial fad. There have been blue watches before and there will be after but there was a time when everyone had a blue dial around the same time. I wish I had the image of all the steel blue dial watches.

>>17219820
I don't know why I thought they would be more durable but makes sense. I might never buy an automatic lol, doesn't seem worth it.

>>17219579
Not even close. Do you comprehend how many quartz movements are made for under $10/each? Mechanical movements can never be made as cheaply as cheap quartz movements.

>>17219845
Just don't buy shitters. In order to get a really good mechanical watch you need to spend around 8k or more.

>>17219842
nigger

Look at this shitty thread about Rolex

https://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=870158

>>17219853

Every good model should come in blue, what's your point?

>Sent from my Iphone using TapAtalk!

>>17219847
yes they can

>>17219856
>here's the story about how I spent an entire afternoon of my life chasing a product I know isn't in stock

>>17219853
Thanks friend I couldn't find it.

>>17219867
Now post all the sub $2 quartz watches on the same site. In China they make $1 quartz movements by the truck full, but they don't make $1 mechanical movements.

>>17219867
>>17219873
My mistake that is the price for the strap. I knew the watch was too nice. This is one of the cheaper ones I could find. The ali site is fucking shit.

>>17219850
>8k or more.
not really.

>>17219064
>>17219210

>lost my citizen field watch I've had for 7 years
Feels bad

>>17219926
How on earth do you lose a watch? Did he strap broke, or the pin?

>>17219926
rip

Im looking for a watch to wear until I'm dead that matches nearly every outfit. Mostly casual but sometimes business causal.

Somebody show me something please. Ive been looking at seikos cause i cant afford a regular ole rolex with that window for the date.

Maybe I'll get a vintage elgin

>>17219988

>>17219999
based quads

>>17219988
>watch to wear until I'm dead
>vintage
Unless you're planning to die in a couple of years, max, vintage is NOT the way to go for an everyday watch.
If you can push your budget a bit higher, maybe you can get a second hand Tudor Black Bay 41mm. Looks well in any ocasion imho.

>>17219999

>>17220017
Plus, you can choose from black or blue and it has 15atm resistance.

>>17220017
Yeah this one looks good. I'll consider it.
Tudor has been on my radar for a bit.

>>17220025
>
iots a cope watch. refer to the chart.

>>17220022
With a green strap.

>>17220022
>>17220028
This ugly monstruosity will never last a lifetime. LOL

>>17220030
It's a good thing I posted here hahaha

They look great.

>>17219926
which model

>posting the worst chart

>>17220022
>that crown position

>>17220063
mogs rolex

>>17219421
any other recommendations?

>>17220063

>Paris, LA, NY

why would I care what time it is in those 3rd world infested shitholes?

>>17220075
good to know when charttard is gonna wake up

>>17220074
It’s so pathetic it’s actually charming

>>17220074
>>17219421
Google vintage Bucherer Santos

>>17220141
cheers mate

>>17219913
What's the watch second from the left?

>>17220219
Seiko SARB003, the japanese answer to the Rolex Oyster Perpetual. A much better watch than the swiss if you ask me.

>>17219559
now if only the intricate mechanism was stored in a non clown looking watch. Then it'd be worth actually making it.

Check this out bros:

https://instagram.com/watch_crime_ldn?igshid

Wearing a watch is no longer safe.

>>17220222
>A much better watch than the swiss if you ask me.

>>17220245
I don't have an insta, maybe post some highlights for us?

>>17220248
you dont have a watch too

Wtf did Tudor grow some balls for once and actually make a good watch.

>39mm
>12mm thick
>All titanium
>T-fit
>Matte ceramic bezel
>Time only

>>17220249
I have 3
You might try "and you don't have a watch either" in the future, the "too" gives off major esl vibes.
>>17220259
Very nice

>>17220259
damn mite cop

>Did Tudor grow some balls and finally make a pelagos for wristlets?

>>17220259
I’m glad my wristlet frens can enjoy the glory known as Pelagos now too.

>>17220259
Nice Ro... oh.

>>17220274
Has literally never happened before

>>17220259
Damn and they didn’t fuck it up with faux patina. I might actually have to change my next watch plans to this.

>>17220272
>>17220273
The current Pelagos is absurd lmao.

>>17220219
op here, I find it funny how people always confuse the seikos models, its SUR309

>>17220259
Why would you want titanium? It scratches to shit in minutes.

>>17220249
got eem

>>17220296
Not compared to a Sea-Dweller Deepsea

>>17220283
Good shout, can’t stand fauxtina

>>17220304
No it doesn't.
Numbnuts.

>>17220259
I'm impressed except I hate the ugly hands and indices. Also why do they have to model it on females? It's not fair wristletbros.

>>17220333
>why are women modeling for women watches

>>17219913
That's honestly a nice collection. I like japshit.

thoughts on a Girard 1966 vs a JLC master ultra thin? which one would you guys go for? or am is this just coping over my inability to afford a VC patrimony?

>>17220333
>Also why do they have to model it on females? It's not fair wristletbros.
Kek at your wristlet tears.

>>17220259
looks great

>>17220349
JLC Master Ultra Thin is based and segs.
I'd get one if I wasn't a poorfag.

>>17220338
Rude. Be nice to rolexbros.

>>17219913
9/10 desu

>>17219913
I bought and returned that green Seiko last Christmas. Too flashy, accentuated the cheapness imo. That Casio diver looks pretty good ngl.

Hey watch heads? Clock gobbling faggots? I don't what you call yourselves. Anyways I fell down the watch retard rabbit hole a bit, I'm not going to start collecting but I did want to get a nice watch with a bronze case cause they seemed snazzy. Of the bronze watches around these days which are reasonably serviceable to fix without breaking the bank and will last a long time? If it helps I don't care about movement autism so if it looks nice and is either manual or quartz thats fine.

Oris Pointer Date Bronze

>>17220379
>>17220385

>>17220379
>bronze
>repair costs
I smell so much disappointment in your future it's unreal. Good luck in your endeavors but I get a feeling you will be learning a lot of difficult lessons.

>relative thrifting and brings home some dead watches for a couple bucks
>throw a battery in the timex
>it's a fake chinese timex for a model that doesn't otherwise exist besides chinese fakes

Why make the fake of a 20 dollar timex?

>>17220259
I'll wait a year or two and get it at a discount from Chrono24. Their watches usually go for 300 - 500 dollars less. I'm actually surprised that their aren't as many third worlders seething and calling this a "cope watch" this time.

>>17220413
There are fakes of $10 casios. It's hard to fathom but there are places in the world where an F91W is a luxury item.

>>17220259
>I'll wait a year or two and get it at a discount from Chrono24. Their Tudor watches usually go for 300 - 500 dollars less, and comes new with papers and everything. Since we all know that the uneducated dealer will try to sell at MSRP because of the associations with Rolex.

>>17220259
I'll wait a year or two and get it at a discount from Chrono24. Their Tudor watches usually go for 300 - 500 dollars less, and comes new with papers and everything. Since we all know that the uneducated dealer will try to sell at MSRP because of the associations with Rolex.

>>17220420
Weird. I mean the watch seems fine, movement is a loud ass quartz, digital screen still works although the date feature didn't account for leap years. For all the effort they put in they could have just thrown some chink brand on it, undercut timex and sold it to consumers directly.

>>17220259
Finally a Tudor worth considering.

>>17220413
Most chinks are still living in third world conditions despite the glitz and glamor of their major cities. 20 Dollars is a lot to those people, and chinks would rather spend like 3 bucks for a fake than pay the full 20.

>>17220426
5 RMB or 50 Cents is basically minimum wage for them, since the government hire their online trolls for that amount. Puts in the perspective how poor a good majority of them are.

>>17220424
That's something I always think about but I come to the conclusion it's easier to sell a fake from a brand people already know than a noname. Brands and marketing are a very powerful thing.

>>17220426
You can sort of say the same thing about plenty of western countries as well to be fair.

what watch box do you use? I want to get one for ~20$, found one for 6 watches+3 sunglasses which is pretty cool, it has window glass but I think I prefer a watch box with a mirror, what do you think? also post your watch boxes

>>17220454
Anything cheap chinese box off ebay below 20 is good. I'm trying to limit the amount of watches I have and just have a beater and a grail for certain scenarios.

I want a 38mm ana-digi with lumed hands and hour marks. Does it exist?

>>17220488
Yes. Google Citizen Ana-Digi.

>>17218970
I’m flattered and also slightly disturbed that you used my watchbox as your background. Nice watch though.

new
>>17220550
>>17220550
>>17220550
>>17220550
>>17220550

>>17220454
I probably have the exact one that you've found now, it's good enough, sure the materials aren't that high quality, but what matters is that it's a pretty convenient and compact way to store this crap
small mirrors are for women