/fa/ - Fashion

Cope if you must and you will

Pick one.

>>17238943
um sorry but dive watches are kind of gay to like

>>17238943
Pelagos every time.

>new CWard
>do the currency trick
>price still comes out to $800 with steel bracelet
Maaan I just don't know if they're really worth as much as people say they are. I feel like there are microbrands out there coming out with shit that's nearly identical for half the price these days.

I'm looking to buy a watch with a yellow dial, does anyone know of anything that looks better than the Doxa Sub 200?

>>17238958
>sub
>doesn't buy a brand with sea-related logo

>>17238943
Pelagos, square markers fit the snowflake hand better than the mess of shapes that is the BB58.

>>17238943
neither

do you know that the prices of the famed (and also out of production) skx have dipped back down to $800?

>>17238962
Fuck off, weeb

I have never seen a Rolex in person.
I have never seen a photo of a Rolex with a bezel moved from its default position.

>wearing a rolex when tudor exists
?

>>17238963
wearing a seiko (especially a famous one) will win you admiration from all watchgeeks

wearing a tudor will only bring you questions of why you didn't buy a rolex or a grand seiko

>>17238968
Seikofag cope

>>17238969
does your watch look like a million bucks? I don't think so!

>>17238971
le cuckold magazine

still looking for a good sturdy steel bracelet watch, 38mm to 40mm, preferably 10ATM, up to $5k, after learning that TAG Heuer is not worth it. Any recommendations? I dislike diver bezels

>>17238968
>or a grand seiko
lmao who buys that shit

>>17238976
patek nautilus

>>17238959
It's been a while since I've seen a date window that didn't have a white or black background. They don't usually colormatch them with the dial like that.

>>17238968
>wearing a seiko (especially a famous one) will win you admiration from all watchgeeks
Why would I want that?

>>17238978
literally everyone

>60 years after Seiko’s creation of Grand Seiko, and just a decade after it was launched outside its native Japan, the brand has overtaken some of Switzerland’s most famous and venerable luxury watchmakers to break into and climb the top 10 marques in the United States.

>Remarkably, this success is not just in the sub-$3,000 market, but also at the ultra-luxury end of the business for watches priced at over $30,000.

https://usa.watchpro.com/in-depth-grand-seikos-remarkable-usa-growth-story

Is there any data on energy requirements/needs/losses for different parts of the movement?

>>17238976
Blacked bay

>>17238988
Maybe in Daniels' Watchmaking book, or other similar books assuming they're out there.

>>17238987
>amerisharts

I literally do not need more (and likely you don't either)
>countdown timers
>hour signals
>in sync with public transport
>water resistant
>don't care about smashing it in to a wall because it will survive
The perfect beater, and the perfect watch for my job

>>17238943
Left is based.

>>17239016
lol stupid poorfag thinks watches are about utility

>>17238971
>Source: hodonkey
LEL, you retard

>>17239016
Got this yesterday. Took 2 months to arrive from Japan. My favourite module. Has 2 stopwatches, wt, low temp screen, same as mudman.

>>17238976
Pelagos 39mm

>>17239016
At least get the up to date module that fixes the stopwatch.

>>17238987
>Imagine coming from burgerland and spending your dollars in a shit watch instead of saving for the inevitable valve replacement surgery.
Ameritards, really?

>>17239029
hideous stuff

>>17239016
>and likely you don't either
I'm neither a person of obscure dermis nor a white trash hillbilly or yellow virgin. Sorry, anon.

>>17238988
if you mean energy loss through friction the swiss calculate a 10% loss for every gear stage

It has been almost a year since I last bought a watch. You too can beat this addiction. I believe in you anon.

>>17239029
This module like the mudman is one of the best in any casio. It doesn't show the current time in the stopwatch mode unfortunately which kills it for me.

anyone know this feel? I was reluctant to buying a $250 watch because it's expensive, to wearing $1000 watch casually, and I'd even wear more expensive watches without minding if they take scratch. It's a liberating experience

>>17238941
>Dior, Louis Vuitton, Ralph Lauren
Why aren't these in Ultra Luxury?

>>17239048
I like to coonsummmm, anon.

>>17239041
I'm specifically interested in the press fit hands stage. If i understand correctly the hour hand sits on the minute hand and is applying 'braking' to it.

>>17239052
I felt the same way and I thought there was no limit but I reached my cap at $2000. I don't know if I just found the right watches or if I just realized I'm poor and just because I can buy a $20k watch doesn't mean I should.

>>17239056
Dior

>>17239056
Ralph Lauren

>>17239063
That's what I mean.. It has way more than the 26 jewels in a Grand Seiko. Plus they're quartz, so probably much more accurate than most Rolexes

>>17239064
Holzkern

>>17239056
Louis Vuitton
There is more to watches than what you know, anon.
>Three high-end watches from brands normies associate with lesser watches.

>>17239065
That's a MECHANICAL watch with ow inspiring artistry on the dial, not quartz.

>>17239061
Poor people don't buy $2000 watches. You either massively overspent or are lying about being poor. You's a bitch ass nigga

>>17239065
>He thought quartz could be high-end.

>>17239075
fp journe bros....

>>17239048
I haven't bought one since a little over a year ago when I got my Orient Bambino. Having an automatic watch that's so cheap I don't have to worry about damaging it has led to me enjoying it more than other watches that cost me far more.

>>17238982
don't like the look of it

>>17238990
>>17239031
looks okay, but why should I not take a Rolex instead? I thought the explorer or date just are in that price range

>>17239058
Me too but I realized I don't need to buy every watch I like. I can enjoy and ogle watches without owning them. It took a couple of mistakes but I'm happy with my collection right now and can save money if there is something I really need to own.

>>17239064
>movement supplier copy pasted sellita but it had a subdial your designer wasn't told about
>"Timmy, remove out the gear connecting that subdial, and print RL on it"
>35000$
Like I said, Ultra Luxury & handmade (some guy had to remove the gear manually)

>>17239090
holy fuck & I just noticed how misaligned the screws are KEK

>>17239059
thats not quite right you see on the pivot of the minute wheel sits the cannon pinon via friction fit and the minute hand is pressed onto that cannon pinon. the hour hand is pressed onto the hour wheel which is just placed ontop the canon pinon loosly and is held by a washer and the dial. also the hour hand is pressed on firts so it sits under the minute hand

will a matte steel bracelet work on a titanium watch without looking odd? already have a strap with a shiny steel clasp for it and it looks slightly different, but acceptable because it's not right next to eachother

>>17239074
I make minimum wage and spent easily $4000 one year on watches. It's not hard to save $10k a year on minimum wage for hobbies and leisure. The only way that's not possible is if you have kids or another hobby is sucking you dry.

Should I buy a vintage leather bomber jacket?

To wear with raw denim and iron rangers

>>17239105
sir this is a watch thread

>>17239105
wrong thread nvm

>>17238962
>$800
>For a $300 (now sub$150) watch

>>17239105
wrong thread but yes (unles you are a manlet)

I'm about to pop my watch cherry with a Breguet
should I?
I never paid this much for a watch.

>>17239112
Yes

>>17239112
just so you know the company’s name is pronounced bre-gay.

>>17239110
wrong thread but I am 6 feet and have a beard

>>17239112
Salty looking moonman

>>17239112
or perhaps this instead? I love both, but I feel like buying both is kinda degenerate

>>17239126
inshallah you buy the other one and not this wack ass dial

>>17239141
Mashallah brother you convinced me. Takbir

>>17239126
>that date window
lol

>>17239112
>about to pop my watch cherry with a Breguet
>should I?

do you mean you've NEVER worn a watch before or is this just your firdt substantial purchase?

anyway that thing is like 42mm iirc. be sure you actually do want it

>>17239088
>looks okay, but why should I not take a Rolex instead? I thought the explorer or date just are in that price range
lmao no. The Pelagos 39 is 4k.
The Explorer and the DJ are almost 7k.
Also good luck finding one of these at retail.

Cheap digital Casio bros? What are your viewing angles like? I got an A168 and it has pretty bad viewing angles, with the numbers being a bit faded head on and completely gone when viewed from the top. Is that normal?

>>17239126
That's nice
I like their guilloche dials also
But love breguet numerals
They are curiously proud of the 38 hour power reserve on the 1st one
Date kills the enamel one, get the small seconds version
Or a tradition

Second one still hasn't shipped :(

>>17239035
I hope they roll the updates out to their entire range

>>17239112
Remember to post a picture on here after you get it

>>17238938
Why are Indian hands so sexy

>>17239202
good morning sirs

>>17239174
Be thankful. It's shit, you don't need two.

Quartz bros, why are my shitters losing 30s/month. Guess I'll stick to atomic quartz from now on.

>>17239214
I replaced the battery in my 9f at the beginning of March, it's about 3.5ish seconds fast currently

Do people really think this looks good?

Fuck I wouldn't even wear a Vacheron if I got one for free.

>>17239203
Thank you sir but respectful nighting here ok? Good night my respected sir

Going to get my first watch. Help me dice between these 3.

>>17239222
Get a Vacheron Constantin Americana instead you bitch ass nigga

What does /wt/ think of the seiko 5 sports? Should I cop?

>>17239220
is this the latest poorfag cope

>>17239220
VC certainly has nice watches. this isn't one of them

SPROOOOOONG DRIIIIIIIIIIIIIOOOOOIIIIIIIIIIWE

>zaratsu poooooooolishiiiiiiiiiiing

>>17239112
>I never paid this much for a Swatch.
FTFY

>>17238938
Hamilton khaki automatic in 38mm. Perfect fit, comfortable bracelet, and looks amazing.

>>17239257
quite hideous

>>17239100
Why would you willingly make minimum wage?

>>17239112
Great watchmaker both mechanically and stylistically. Right at home among patek and lange imo, although theres an argument to be made that the finishing quality isnt quite on par with PP and Lange

Although for you it would be sort of like getting a ferrari as a first car. A watch like that does require some babying, and I would be selective about where and how often I wear it. Its not a watch that will do well with bumps, shock, or scratches

ROLEX ROLEX ROLEX ROLEX ROLEX ROLEX ROLEX ROLEX ROLEX ROLEX ROLEX ROLEX

Don't touch the Timex.

>>17239220
The Patrimony needs an update or something.

I went gray for my Rolexes. To me there’s just too much uncertainty with dealing with ADs in NYC. I have spending history with one of them and asked for a sea dweller and it’s been a while and still no word.

Dealing with the ADs to me is just incredibly shot.

>>17239312
the master is too modern and sharp looking for vacheron to just outright copy, and this is coming from a MUT owner.

>>17239322
You have to keep going in over and over and keep reminding them you want one and are a local. It’s bullshit bit paying gray premium is gayer

>>17239325
They should just copy the dial layout, the Patrimony perpetual looks weird because it looks imbalanced and the subdials are too close together.

>>17239220
All of these kind of perpetual calendar displays look ugly to me.

>>17239349
yeah, as far as vacheron perpetual calendars go the overseas perpetual calendar is a much nicer looking watch

>>17239357
It’s funny because it’s essentially the same movement in the Overseas and Patrimony perpetual. Presumably that’s why it doesn’t really look like it fits and why the Patrimony is 40.5mm, because they wanted to use (almost) the exact same movement. It does look a lot better in the Overseas.

Watch you're wearing, how much you make
>pic related
>$130k

>>17239228
the dial looks pretty busy to me, but it's a good cheap watch

>>17239367
cant believe people actually buy devilles

>>17239367
Nice!

>>17239401
Eh, I wanted a sub-40mm GMT that wasn't 14mm+ thick from a reliable brand. There really isn't many options that meet all that criteria.

>>17239420
Only other option I could find was pic related, but it's a microbrand with questionable longevity.

>been waiting for "the call" for 7 months
>get a call telling me it's something i'd REALLY like to see
>have to fly to an airport but it's no biggie
>finally get through and get to the duty free section after a 6 hour flight and customs
>they show me a fucking yachtmaster instead of the seadweller
FUCK i hate playing AD games

>>17239423
I'd get a yachtmaster 37mm over a Submariner or Seadweller

>>17239222
Middle,

>>17239343
Yeah I get that. One of the ones I got was the sea dweller but I got it for close to retail and traded in my Tudor I didn’t want to the guy privately.

The other was a white dial skydweller, and I paid well over retail for it. Reason being, SkyD is the least produced watch and it’s my understanding you just can’t get one white without having a purchase history. Do you have a take on that? I can still sell it for what I paid for it.

I won’t lie too and tell all of you that I don’t like the idea of begging and badgering for a watch. Buy gray, overpay, but get it today. Buy white, wife’s butthole no longer tight, at least my wallet isn’t as light.

>>17239471
How does the sd wear?

>>17239488

>>17239494
I wish Rolex would release more weird watches like this but I never see Skydwellers so maybe it's hard for them to justify. I don't think I have ever seen one in person.

>>17239488
Not sure if you mean the SeaD or SkyD.


>>17239496

They are the most complicated Rolex has to offer. I’m not sure why they are so rare, might be combination of the level of complication and demand. They are definitely unusual to see, I have never seen anyone else wear one in real life either.

>>17239496
>but I never see Skydwellers so maybe it's hard for them to justify.
I don't think they sell many of them
>>17239506
>I have never seen anyone else wear one in real life either.
Its too bad, they are on a whole different level in terms of gmt annual calendar watches. Super impressive design and functionality. I wonder if they would sell better if they were a mm or two smaller but i imagine they wanted to prioritize legibility and also i might just think that cause im a wristlet.

>>17239016
no better birth control than a shitty digital watch on some geek's 4 inch wrist

Is 47.5mm lug to lug too much for my 6.25inch wrist?

>>17239581
Probably not but it depends on whether your wrist is more round or oval shaped. It's probably going to be about at the upper limit

>>17239584
It's more oval shaped, the projected width measures 50mm.

>>17239166
Yeah you get used to it because that is not how you look at a watch. Trust the process. I was like you before. I kind of freaked out. Then after use you realize you look at the watch from bellow at an angle and that is how it's designed to look best.

>>17239088
If you like paying gray dealer prices go ahead

>>17239193
It was a weird period where Casio said "people would rather measure to 1/100 of a second for 24 hours than know what time it is." Most watches are fine but a notable one that need an update is the GW-6900 which has exactly the same functions as the GW-M5610 but with a different display. It's a cool watch but it's dormant and it doesn't look like they know what to do with it.

>>17239546
There’s just a whole lot more going on with the SkyD that would make it reasonable to think the size was due to complications. It’s the only watch I would pay so much over retail for. I will also add it’s not a photogenic watch but much more special in real life to wear. Few of them made, few watch enthusiasts wrists it can fit, expensive, etc. makes it so rare.

>>17239257
A diver bracelet in a field watch.
That's a no for me, but if you like it tho ..

>>17239614
yeah, the ones from the 80s and 90s are are around 6k, I checked it.

Give it to me straight bro.

How bad is the yellowing on those transparent G shock?

white or black dial?

>>17239638

>>17239639

this pic is better so to be fair:

>>17239646

>>17239639
How much?

>>17239652

22k, "10 year" wait. 45% of deposit now. My estimate is that they are just saying that to stop further orders, as it's just a 2 man shop.

So which color do you like more?

>>17239016
But it's so ugly

>>17239660
Imagine being stuck making the same watch over and over for a decade

>>17239660
lmfao you can't be fucking serious it looks like a random $150 watch ahahahahhhaa

Buy micro.

>>17239673
FARTER

>>17239673
fugly modernist crap

>>17239672

seethe poorfag. I am just asking which one looks best not that I am going to buy one

>>17239679
go fuck yourself retard who the fuck cares you can get a longines or some shit like that for $150 on alibaba

>>17239680

spoken like a man of low quality, with no appreciation for nice things. Enjoy being poor and bitter for the rest of your days

>>17239676
Let me guess, you wear some shit ass Casio or Seiko lmao

>>17239683
all of my watches are over 5 figures.

>>17239682
Tell me why this is "nice" except for the price tag, I'll wait.

>>17239682
>>17239679
https://www.phillips.com/detail/PATEK-PHILIPPE/CH080116/135

Too poor for the real thing so you have to buy a shitty $10k fake?

green or gray

>>17239691

you're the one 1) samefagging 2) bringing up $150 longines shitters

>>17239660
White

what's the most expensive watch ever bought and shown on here?

>>17239706
My favorite was a VC cow horn

>>17239696

green. Black may be interesting as well

>>17239703

Interesting. I thought the same but by less of a margin than I recently thought.

>>17239706

Have seen somebody post some 30k+ lange

>>17239706
Some poster had an extensive collection of incredibly rare vintage pieces, but he hasn't posted in a few years and i cant recall the specifics.

>>17239702
Literally every watch like that is the same from $150 to $1.5mil yeah.

>>17239702
charttard you always samefag

>>17239639
nice calatrava homage, looks better in black (much like the original)

Rolex.

>>17239706
I remember a datograph, of some variety
>>17239743
Which ref has breguet numerals

trump.

>>17239757
See >>17239691 retarded lazy illiterate moron.

>>17239777
They're both clearly homages you cretin, stop being so uppity

>>17239636
It's bad. It's going to yellow in a few months, I guarantee it. If you are concerned about yellowing don't get a transparent watch. The only reason you should buy a transparent watch is if you like the end result.

>>17239805
Calatrava with Breguet numerals is a homage of Calatrava with Breguet numerals?

>>17239827
Those numerals aren't pateks to begin with

>>17239174
hey thats my first real watch! Its even got the older higher beat movement

How to pull off a pocket watch at this time and age?

>>17239839
you dont

>>17239577
>No better birth control than being a man who cares about watches, what other men look like and who argue on 4chan
ftfy

3 more days until it arrives

>>17239824
Is there a way to get rid of the yellowing?

>>17239850
I have the reverse display one and love it

>>17239854
pics?
I ordered it 2 - 3 days ago and it's already gone from japan to france, priority shipping is insane

>>17239839
Steampunk hobo

>>17239851
No but you can prevent it. Step 1: don't expose it to sunlight. Step 2: don't let it touch your skin. All joking aside I have heard people use some sort of peroxide with minimal results. In my opinion any efforts are not worth it and it wont prevent it from yellowing again.

>>17239860
Makes sense, cheers anon

>>17239174
Why do you want two anyway, are you buying one to wear and one to display or something like that?

>>17239851
Bright Invisalign tablets I bet

>>17239222
Get the green one, the other two look bland and soulless.

>>17239577
I have no way to prove it but three days a go I fucked a girl and spent the whole night wearing it

>>17238974
>>17239027
excellent rebuttals, you humongous faggots

>>17239933
Show me a million dollar watch with that style of day date

>>17239222
Green but lose the leather strap
It looks stupid on a field watch

Post you goals

>>17239978
It’s a nice goal anon. The el primero is beautiful.

A nice dress watch like this or a Patek would be a goal of mine. I have mostly flashy divers.

should i get a watch if i'm a wristlet

>>17239997
Of course, there's plenty of great small watches out there. How small are we talking?

>>17239978
For me it’s the Omiwatari desu

>>17239998
6.5" but i think it looks worse because i also have large hands. i'm not sure if i should draw attention to that area

>>17240006
That's still a pretty normal size. Perfect for a classic sports wach.

>>17240006
That's fine, you can wear most watches without issue.

>>17240015
>>17240010

I have close to an 8 inch wrist and am cut off from more than half of luxury watches imo. 6.5 would cut you off from maybe anything above a 42 mm give or take. Your wrist would allow most luxury watches which tend to fall closer to 40mm if anything.

If I want a watch for every day use during all seasons, which safe color should I be looking for? Blue, white, or black?

>>17240028
Any of the three is fine, green too

>>17239978

>>17239978
I have a few actually

>>17240010

>>17240047
Ya know honestly, the tudors which do their own thing and don’t look like Rolex homages are so chill.

>>17239978
want to find this one on the used market and I want a 35mm tissot prx

>>17240044
What’s the reference number on this?

>>17240032
Thanks. I guess I'll stick with a safe blue.

>>17240003

you can just buy this watch though

Pateks are very nice but I’m always blown away by how much they cost. I don’t think I could ever afford one even as an old man. I’m curious what the future of a brand like Lange will hold with the quality they are producing, and if one day they will be held in a similar regard. They’re just so gorgeous and you really get what you pay for without the hype premium.

So much beauty, feels like a shame sometimes that I went to with the omega Sedna, and Rolexes as my luxury choices but I figure one day I can sell them and a watch like this would suit me when I’m older. One can dream I guess.

>>17239850

Its allright, more like a sidegrade. I bought it to wear it and nothing else but it ended up in my rotation. The light is absolute dogturdshit and the buttons very hard to press.

>>17240078
SBGW231

>>17240112
I hold Lange in higher regard because they don't cut corners on their entry level models. Don't get met started on the Patek seal - what a joke.

>>17240130
Cheers
That’s a very nice dress watch. I was looking at some of their HAQs. This fits the bill too for what I’m looking for.

>>17240110
It’s very tempting right now with the exchange rates. I might just say fuck it and pull the trigger. There might be no better time to buy one.

>>17240133
I would actually like to get you started because I’m interested.

>>17239833
Its the exceedingly hard to find quartz version
>>17239883
That's exactly right anon

>>17240142
Patek spent a very long time at the top. Vacheron was an etablisseur for the vast majority of their history and AP has always been the sort of odd man out of the three, epitomized by their repeated failure of the last two decades to create a new identity for themselves apart from the Royal Oak.

In the early 2000s, while VC was ramping up their in-house movement divisions and AP was stumbling around, Patek started becoming more and more in demand. Maybe it was the "You never own a Patek" ad campaign started in 96, or maybe it was the fact that rappers started mentioning the brand. Regardless, their demand surged and has continued surging ever since. That may be relevant depending on how conspiratorially minded you are.

Around 2009 Patek announced they were abandoning the Geneva Seal. The Geneva Seal stipulates that movements must be made in Geneva and has lots of requirements on movements, the most difficult of which have to do with hand finishing techniques and particularly removing instances of machine marking from movements. The explanation Patek gave was that the Geneva Seal only applied to the movement and did not sufficiently measure the accuracy of the movement. The Patek seal would guarantee a standard more strict than COSC and would apply to the whole watch rather than just the movement.

That all sounds well and good. It's a little dodgy to certify your own watches with a seal you just made up, but it's Patek Philippe. The greatest and most prestigious watch brand in the world. If anyone should have a seal, it's them; however, Patek had been doing some shady things in the background. When they released the 5711, they got rid of the iconic monobloc design. Why? Easier to scale up production. Then in 2012 they announced that the Nautilus would no longer have screwed links, they would have pins. It wasn't long until people realized that the Patek seal requirements were missing some things.

>>17240196
The Patek seal didn't require that they remove machining marks. A glaring omission. You can find many examples online of Patek owners displeased with obvious machining marks on their movements. Let's set that aside. Here's a new 6119. A pretty decent looking movement on first glance from afar. See anything missing? I do; where are the interior angles? This is a $30,000 watch, and realistically you're probably going to pay more. This is a new release from Patek and an update to one of their most iconic and recognizable watches. Maybe that's not fair. It's an "entry-level" Patek made of precious metal and is a simple three handed watch. You can't expect them to really go all out on such a basic piece, can you?

>>17240206
Here's a $24k Breguet with better finishing, hand-polishing, and more interior angles on the caliber 777Q. That's a Swatch brand for you snobs out there.

>>17240196
That was a great read. You are very knowledgeable, thanks anon.

If you’re still in the mood, I would be curious about hearing more about your take on VC

>>17240217
I mean hell, if you’re also interested I would hear you tell us all anything you felt like because this is all great stuff. If not start a YouTube.

>>17240217
I like them. I think their designs miss about as often as they hit unfortunately. The Patrimony looks like a dinosaur. The Historiques line is where most of their interesting but still well-put together pieces are. I'm partial to the 1921 and 1955. Pic related is from a Traditionelle, which is unbelievably $10k cheaper than the 6119, and has more interior anglage.
>>17240223
I'm flattered but most of this information is just derived from various forum posts over the years. It is pretty well documented on watchprosite and the Rolex forums that Patek is a completely different company than they were at the start of the millenium and I firmly believe that if you are buying any Patek short of a minute repeater, you are paying a premium for a worse product because of the name on the dial.

>>17240225
Can I also hear your take of Rolex?

>>17240229
And can you tell me which watches you own if you’re comfortable sharing?

I ask so many questions because I lurk these threads and other places for someone with something to say but I’m often left with shitposting or the same watches over and over again.

>>17240229
>>17240234
Sure, here are some of my better watches. I’ve got some other random sort of weird stuff like a vintage two tone DJ, some Seikos, an old Panerai, some resin G-shocks, a Nomos. I like Rolex but the modern watches don’t appeal to me at all. Nothing against their design, but I wear a dress watch 6 or 7 days out of the week and have found myself a bit tired of sports watches. If someone said they wanted one watch for the rest of their life, I’d tell them to get a Rolex. I’d go grey though. My next purchase will probably be from H. Moser and Cie or maybe Lange, I’ve been eyeing the 1815 Up/Down for a while. Hard to justify though.

>>17240239
Nice collection, thanks for sharing. I’m gonna guess that you’re a bit older than me based on your collection. I have mostly sports watches but that’s because of my age and lifestyle. One day I will sell my sports watches and go to a dress watch collection, probably in about 10 years. I can’t speak of H. Moser and Cie since I haven’t heard of them but Lange is making truly special watches. I look forward to the day I own one. My collection is this:

>>17239978
I'd love to get a Santos. Perhaps in a year or two.

>>17240243
Impressive, I've always had a real soft-spot for the Skydweller but it's right on the edge of what I'm comfortable with size wise and then the market sort of went crazy when I was looking at them. I really recommend looking up Moser, they're a true haute de gamme watchmaker that is highly integrated, they don't charge eye-watering prices (comparatively) and they don't take themselves anywhere near as seriously as the rest. They're probably my favorite watchmaker at the moment.

>>17239978
This is probably it, but aftermarket prices are retarded at the moment. Can't wait for the current steel sports watch market to eat shit.

>>17240251
Could have walked into a boutique and bought it at retail 3 years ago.

>>17240261
sucks to be me, right?

>>17239257
holy shit the reflections. Can you even read it in sunlight?

>>17240269
sneedmaster, formerly the chuckwatch

>>17240249
I’ll check them out along with Cie. Thanks anon.

I bought the SD42 gray, so I can understand why you would not want to buy one. Paid the most for it both by total price and premium but it’s my best watch so whatever.

Next in line is a Tudor GMT or the Ranger, not sure yet.

>>17240274
Get the GMT

>>17240275
Leaning towards that one.

>>17240273
Durp the name was H Moser and Cie one brand. Well.

>>17240274
My vote is for the GMT.

>>17239978

>>17240215
Gorgeous

>>17239065
>quartz
>Luxury

>>17238959
ref?

>>17240067
That is the most beautiful diver I've ever seen, shame it's shit.

>>17239016
this but the updated version

>>17240383
PY035F

>>17239839
Tell them you're a huge Somewhere in Time fan. I don't know, don't use it as a fashion statement.

Why are good watches so fucking expensive?
Might as well buy a house instead.

>>17239063
That's just a copied, western capitalist version of old Soviet watches. Compare with this old Raketa.

>>17240467
depends what you mean by good. high end watches are expensive because of the large amount of (skilled) manual labour involved combined with the fact they are marketed as luxury so have a huge premium.

>>17240498
>high end watches are expensive because of the large amount of (skilled) manual labour involved
Stop peddling that bullshit. They're expensive because they're for rich people, no other reason.

>>17240500
labour costs are the most expensive part of any product which is why so many companies outsource to shithole countries.

i wish this setup was more common

>>17240512
>>labour costs are the most expensive part of any product
Those aren't actual costs, those are the owners just giving free thousands of $$$ to people to fund their expensive lifestyle, for something that an Indian will do for $5. Don't understand why you'd support a scam like that.

>>17240515
why so mad?

>>17240500
>>17240515
the poors are seething again

>>17240515
So you mean instead of the $2500 TAG Heuer I should buy a $500 Tissot and give the $2000 to my neighbors?

>>17240535
Yes.

>>17240500
>>17240515
Imagine being so butthurt and dirt poor.

>>17240515
Tell me again how can this be done on the cheap by an idian for 5 dollars.

>>17238938

>>17240547

let's B real:
this would be so good with a real watch inlayed on the back

>>17240548

>>17240544
Oh you're wearing your watch inside out? Didn't know you were gay, sorry.

>>17240514
Just buy a Bulova Computron.

>>17240550

>>17240515
Please tell me where I can get this for $5 as I'll be first in line to buy one?

>>17240550
>>17240548
>>17240547
It's shit. Sorry.

https://www.sinn.de/en/Modell/140_St_S.htm

Is there a watch exactly like this, but with a normal wearable height/thickness?

>>17240551
>Oh you're wearing your watch inside out?
With a movement that well made, I could if I wanted.
Sucks to be poor like you, tho.

>>17240558
Look into Bell & Ross catalog. They have something similar and it might be thinner.

>>17240557
but but it was used by the nazi aviation

>>17240566
>used by the nazi aviation
Oh, it's even shittier, then.

>>17240566
well they did lose the war after all

>>17240512
>labour costs are the most expensive part of any product
This might be true but labor is still less than 10% of the price of a PP (its probably closer to 2%), the vast majority is just luxury markup

>>17240577
>less than 10% probably 2%

Am I based?

>>17240514
Just get the Casquette 2.0 bro

>>17240582
How many hours do you think it actually takes to polish anglage?
I guess i should have specified the entry level pieces but im not wrong unless watchmakers for PP earn more per hour than partners at a T10 lawfirm.

>>17240585
>5k usd
I'm not rich, dammit

>>17239824
Is the yellowing actually good looking or just looks like you've spilled curry powder all over it?

Can't make up my mind.

>>17240593
Yeah its too bad its such an uncommon design, the computron is okay but it just doesn't quite have the charm of some of the early models.

>>17240595
It looks like it was just gold tinted clear when they bought it. Right at this movement that watch looks good, the problem is in a few more years it will be the color of a diabetics urine.

>>17240566
it's ass, it says so on the dial

>>17240595
Anon is right. Transparent plastic is a no no if you're a bit anal about yellowing. Once it has aged, it'll look like shit and you'll regret buying it.

>>17240577
> Research, Design, Testing, Construction, Finishing
If you'd said materials were closer to 2% then sure, but experienced watch makers are very highly paid. Those at Patek have 20+ years.

>>17240599
>>17240585
>>17240553
Doesn't someone here has a mechanical driver's watch?

>>17240603
>>17240566

>>17240611
I prefer this over the original logo

>>17240607
>Those at Patek have 20+ years.
They still aren't getting paid $500+ per hour

>>17240621
Guess what, almost no job does. But there are a shit load of man hours involved in producing a high end watch from conception to eventual production. Sure there is a massive markup for luxury goods but it's also true haute horology watches are less automated that most industries.

>>17240209
Why is MM stabbing him?

>>17240595
>>17240605

Yellowed clear G-Shocks look way better than original. They actually look like they're yellow not just plain shit clear plastic.

>>17240010
>>17240047
I really like these two tone Tudors and thought for a while about getting one, settled for a GS instead because FUCK I can't stand the piss-stain coloring of the hands and the hour markers on the bb58s up close. It's like Tudor invented a time machine to travel back to one of those nasty ass rooms designated for all the stanky smokers within an office building, and scraped the cigarette muck off what used to be white walls just to make these watches.
Either that or they got the Rolex CEO to piss daily into a barrel of white paint.

>>17240638
this and the hammer hand, I can't that clunky thing. Only the ranger and some other model does not seem to have it

tudors are ugly on purpose and rolexes are boring on purpose

>>17240549
It'd be a novelty, an impractical (taking up valuable space in the case) novelty. It's an interesting idea, perhaps there will be a new segment of luxury phones by Patek or something like that in the future, although the watch part should be removable because the phone itself will be useless in 5 years.

>>17240609
Yeah lawyersama has it. Can't remember the brand though.

>>17240243
Too poor for a dress watch?

>>17239978
For me, it's Citizen

>>17240467
Anon a Citizen Eco Drive can be had for just $150-300. There's more watchmaking happening in this watch than a Rolex. It's true cutting edge.

>>17240659
>>17240662
good morning sers

Why shouldn't my first luxury watch be a green Oyster Perpetual?

What's the consenus on date complications?
They look fine, useful and imply some sort of long-term precision/accuracy if the date changes correctly.
But it really bothers me that I have to adjust the date manually at the end of the month almost every other month because it cannot distinugiush between 28/30/31 day long months. I feel like it's a flawed gimmick. And powerful perpetual calendars are often so expensive that most cannot afford it.

Field watch kino

>>17240683
>NOOOOOOOO I HAVE TO CLICK THE DATE OVER SOMETIMES???? NIGGERMAN SAVE ME IM GOING INSANE

>>17240683
I hate 99% of date complications. It just ruins the dial. If I don't know what the date is I'm already fucked.

>>17240683
most of them are ugly and break up dial symmetry, especially ones with cyclops lenses and mismatch the dial color

>>17240684
See? Perfect example of a date ruining a watch dial.

Look at a submariner date vs no date. The date ruins it while no date is perfection.

Is there any politcally incorrect watchmaker? Give me ebony cases and such.

>>17240693
ruined

>>17240683
Just for you I cycled my watch's date through a couple months. If you're a wagie and your alarm clock rings in the morning & you have no time in the morning before you go be a wagie the whole day... maybe analog watches are not for you? You know you can not be in a hurry constantly, right? You don't have even 10 seconds, per month, to set them?

MAKE A NEW THREAD YOU DUMB CUNTS

>>17240691
Looks nice here though
>>17240112

>>17240698
I have but I expect more from a watch that costs 5000.

>>17240693
>>17240695
It does indeed look better without the date.

>>17240672
Because nothing goes with green. There's a reason black, white and blue have always been the defacto choices.

>>17240698
>I can't remember what day it is!! Please ruin my watch dial daddy Rolex!

>>17240706
Cash goes with green anon.

>>17240719
>>17240719
>>17240719

>>17240701
that date window literally goes out of its way to be symmetrical and matches the dial color which were my two complaints with date windows to begin with

>>17238938
CITIZEN WATCH
FULL ROSS

>>17240653
Lol depends on which dress watch we are talking about. I’m a construction worker in his 20s, it wouldn’t look quite right to rep a Datograph.

>>17240584
only if you sold it for more than you paid after this pic

>>17240695
date sub wouldn't be so bad if not for the boomer zoomer

G-SHOCK is sovl