Limited Edition

[Anonymous No.13674133]

This thread is about the appreciation of horology and the design, micro-engineering and material engineering that are required to make a functioning watch, clock, hourglass, or other timepiece.

> Required viewing for new people
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rL0_vOw6eCc [Embed]

> Used watch guide:
https://pastebin.com/f44aJKy2

> Strap guide:
http://pastebin.com/SwRysprE

> Watch essentials 102:
https://pastebin.com/8jPvz52Q

> Previous
>>13671120

[Anonymous No.13674141]

>>13674124
Thanks. So, how about SARX033, do you recommend it? Or is there any other you recommend?

Also, do they come in smaller sizes than 40mm?

[Anonymous No.13674156]

>>13674133
Threadsplitting and posting the thread bump limit, not cool

>>13671108
>>13671108
>>13671108

[Anonymous No.13674163]

Want.

[Anonymous No.13674187]

AT LEAST NO TIMEX IN THIS THREAD FUCK

[Anonymous No.13674205]

Repost because the last thread endet:

>Evening wt

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

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

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

What do you think? Anyone into pocket watches?

[Anonymous No.13674216]

Shame it's quartz desu.

[Anonymous No.13674217]

[Anonymous No.13674221]

[Anonymous No.13674234]

>>13674205
>few people on the omega forum seems to loose there face over this caliber
What does that mean?

[Anonymous No.13674242]

>>13674205
Pocket watches are fedora tier

[Anonymous No.13674261]

>>13674205
Better be careful. The first time you drop it, it's toast

[Anonymous No.13674331]

>>13674205
My own Semenmaster 600 has a cal. 601 in it (dirty pre-restoration pic). It's a very nice, simple, accurate hand-winding movement, with no real flaws.

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

>>13674261
It has Incabloc in it, dum-dum.

[Anonymous No.13674338]

>>13674234
There are a few guys there writing stuff like: This is the best movement ever made.
One guy even compared it to some Patek..

>>13674261
Will put a chain on it, bit I woun't use it on a daily basis anyways.


I was just curious what you guys think about this movement. Also the 19800 A/h seems to be weird, never saw that beatrate befor.

[Anonymous No.13674350]

>>13674205
My 613, same family, is an excellent movement, I'm very happy with it.

[Anonymous No.13674353]

>>13674331
Incablocs are from infallible. Not that an incabloc will help much with all extra weight from the case anyways

[Anonymous No.13674363]

>>13674338
The 56x/60x/61x series had a reputation as being an exceptionally good "workhorse" movement series, though I'd give the best as the times 313x series, probably. Made in large quantities, very robust, excellent timing performance. They are among the best in pursuit of those specific goals. Patek movements Target an entirely different set of goals; I would but be surprised if a 564 keep better time at this point than a patek from the same era, but it would not, for example, be nearly as nicely finished.

[Anonymous No.13674368]

>>13674338
>Also the 19800 A/h seems to be weird, never saw that beatrate befor.
The Vostok 24xx series (still in use in Amphibias and Komandirskies) also has this beat rate. Though that movement family was created a quarter century later than the original Omega 550. Says a lot about how behind the times the slavs tended to be, by that time 19800 was pretty much obsolete in the West, both in Switzerland and Japan.

[Anonymous No.13674372]

>>13674331
Thanks for your information mate.
I thought the second hand was moving a little odd, but now I feel like thats because of the 5.5/sek frequence of the balance wheel.

Are there some benefits to that beatrate?

[Anonymous No.13674382]

>>13674372
>Are there some benefits to that beatrate?
It will never fucking wear our, ever.

That's why most old Russian and Japanese calibers are basically bulletproof, the slower beat rate movement can take lack of maintenance way better than a high-beat one.

[Anonymous No.13674400]

What watch to cop if I'm going for robloxcore?

[Anonymous No.13674410]

>>13674363
>>13674368
>>13674382

Seems like wt likes this caliber

Thanks for your informations guys, you made me apreciate it even more!

I will read up more on the beatrate for sure, I didn't know this was common at some point. I thought there are only straight movements with 5 to 16 halfswings/sek.

[Anonymous No.13674418]

>>13674410
There are certainly watches outside that range (pic related, and breguet at 20), but 19800 falls in that range.

[Anonymous No.13674423]

>>13674410
The rare 602 is also the only Chronometer-rated geneve model.

[Anonymous No.13674426]

>>13674423

[Anonymous No.13674439]

>>13674410
Honestly I can't really name that much other movement families with that beat rate, I know Rolex and Seiko had 19800 calibers in the 60's.

Though is you write 19800 in the search boy on Ranfft's movement database, it pretty much lists every caliber of that beat rate it knows of, which is quite a few:

http://www.ranfft.de/cgi-bin/bidfun-db.cgi?10&ranfft&&2uswk

Just write it in, nigga!

[Anonymous No.13674479]

I kindof regret not getting this watch. I got the SBDC029 instead, which is the same as this but with Titanium bracelet and hardlex crystal

What do you guys think? I like the TI since its less cumbersome, more comfortable. Also wish mine had Sapphire. Is it worth flipping?

[Anonymous No.13674492]

>>13674363
I'd almost be inclined to argue in favor of the 56x/75x/60x/61x over the Rolex 31XX family as Omega managed to get so goddamn many of them to pass chronometer testing at a 19,800 beat rate. It's truly astonishing the level of chronometric performance they got out of that family of movements.

Omega has a pretty good argument for being the best mass produced mechanical movement before the quartz revolution certainly, though a good case could be made for the Girard Perregaux 32a or the Daini Seikosha 4500 as well.

[Anonymous No.13674500]

>>13674400
white gold yachmaster ii

[Anonymous No.13674518]

>>13674216
that credor eichi is definately not quartz

[Anonymous No.13674557]

>>13674518
the Spring Drive is still a quartz movement even if it's a hybrid one

[Anonymous No.13674562]

>>13674557
There's no such thing as hybrids. It's either quartz regulated or it isn't.

Though if there was such a thing, then Luch's quartz abomination would be closer.

[Anonymous No.13674578]

>>13674562
> There's no such thing as hybrids. It's either quartz regulated or it isn't.
Tell that to the GS fanboi's. They claim Sping Drive isn't quartz.

[Anonymous No.13674583]

>>13674562
>It's either quartz regulated or it isn't.
Such black and white thinking anon. Just consider that luch and SD hybrids.

[Anonymous No.13674590]

>>13674583
Please point me out the "hybrid" timekeeping element.

[Anonymous No.13674593]

>>13674578
The "SD isn't quartz" faggots are the Flat Earthers of horology.

[Anonymous No.13674595]

>>13674590
How about the part where it has elements of both movement types? I don't see why this is so difficult. Typically when you say "quartz" to someone you think of the standard stepper motor & battery movement.

[Anonymous No.13674598]

>>13674578
It ia true, gs fanboys just want to deny that because most sad fuckers see quartz regulating as a problem

[Anonymous No.13674612]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L5eK6b4RU9g

>yo
>yeah?
>lets make another speedmaster limited edition
>okay I suppose
>lets make it look super fucking cool, but
>but what
>lets make the seconds dial look like shit

???

[Anonymous No.13674624]

>>13674595
>it has elements of both movement types?
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAND?
>Typically when you say "quartz" to someone
These people are either laymen or idiots.

The type of movement is defined by the nature of the timekeeping element, everything else is irrelevant. This is how every book on watchmaking defines it. Anyone who says otherwise is a dumb layman spouting horological pseudoscience.

I'm not even biased in anything, I've worked on and own mechanicals, quartz and transistorized movements.

[Anonymous No.13674627]

>>13674612
Limited editions used to mean something. They were special pieces but most brands these days just abuse the label as pure marketing to sell watches. Omega are one of the worst examples. "Ltd Edition - One of Thousands"

AP do it a lot too but actually this >>13674133 is a nice one. Only a few hundred made each year, boutique only.

[Anonymous No.13674640]

>>13674627
Yeah, recently I looked at Tissot's website, and there are more than two dozen who-cares limited edition models at any given time. Limited maybe, but in no way special or unique or collectable.

https://www.tissotwatches.com/en-en/shop/selections/special-collections.html

[Anonymous No.13674648]

>>13674627
Also are moon phases really that impressive even? I've serviced a 90's Poljot chronograph movement with a moonphase before, it's literally just a few extra wheels connected to the hour wheel, and a finger that turns the moon-phase disk a little every 24 hours.

[Anonymous No.13674660]

Imagine a watch like Philippe dufour's dually, but where I've of the balances is replaced by the quartz-regulated balance of a luch 3055. The watch is now averaging the rates of a hairspring and a quartz frustrated and is a hybrid movement.

[Anonymous No.13674668]

>>13674660
*Regulator
Nice job autocorrect

[Anonymous No.13674675]

>>13674648
> Also are moon phases really that impressive even?

Not really. The basic moonphase movement is exactly how you describe. However that will typically be one day out after about 2 years due to the moons cycle not exactly matching the single gears number of teeth. Something like that VC watch will have a more advanced movement that should be correct over at least 100 years.

[Anonymous No.13674677]

>>13674660
>quartz
Go ahead and shoot yourself in the face.

[Anonymous No.13674678]

>>13674660
That's a tough one, though I think it would count as having two quartz-regulated balances, one directly driven and another indirectly, so it would still be a quartz.

That is of course if the coil-driven balance can overpower the mechanical one. Mechanical movements have way more torque than electronic balance ones. That is why for instance Cosmotrons don't need that many jewels, there's just not that much torque.

[Anonymous No.13674686]

>>13674678
The differential in the duality allows the two balances to run completely independently, I believe. If you use a piece of plywood to stop one, the other will keep running and the hands on the watch will run at half speed.

[Anonymous No.13674689]

>>13674677
post tummy

[Anonymous No.13674696]

>>13674686
Sounds kinda like a car differential.

[Anonymous No.13674702]

>>13674678
What you're describing sounds kind of like an accuquartz. The fork tine that's driven by the quartz oscillator is (I think) not the one with the pawl, so you kind of have two oscillators, one directly quartz driven, and one indirectly quartz driven.

[Anonymous No.13674719]

I remember when I was looking for the old chronomasters at the citizen boutique (before they were ecodrive). The sales suicide told me they didn't sell any quartz watches at the US boutique. When I asked about the different if quartz watches on display, they told me they aren't quartz, they're ecodrive, and unlike quartz never need a battery.

It's similar to how many tuning forks and electric hairspring-regulated watches I see listed as quartz - to many, it means that it takes a battery, and has nothing at all to do with quartz.

[Anonymous No.13674731]

>>13674702
http://members.iinet.net.au/~fotoplot/acctech224.htm

The tuning fork is only a stepper motor controlled by the quartz circuit in this case. It serves no timekeeping function, though having the fork out of tune could cause problems in proper operation.

[Anonymous No.13674743]

>>13674719
Here quartz is often confused as only meaning LCD, because one is quartz crystal, the other liquid crystal. Also when they find their father's/grandfather's old slav shitter they seriously ask if it would need a battery. Then I wind it and the fucker just starts up.

People are fucking stupid, and most have frighteningly little intuition toward machinery.

[Anonymous No.13674744]

[Anonymous No.13674747]

>>13674731
Agreed, in which sense I think it is similar to what was described here >>13674678
which is different from how the duality works. The base of the fork acts as the "differential", but in this case forces the tines to be in phase. If the quartz driving frequency was sufficiently off the natural fork frequency (for example, the fork frequency was a harmonic), the fork might "overpower" the quartz timing signal, similar to the above example.

I'll admit, it's a stretch.

[Anonymous No.13674749]

>>13674744
>t. I have my own Sonic OC

[Anonymous No.13674758]

Made money from stocks, buying a rolex to reward myself, which model should I go for?
GMT
Sub
Explorer 2
Datejust 41
Milgauss
??? Buying from AD

[Anonymous No.13674764]

>>13674747
>the fork might "overpower" the quartz timing signal, similar to the above example.
That sounds more like abnormal operation, rather than suddenly being fork-regulated like its ancestors.

It's kinda like how some very early quartz movements can be maladjusted, and move more than one second a beat, because the rotor swings too hard for whatever wacky obscure reason.

[Anonymous No.13674767]

>>13674758
>GMT
>Sub
>Explorer

Good luck getting any of those from an AD right now. As for which one to pick, just get the one you like.

[Anonymous No.13674773]

>>13674758
>GMT
>Sub
Not bad not bad.

>Explorer 2
Boring shit, kys.

>Datejust 41
Only go for the yellow gold black dial if you're e black, if you're white, opt for the fluted bezel in some flavor of rose gold. The white gold is for fucking faggots.

Misgauss is fucking gay.


and yes, obviously buy from a AD. You'll probably still be able to get a 10% discount on a precious metal Rolex, and for SS they are the only source unless you want to pay +25%.

[Anonymous No.13674776]

>>13674133
shut the fuck up faggot

I'm posting the only watch that matters

[Anonymous No.13674847]

I think G-Shocks are ugly
Am I wrong?

[Anonymous No.13674851]

>>13674758
why do you want a rolex?

[Anonymous No.13674860]

Casio Royale
silver or black?

[Anonymous No.13674863]

>>13674776
and for those who want to flex...

[Anonymous No.13674870]

>>13674776
Based and redpilled (not cringe)

[Anonymous No.13674899]

>>13674847
The 5600 ones are kind of cute

[Anonymous No.13674908]

What kind of metals are movements made of? I imagine it hasn't changed much over the decades.

[Anonymous No.13674910]

>>13674908
brass and steel. Rhodium might be the most common plating?

[Anonymous No.13674953]

>>13674758
Reinvest and forget the Rolex. You don't need a watch as a reward. Make more money and get a Daytona or a day-date...they're the only models worth having, and if you don't want a watch in precious metals or think it's a waste of money, then you're missing the point.

>>13674627
You know, it's attractive...but I have no idea what it would look like on a wrist.

>>13674205
COOL! I didn't know they made 'modern' pocket watches. How's it running?

>a modern rarity folks...drunkseagullanon is drunk...

[Anonymous No.13674969]

>>13674953
A Daytona is just a hipster Speedmaster for people who have too much money.

[Anonymous No.13674988]

>>13674969
It's aesthetically perfect, it's highly coveted, it's automatic wind (as opposed to the manual Speedy), it's still considered a serious status symbol, and the resale is comparable with day-dates and valuable subs.

My point stands, as a Rolex in today's world is also for 'people who have too much money'. C'mon now...you think that people buy Swiss watches now thinking, 'hmm...this is a good value purchase'....

I may be drunk, but I'm not stupid...(though I may get a little more direct). These things are luxury items Anon. Why not accept that and get something luxurious? I fail to understand this kind of thinking at all. Do you believe that the Daytona is a shit watch? Or perhaps the manufacture is of a lower quality? Or maybe the movement isn't any good?

C'mon now. At this stage in history, it's bullshit to consider this kind of argument of people buying specific watches 'because they have too much money' or 'money to burn'. No one needs a mechanical watch today. They're PURE luxury, there is no necessity at all.

pic unrelated but fucking awesome nevertheless

[Anonymous No.13674991]

>>13674969
If you hate it I want it.

[Anonymous No.13675004]

>>13674988
I mean, NASA thought it was of lower quality so that has to be worth something

[Anonymous No.13675009]

>>13674988
This guy fucks

[Anonymous No.13675037]

>>13675004
This is one of the most idiotic posts I've ever seen, even here. The Rolex failed the testing, so it was lower than the Omega WITH REGARD TO quality for EVA, extreme temperatures and humidity changes, and all the other rigors of space. That has nothing, NOTHING to do with wearing the watch on earth. Furthermore, I'm not telling Anon to save up and buy a 1960's Daytona. Modern ones are surprisingly just fine.

>>13675009
Fucks...what? Who doesn't enjoy the openness of that question...

[Anonymous No.13675057]

>>13675037
Okay whatever dude, enjoy your 2nd best "cosmograph" watch that costs three times more. Money really can't buy taste I guess.

[Anonymous No.13675063]

>>13675057
The argument was not about taste, it was about the merits of the watch and the claim that a Daytona was 'just a hipster Speedmaster for people who have too much money'. Again, you've missed the point entirely. Jesus...are you drunk too? Or is this your normal mode of functioning?

[Anonymous No.13675068]

>>13675063
he is just too prideful to admit he is wrong and his comment was half-baked

[Anonymous No.13675071]

>>13675037
its a punchline from a bit on the show 'silicon valley,' look it up on youtube

[Anonymous No.13675085]

>>13675068
Anyone can be wrong, that's why we discuss watches here. So we can share our enthusiasm and our knowledge about this little corner of technology that hasn't been mutilated and gang-raped by modern society....yet.

>>13675071
Okay, I've never watched the programme before. Thanks...what does it mean?

Pic semi-related. While I liked the Daytona, I fucking hate it on a leather strap. It looks awful, especially with the end link things intact. It's like half a watch...it's incomplete. I still don't know what they're thinking here...

[Anonymous No.13675107]

Completely different question for y'all, since I feel like talking.

We post our grails here from time to time, those watches that one day we'll own. Maybe we'll win the lottery and get it sooner...maybe we'll never get it but dream of it. Maybe we'll get the next best thing...and have twinges of regret everytime we think about what could have been. Maybe it's a watch we once owned and sold years ago and can't find again....

So, question for you. Post your grail, post why it's your grail, and most importantly, post how you think you'll achieve/find it.

I'll start: 376.0822 Omega Speedmaster. Made for two years, and in very low numbers. Uses one of the most reliable and robust automatic chronograph movements ever made.

For me, it's the final watch. I don't need another one after this, because this does it all. I've already started saving for it...but it'll be about a decade given current prices (right now they are going for 15-20,000 depending on condition). Considering that I never plan to spend that much money on any other watch, it'll satisfy me (I love Langes, but I'd never buy one). As long as nothing disastrous happens to me financially of course...

Now, YOU!

[Anonymous No.13675112]

>>13675085
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_uMEE7eaaUA

[Anonymous No.13675125]

>>13675107
>We post our grails here from time to time, those watches that one day we'll own.
I'm always confused when people talk about grails. To me a grail is an essentially unobtainable watch.

In terms of nearly but not actually unobtainable grails, I'd like one of each of the series production observatory-certified wristwatches. It's mostly just a matter of waiting and always watching, and being in the right place financially when the opportunity comes.

There are some HAQ quartz watches I'd love to own, but they're almost impossible to find, even compared to observatory watches, and I don't think I feel passionate enough about them to always be looking.

And then there are watches that I want and are very expensive but are readily available; I don't really consider those grails.

[Anonymous No.13675138]

>>13675112
Hm..I do feel sad that I'm being compared to Gabe from the Office...lol

>>13675125
Cool! In terms of the observatory-certified wristwatches, are they from all brands that had them, or are you brand-specific with this collection? (I don't know enough about the subject, so forgive the question if it's stupid).

I know what you mean about the loose terminology regarding grails. I'll tighten it a bit to mean something that is either very difficult to get, very expensive for you personally, or both. Something that you'd want, that you'd be satisfied with, and that would be something like the center of your collection or the showcase. Does that make it a little easier to narrow down?

[Anonymous No.13675155]

>>13675125
Sorry, one other thing. Why do you like the observatory-certified wristwatches? Is it the extreme technological engineering? The remarkable performance? The rarity? The aesthetics? ....post pic please! You're passionate about it, so show me why!

[Anonymous No.13675163]

>>13675138
As far as I'm aware only three brands sold series-produced observatory chronometers to the public: Rolex, Girard Perregaux, and Seiko. Omega made an observatory certified quartz marine chronometer, which is also on my list. I think... Krieger? also made a more recent marine chronometer certified at besancon, though I don't really care for it, so I may not actually get that one.

>>13675155
I really appreciate the pursuit of accuracy as something watchmakers should strive for; a lot of my collection (chronometer or chronometer-level watches, observatory watches, tuning fork watches, HAQ quartz) relate to the progression of that drive for accuracy. It's what I respect the most about modern Rolex, their production of a million watches per year at a 2spd certification.

[Anonymous No.13675172]

>>13675107
$30k
Created for CERN researchers.

Realistically I will settle for the newer blue dial milguass. While a completely different watch, it is one of the most beautiful and underrated watches in my opinion

[Anonymous No.13675181]

Good night /wt/
Be nice with each other.

[Anonymous No.13675184]

>>13675172
also I guarantee you it will be worth a fortune if/when they stop making it due to it's uniqueness and relative obscurity

[Anonymous No.13675187]

>>13675184
What’s that the Marilyn Manson?

[Anonymous No.13675191]

>>13675163
Okay, I've seen you post this pic before....so you're this guy. Cool! Which one, if you had to choose one, would be the most 'grailish' to you? In other words, if you could put one above all others, perhaps for its rarity or 'choiceness'....which would it be? Love to see a pic...

>>13675172
Hmm...okay, a Rolex Milgauss...with red lettering and second hand tip. Help me to understand. Why? What makes this special to you? Is it the fact that it was made specifically for CERN researchers? (perhaps like the Comex diver watches?) or is there something I'm missing (like very impressive statistics in performance or what it was designed to do)?

>>13675181
Sleep well Anon...hopefully we'll be nice, but debate hard.

>>13675184
The blue one, or the CERN one you posted earlier? Help me I'm drunk! The Milgauss is made to be impervious to serious magnetic fields, right?

Pic WAS a grail of mine....but as I said, I'll probably never buy a Lange. It's still fucking beautiful though...

[Anonymous No.13675193]

>>13675172
I saw a guy in the subway with a green milgauss with the thunderbolt hands. The seconds hand had a choppy quartz movement. Was it a fake?

[Anonymous No.13675195]

>>13675193
>The seconds hand had a choppy quartz movement.
>Was it a fake?
Gee I fucking wonder anon.

[Anonymous No.13675224]

>>13675191
I guess the Rolex would be the one I would be more excited about than the Seiko... Rolex was the first, and Seiko went through the same testing GP went through. But a bit of a tossup.

[Anonymous No.13675226]

>>13675195
I wasn't sure if Rolex still made quartz movements. Maybe he just took the dial or something. Is it bad to publicly shame people who wear fake watches?

[Anonymous No.13675241]

>>13675224
Cool, thanks for explaining Anon. I wonder how these observatory watches perform in the real world...in other words, if people wear them regularly and how well they do. What's the accuracy of your GP?

[Anonymous No.13675247]

Any thoughts on the Speedmaster Pro vs the Coaxial? Date and automatic winding is important to me, but it seems like most people recommend going for the Pro.

[Anonymous No.13675260]

>>13675247
Here are a few.

1) The Pro is the link to the moonwatch, anything else is in name only. If you care about NASA/heritage/space, then go pro. If you don't care about any of that, then this segment is moot.

2) As far as I know, the current co-axial in this iteration is fine, and doesn't give problems. Furthermore, there is an argument to be made that the chronograph minute/hour dial is far easier to read quickly than the original layout.

Bottom line? The two watches couldn't be any more different from each other. Completely different movements, completely different aesthetics, and completely different purposes. There are other automatic winding plus date chronograph watches available that might look better aesthetically than the coaxial in your pic. Are you thinking of getting the coaxial Anon?

My pic is one of the earlier coaxial versions...it's slightly larger than the original pro, which is why the proportions of the subdials is off....

[Anonymous No.13675262]

>>13675260
what connection does the current pro have to the man-on-the-moon heritage?

[Anonymous No.13675274]

>>13675262
I did this last night, but I'll be brief here. Similar aesthetics, similar size, similar materials, and it's a NASA certified movement in its current form and can be seen on EVAs currently. Specifically regarding the moon though, as far as we know only cal. 321s were worn on the moon, and the modern pros use the 861/1861. But considering that the current 861/1861 is certified for EVAs, it's not that big of a deal unless you're a stickler for the original hardware (like I am). If NASA goes back to the moon, it's likely a modern 861 will be there, so I don't see the point in getting one's panties in a kruller. Does that clarify the point? Man...that question gets asked a lot...

[Anonymous No.13675277]

>>13675274
Does any of
> similar aesthetics
> similar size
> similar materials
Not apply to the coaxial speedmasters as well?

[Anonymous No.13675282]

>>13675277
You are correct.
1) The aesthetics are different, as you can see on the face, specifically regarding the proportions and placement of the subdials on the rest of the face.
2) The size is different; coaxials are larger.
3) The materials are usually different too, most notably with the lens (which on co-axials is usually sapphire crystal and not Hesalite).

Then there are other details too, but these are the most notable.

[Anonymous No.13675302]

Poor fag here saving up for a luxury watch
I'm thinking about either Grand Seiko, Tudor, Omega or Rolex.
I know Rolex is great but I can't help bit associate it with people who buy Rolex simply as a status symbol and or buy the gaudy ones with diamonds, is it still worth getting one?
Also is the risk of getting robbed because of the Rolex worth it?

[Anonymous No.13675304]

>>13675302
why do you want a luxury watch

[Anonymous No.13675309]

>>13675302
Oyster Perpetual/Submariner

[Anonymous No.13675315]

>>13675302
First, anyone can get robbed in the wrong part of town, so don't think about that issue.

Second, unless you're buying the watch to impress other people, don't pay attention to what you think they might think of you owning one. Buy it for yourself.

Third. In all honesty Anon, buying a luxury watch should be a purchase which you don't notice financially. If you're poor enough that this money really could go towards better things (better living arrangements, groceries, a car, etc.), then don't do it. It's not worth it at all.

If you're going to spend money on a luxury watch, then it has to be money that you won't miss at all. Honestly ask yourself if this is the case. And don't worry, luxury watches will still exist when you have the disposable income to afford one without worrying about it.

[Anonymous No.13675314]

>>13675260
I do find the heritage of the watch very interesting but it isn't a major factor in my buying decision. As for aesthetics, I do think that the Pro has better proportions and if it were automatic, it'd be a no-brainer. I guess its a matter of practicality.

[Anonymous No.13675321]

>>13675314
Well, I think Omega specifically fucked up the proportions to prevent the drowning of the traditional Speedy. If they did one that looked exactly the same as the original but was automatic, it would fly off the shelves but also no one would buy the manual-wind except history buffs, and those numbers are likely dwindling.

pic unrelated but beautiful nevertheless...the only Patek I like.

[Anonymous No.13675322]

>>13675304
I think they're a great piece of history and I'm mezmarized by their simple yet great design both inside and out.
I'm still 24 and I wanna start saving up soon
>>13675309
Beaut
>>13675315
Oh I understand of course, I have a separate savings for my realistic needs and another savings for watches.
The thing is in my country everyone knows Rolex, seiko is the every mans watch and Omega and Tudor aren't known so the risk of the Rolex is tad higher

[Anonymous No.13675410]

[Anonymous No.13675472]

>>13675302
You have no business having a luxury watch if you're poor. It will just look stupid if you do get one. I think you should get a more affordable watch instead, and there is plenty to choose from. Look into seiko presage. They have reasonably priced watches that will feel high quality. Or if you don't like the idea of having a Seiko, then consider a Longines. There are many micro-brands too. Maybe Christopher Ward is something for you? Maybe Junghans is something for you? These will cost a little bit, but they won't break your bank. Ideally if you have very little money you might want to buy something even more affordable, but hey you're the boss of your own money. But my advice is that you DO NOT need a luxury watch, use your money toward something more important.

Listen to what >>13675315 said
>If you're poor enough that this money really could go towards better things (better living arrangements, groceries, a car, etc.), then don't do

[Anonymous No.13675590]

Hey watchfags. Debating between Seiko, Bulova, Citizen, and other brands within that caliber for my next watch. I want a strong machine on my wrist. Suggestions?

[Anonymous No.13675611]

>>13675590
Seiko my dude

[Anonymous No.13675737]

Why does /wt/ not discuss folding-watches anymore?

Thinking of getting this one, but should it be spearpoint, or should I go for the tanto meme?

[Anonymous No.13675782]

>>13675737

Spearpoint, tanto is a bitch to sharpen.

[Anonymous No.13675785]

>>13675782
Meh, I suck at sharpening anyway. Though usage-wise is tanto practical? All I had before that's similar is a Higonokami, which is reverse-tanto.

[Anonymous No.13675801]

Thoughts on the Ball Company?
/wt/ has set me straight about not getting into high end watches and now I aiming for watches at the lowered end to save up

[Anonymous No.13675806]

>>13675801
Over priced for what you get unless you want to jack off about the tritium

[Anonymous No.13675812]

Thoughts on Vincero watches?

[Anonymous No.13675818]

[Anonymous No.13675820]

[Anonymous No.13675821]

[Anonymous No.13675823]

[Anonymous No.13675828]

[Anonymous No.13675830]

[Anonymous No.13675832]

>>13675806
Any other brands for around 1k? Looking for a diver

[Anonymous No.13675867]

>>13675830
>that chubby arm

[Anonymous No.13675880]

>>13675812
>>13675818
>>13675820
>>13675821
>>13675823
>>13675828
>>13675830
Truly a piece of horology that will never go out of FASHION

[Anonymous No.13675882]

>>13675830
Wait...is this a Jew watch?

[Anonymous No.13675885]

>>13675882
Meant for
>>13675828

[Anonymous No.13675899]

>>13675867
>clearly a gymfag arm

[Anonymous No.13675910]

>>13675899
post tummy

[Anonymous No.13675913]

>>13675910
fuck off perv

[Anonymous No.13675919]

>>13675913
You don't scare me now show us your flabby chocolate body

[Anonymous No.13675968]

hmmm which one to wear today

[Anonymous No.13675970]

>>13674953
a collegue of mine is spending half his time on flee markets and he found this precious piece for me. To be honest I haven't checked on it's accuracy yet but it seems to run fine and keeps time.
like I said, haven't checked, just noticed it wasn't off on the next day.

[Anonymous No.13675971]

>>13675830
does the chronograph second hand sweep at least?

[Anonymous No.13675973]

>>13675968
Wear the Patek Calatrava and take a wrist shot for me, it is my grail watch.

[Anonymous No.13676036]

Post lume

[Anonymous No.13676037]

>>13675968
Do your jlc again, like yesterday!

[Anonymous No.13676039]

[Anonymous No.13676049]

>>13676039
wow you must be really tiny

[Anonymous No.13676050]

>>13675968
All of these look like shit. You literally picked the worst, most tasteless models from every brand.

[Anonymous No.13676054]

>>13676050
fucking poorfags

[Anonymous No.13676084]

Alright, tiny movement service time.

Next to my rotten finger for comparison.

[Anonymous No.13676091]

>>13675309
this one is really hard to read in sunlight, thats why i decided to get a grape dial one. now you have even more options with the white and black dial. I think i still prefer the grape though

[Anonymous No.13676092]

Good morning wt

[Anonymous No.13676093]

>>13676084
your finger looks nasty, enjoy tinkering with those shitters mr pajeet

[Anonymous No.13676095]

>>13676092
Are you a watch maker?

[Anonymous No.13676101]

>>13676095
Nope, just a collector. The closest I've gotten is regulating my regulated balance watches and tinkering with disassembly and reassembly of bare movements

[Anonymous No.13676113]

>>13676092
*steals the accurate celestial*
Ha..ha...hahahahaha!

ha!

[Anonymous No.13676119]

>>13676095
why would you think that ?

[Anonymous No.13676120]

>>13676113
accurist*

[Anonymous No.13676125]

>>13676113
But it's a 35N, if you wanted one of those you could just buy it.

[Anonymous No.13676126]

>>13676125
Yes you're right. Fuck my miserable N50 lacking life.

[Anonymous No.13676131]

Btw did you check the lug to lug on the accurist for me?

[Anonymous No.13676132]

>>13676093
It's just the lighting, Senor Goblino, don't shart yourself.

[Anonymous No.13676136]

>>13676131
Ah, sorry, I did not. Will definitely do it tonight.

[Anonymous No.13676142]

>>13676136
Okiedokies.

[Anonymous No.13676146]

https://www.reddit.com/r/Watches/comments/9f6djm/seiko_my_sbpg001_from_japan_never_seen_one_of/

[Anonymous No.13676149]

Alright, a closeup of the movement. I kinda have no idea what this is though. It's unbranded, and it looks like a Slava 1601, but not quite. The watch is a Zarja, but the Zarja 1601 is a completely different movement.

Oh well, I'll still have no problem servicing it though.

[Anonymous No.13676151]

>>13676146
Why not just post the image instead of making me click on a reddit link?

[Anonymous No.13676159]

>>13676149
it's a fucking shitter, you shitter

[Anonymous No.13676164]

>>13676159
>t. the crown jewel of my collection is a 4R36

[Anonymous No.13676168]

>>13676164
>t. the crown jewel of my collection is a vostok amphibia

[Anonymous No.13676172]

>>13676149
Also for some reason the regulator has teeth. Weird.

>>13676168
>not denying
You're done, kid.

[Anonymous No.13676178]

>>13676172
say what ever you have to cope with your shitty life

[Anonymous No.13676185]

>>13676178
>projecting this hard
Sorry kid, got work to do, go bother someone else.

[Anonymous No.13676186]

>>13676172
Don't feed him (You)s, he only insults you because you post actual /wt/ related content here and if he got you to leave, the thread would get worse, which would make him happy.

[Anonymous No.13676191]

>>13676186
>Don't feed him
That is some great advance

[Anonymous No.13676193]

>>13676172
Okay, what the fuck.

[Anonymous No.13676205]

>>13676186
>the thread would get worse
we got rid of digishit, next will be quartz shit and finally shitty mechanical shitters like seiko 5s and soviet fucking crap.

[Anonymous No.13676206]

Opinions on the Orient 3 star?

[Anonymous No.13676212]

>>13676206
Tell us your opinions first if you have any.

[Anonymous No.13676215]

>>13676205
Can you get rid of the overweight shit too

[Anonymous No.13676217]

>>13676206
Not a fan of Orient personally, I bought an Orient vintage but the quality seemed poor and it stopped working after 6 months. That might have just been one bad example, but it really turned me off from the brand.

[Anonymous No.13676221]

>>13676036

[Anonymous No.13676222]

>>13676206
SHITTTEEEEEERRRRRR

[Anonymous No.13676224]

>>13676215
you mean the canuck?
he does post shitters, but he is no concern

[Anonymous No.13676227]

>>13676205
>we got rid of digishit

[Anonymous No.13676228]

>>13676224
Post your tummy little pig

[Anonymous No.13676230]

>>13676228
show us your tummy you fat sack of shit

[Anonymous No.13676233]

>>13676230
>scared /wt/ will laugh him out of town if he exposed just how chubby he is

[Anonymous No.13676237]

>>13676233
>this bottom feeder logic

[Anonymous No.13676247]

>>13676227
Ae, that's a nice timepiece right there my brother, really horologically significant, utilizing the most durable materials, I am in love

[Anonymous No.13676253]

>>13676237
>too scared to top himself after his breakdown last night

You truly are a scared little piggy of a man

[Anonymous No.13676258]

>>13676253
the fuck are you talking about nigga?
you really should sniff the paint less shit stain

[Anonymous No.13676263]

>>13676258
You haven't told you friends here yet have you? Oh wow you really are so broken it's pathetic

[Anonymous No.13676268]

Just changed my bambino strap to a chink leather strap. So much nicer

[Anonymous No.13676273]

looking for a watch with design similar to the Instrmnt 01-C but not quartz
any suggestion?

[Anonymous No.13676274]

>>13676268
kys

[Anonymous No.13676275]

>>13676206
Perfect for wristlets

[Anonymous No.13676277]

>>13676273
>looking for a watch with design similar to the Instrmnt 01-C but not quartz
any suggestion?

[Anonymous No.13676278]

>>13676274
no u

[Anonymous No.13676289]

>>13676273
Junghans Max Bill

[Anonymous No.13676311]

Jesus, Seiko. Just how many parts a case needs to be?

[Anonymous No.13676315]

>>13674562
>>13674578
>>13674593
>>13674624
>The type of movement is defined by the nature of the timekeeping element, everything else is irrelevant. This is how every book on watchmaking defines it. Anyone who says otherwise is a dumb layman spouting horological pseudoscience.

I might try and nitpick this idea a little bit. When you look at a mechanical escapement it simultaneously acts as the timekeeping element and plays an integral role in controlling the movement of the hands.

In a stepper motor quartz watch, the quartz crystal does serve as the timekeeping element, but without the stepper motor that timekeeping element cannot accomplish all the same functions as an escapement does on a mechanical watch, since it is the stepper motor that controls the movement of the hands that translates the timekeeping of the quartz crystal into the represented time.

By the same token, on a Spring Drive it is the combination of the quartz crystal and the electro-magnetically braked glide-wheel that serve as the regulating element, not the quartz crystal alone.

In this light, I'm not sure it makes sense to refer to both stepper motor quartz watches and spring drive watches as "quartz" without elaboration, as that tells you only half the story.

[Anonymous No.13676331]

>>13676315
I laid out my thoughts on this in the pastebin in the op. The most important parts of a watch are
> The oscillator: the ultimate timekeeping element
> The "escapement": how the information from the oscillator is passed to the hands (i.e., swiss lever, glide wheel, index wheel, stepper motor, IC controlling an LCD display, etc)
> The energy: how the watch has power to run (mainspring, battery, water-activated wet cell, etc)
Watches with quartz oscillators have existed with almost every kind of escapement, so to me I think it is reasonable to say that a "quartz" watch is one with a quartz oscillator.

[Anonymous No.13676351]

>>13676331
Interesting, so on the same basis would you then describe any watch that used a mechanical oscillator as a mechanical watch? Even if it was battery powered?

I guess I don't generally think about the oscillator in isolation from the escapement much in how I conceive of different types of movements.

[Anonymous No.13676366]

>>13676351
"Mechanical watch" is not really a term I totally use when I am trying to be precise. I use the phrase hairspring-regulated so often my phone autocorrect sticks it in all the time. I use the phrase traditional mechanical watch to mean a watch with a mainspring, lever (or similar, like detent) escapement, and hairspring.

"Mechanical" didn't mean anything as precise as quartz. Is every watch with a mechanism mechanical? Every watch with a moving part? With a gear? Quartz is very specific, by comparison.

[Anonymous No.13676413]

tfw no gf complication

[Anonymous No.13676422]

Stainless steel or titanium?

[Anonymous No.13676442]

>>13676263
The type of peak quality posts I expect from the autistic shithole known as /f1/

[Anonymous No.13676466]

>>13675785
Knife guy here.
The tanto is extremly useless for 99% of all tasks, because the bevelangel is to large to cut good.

The only thing, a tanto does shine, are it's bad ass looking.

>Never get a tanto for edc

[Anonymous No.13676472]

I think we can all benefit by not replying to bait posts and drama shit by shit posters.
Keep it watch related and say no to shit posting

[Anonymous No.13676474]

>>13676442
>tried and failed to get /f1/ banned on many occasions with gore/gay/interracial webm spam
>exposed as overweight so no longer posts pictures there
>ran away to here
>deletes many incriminating posts
>was posting about contemplating suicide last night
>once again runs away to here

You are done my chubby friend and now your /wt/ friends will see just how broken you are. If you do work up the courage to actually top yourself please do stream it like that /r9k/ kid for us


post tummy

[Anonymous No.13676478]

Waiting for this to be shipped, it's pretty unassuming, but apparently the 5E31 movement is a HEQ, with +/-20 per year accuracy.

[Anonymous No.13676481]

>>13676478
Does it tick

[Anonymous No.13676483]

>>13676474
Classic tudorfag behaviour, he got wt banned from g by posting bead shit, porn, gore etc, the guy is mental seriously.
Do you happen to have a pic of his fat belly?

[Anonymous No.13676484]

Why does someone as rich as me ride the bus?

Because I can afford it.

[Anonymous No.13676487]

>>13676478
Also I'll probably strip the plating and ask our goldsmith to re-plate it.

>>13676481
It's not listed as junk, if that's what you're asking.

[Anonymous No.13676503]

>>13676484
nice suit rakesh, whats the occasion?

[Anonymous No.13676509]

>>13676487
Cool, do you know what kind of TC it uses?

[Anonymous No.13676520]

>>13676503
Got to dress like a OG for work, nigga. Can't let bitches see you in cheap clothes just because you're at work.

[Anonymous No.13676527]

>>13676509
No idea, I will be taking apart and giving it a complete movement service when it arrives though. I guess we'll see then.

[Anonymous No.13676533]

W a t o l

[Anonymous No.13676557]

>>13676527
Will be cool if it's clear. My 5s42 is also specced to 20spy and from a similar era so I might assume the method is similar.

[Anonymous No.13676569]

>>13676533
It looks nice on that strap, clean bezel is cool too.

[Anonymous No.13676600]

>>13676557
Here's the biggest pic I could find of the 5E31 right now. It's also kinda unassuming in appearance, not nearly as good-looking as some modern Swiss quartz movements.

[Anonymous No.13676606]

Alright guys, rate my collection focusing on vintage digitals and post your collections

[Anonymous No.13676648]

>>13675832
Oris

[Kung Fu Jew No.13676667]

>>13676206
Well the three stars are their bottom tier shitters. So you take their already inexpensive watches and make them cheap watches and there is your three stars. You can find them on Wish all the time for like $20

[Anonymous No.13676867]

Thoughts on the Baby Marinemaster?

[Anonymous No.13676873]

>>13675801

[Anonymous No.13676886]

>>13676873
That still ain’t my SLA017

[Anonymous No.13676898]

test

[Anonymous No.13676902]

>>13676898
Congratulations

[Anonymous No.13676911]

>>13676902
I like blue lumes!

[Anonymous No.13676921]

>>13676911
I like 3 colored but hate divers so I’m fucked.

[Anonymous No.13676938]

>>13676921
>3 colored
That's even better, reminds me of a cars dashboard at night, for some reason always made me feel comfy

[Anonymous No.13676949]

Alright, I started working on the second Seiko 3802 I have, since I still can't get the first one to properly work. Maybe I'll learn something new with this one.

So this is I want to show you, /wt/. Pic is the first 3802, made in 1973, and it has this dumb blue wire running under the battery insulator. It looks like it was a last minute modification to the design.

[Anonymous No.13676952]

>>13676483
Sorry friend but he quickly removed many of his posts with his photo when we worked out just how big he was with some quick maths. He went from very vocal to so quiet once certain posts were gone, he was deeply hurt that day

[Anonymous No.13676958]

>>13676949
And here's the second one, made in 1974. The wire was replaced with a conducting trace on a sheet of plastic. Also a lot of other electronic parts were revised, such as the battery protection capacitor and its plastic insulator (green thingie to the right), and the contacts for the coil.

[Anonymous No.13676965]

>>13676921
>>13676938
what watches do you recommend that have trio colored lumes?

[Anonymous No.13676968]

>>13676949
>>13676958
Interesting thanks.

[Anonymous No.13676972]

>>13676958
Here are the contacts for the coil on the left, for the later version. The early version was all flimsy, bendy and fragile, and if it touched the movement plate it shorted. Also I had to re-solder the broken trace, as it's so fragile. And the wires from the coil soldered into the contacts were exposed, and not covered in resin or glue or anything.

TL;DR: early coil was shitty, later is alright.

[Anonymous No.13676978]

>>13676972
And the early coil. You can kinda see how shitty and flimsy that contact foil shit is.

[Anonymous No.13677037]

>>13674350
very very nice anon

[Anonymous No.13677054]

>>13676965
Seiko

[Anonymous No.13677087]

>>13677037
Thanks

[Anonymous No.13677098]

>>13677087
>I
>2
>1
>4
>S
>I
>7
>X
>I
>10
>II
>I
Q predicted this.

[Anonymous No.13677101]

>>13674133
Watchfags will go on dotr

[Anonymous No.13677150]

Full wind

[Anonymous No.13677158]

>>13677150
Pretty impressive.

[Anonymous No.13677161]

>>13677158
if you say so

[Anonymous No.13677166]

>>13677161
Oh neverimnd, was just reading the timings wrong lel.

[Anonymous No.13677251]

>>13676142
The lug to lug is 49mm, although since it has an integrated bracelet, the "lug to lug" is a little weird. I measured from the seam between the case and the first link in the bracelet (between the two pins you can see in the picture).

[Anonymous No.13677267]

>>13677251

[Anonymous No.13677307]

>>13675806
Really? I find the Fireman Victory to be very clean and wanted to buy it as my first over-1k watch. Any watches in that price range with similar aesthetic? Or should I just get a SARB033 at half the price?

I also really like pic related from them (Trainmaster Cleaveland)

[Anonymous No.13677350]

[Anonymous No.13677487]

[Anonymous No.13677533]

>>13674163
It reminds me of something from Gundam.

[Anonymous No.13677545]

Going from a watch thats barely 40mm to this beast doesnt feel to different thanks to the titanium. Pretty cool watch looking forward to a GS next year.

[Anonymous No.13677629]

>>13677545
Peacock or Snowflake?

[Anonymous No.13677633]

[Anonymous No.13677655]

>>13677629
The SBGE001. That Bezel sold me when I saw one in person. Tho those two choices are good as well

[Anonymous No.13677671]

>>13677633
W2c

[Anonymous No.13677712]

>>13677671
It's a 1940s watch from a long-extinct swiss brand that's been in family 70 years. Probably best is to look on eBay for "vintage swiss watch" and buy something similar I guess.

[Anonymous No.13677840]

>>13677533
das tight. i think that watch just got its nickname

[Anonymous No.13677896]

>>13677655
Sexy af, good taste anon

[Anonymous No.13677911]

Question!

Dress watch under 200??

[Anonymous No.13677915]

>>13677251
>>13677267
Thanks, friend.

[Anonymous No.13677951]

>>13677911

[Anonymous No.13677959]

>>13677951
omega? under 200??

[Anonymous No.13677963]

>>13677896
thank u my dude. Lowkey if they ever release a gold version I would sell my soul

[Anonymous No.13677977]

>>13677911

[Anonymous No.13677989]

>>13677911
Vintage slavshit dress watch.

[Anonymous No.13677992]

>>13677959
Got this beauty for 150 eurobucks

[Anonymous No.13677995]

Post collections
I start with mine

[Anonymous No.13678010]

Just arrived, no battery in it yet, so it's not that loud so far. lol

[Anonymous No.13678027]

>>13677995
The new jewel in the crown that is my collection.

[Anonymous No.13678040]

>>13678027
I dislike seiko 5, they are too cheap (and I mean when you handle them, material and finish and also the movement). So even if the design is not so bad, the execution of said design is done so cheaply that it doesn't look good overall, and the watch when you handle it does not feel good or like it is of any good quality - and of course, it is not.

[Anonymous No.13678042]

>>13678040
you just replied to tudorfag mate, try to remember that skin.
his watches are tudor, vostok in green and that seiko 5

[Anonymous No.13678043]

>>13678040
None of this matters, because me wearing one tarnishes the brand in the eyes of /wt/, so it's a great watch for me.

[Anonymous No.13678071]

>>13678042
How am I going to remember everyone's skin in /wt/?

[Anonymous No.13678086]

>>13676667
You can not find the tri star for 20 bucks can you?
If so, i got fucking scammed because the cheapest you can get one in Norway is for 100 bucks on urverket.no.

[Anonymous No.13678104]

>>13678071
I just started browsing wt a few weeks ago and there are atleast 5 anons I can tell by there wrist

[Anonymous No.13678112]

>>13678104
Who's wrist is this?

[Anonymous No.13678115]

>>13678112
can you wear the seiko 5 and the fake casio too at the same time?

[Anonymous No.13678126]

>>13678115
For what purpose?

[Anonymous No.13678133]

>>13678126
it would be a cool collection shot

[Anonymous No.13678148]

>>13678112
Put on all your watches please. The seiko 5 too, in other words.

[Anonymous No.13678149]

>>13678112
Whose*
Are you even from the UK?

[Anonymous No.13678156]

>>13678149
Whose refers to multiple you dumb bitch, dont ever disrespect me like that again.

[Anonymous No.13678168]

>>13678156
Lmao, you are a great troll.

[Anonymous No.13678214]

>*sip*
Ahh, nothin' like a nice cup of joe.

[Anonymous No.13678227]

>>13674133
Hey watch loving anons, I want to sell watches online, what are some specifics I should make sure I’m selling?

[Anonymous No.13678243]

>>13678214
How to achieve this level of gentry?

[Anonymous No.13678244]

>>13678243
It's not easy to do, you need a proper understanding of horology and a lot of money.

[Anonymous No.13678246]

>>13678244
I only wear mechanical watches with a swiss lever escapement and I have £20k saved with a monthly income of £3k.
Do I fit the bill?

[Anonymous No.13678249]

>>13678246
It's possible, get yourself on a few waiting lists for a SNK at some Seiko ADs.

[Anonymous No.13678297]

>>13674744
Kys

[Anonymous No.13678307]

>>13674133
hey /watch/, if i was to buy these from op pic how long would they serve me? i really like the design and they're available where i'm at but i can't be arsed to visit watchmakers every few years

[Anonymous No.13678323]

Is Jack Ryan effay?

[Anonymous No.13678362]

The new thread better not have a fucking digital in the op.

[Anonymous No.13678369]

>>13678362
There already is a watch thread with less than 310 replies besides this

>>13671108
>>13671108
>>13671108

[Anonymous No.13678370]

>>13678323
his old job at dunder mifflin seemed a lot safer

[Anonymous No.13678375]

>>13678369
I’m not posting in a thread made by a retard ruining these generals.

[sieg No.13678388]

>>13678323

CIA analysts are GS-5, bachelor's degree + minor office work

the CIA doesn't let you jump from GS-5 to GS-10+ simply because you dun did good on 1 case

[Anonymous No.13678397]

Is this a good watch?

[ope No.13678398]

>>13675172
I own a bagelHomage, I wear is daily and I love it.

The thunder bolt hand is great.

[Anonymous No.13678400]

>>13678398
Wrist size?

[Anonymous No.13678403]

>>13678397
It's... it's beautiful!

[Anonymous No.13678406]

>>13678403
Thanks, then I guess it's decided. I will purchase it.

[ope No.13678407]

>>13678400
around 15cm or 6in.

I am actually looking for a NATO for it to see how it feels and looks. NATO tend to make the watch look a little smaller on my skeliWrists.

The Rolex bracelet is the most comfi bracelet I have ever worn.

[Anonymous No.13678411]

>>13678407
Okay. Personally I dislike nato, and I don't get why they would make your watch smaller on your wrist. I feel like it has the opposite effect. Besides, your watch fits your wrist just fine imo.

[Anonymous No.13678414]

New thread

>>13678413
>>13678413
>>13678413

[Anonymous No.13678419]

Thougts about superocean?

[Anonymous No.13678444]

>>13674133
NEW THREAD
>>13678442
>>13678442
>>13678442

[Anonymous No.13678452]

>>13678444
Fuck I hate you fucking idiot.

[Anonymous No.13678494]

NEW ^_^

MIGRATE FAST PLOX!!!!

>>13678470
>>13678470
>>13678470

[Anonymous No.13678570]

>>13678444
>>13678494
retards