Please tell me you're aware of the fact that it's a Chinese watch that's not worth more than $20.
Watches are designer/style items. Just like designer clothes "worth" is down to the individual. How much do you think a quartz watch actually "costs" to make? Yet some Tags costs £1,200+
Plus the chinese make a lot of good watches (as well as a lot of rubbish). Some of the top top swiss brands have their parts made in China and then they just "test" them at their swiss base and call it swiss made.
I can't say how good the quality is on that watch based just on the picture; but if it's a geniune automatic, inca-bloc balance then it's a really cool watch. Don't diss it.
Okay, I will not continue pointing out bad investments and will embrace misinformation whenever I can. I apologize.
Oh, don't go there. I didn't think this was the thread for it, but since you lead the discussion that way...
I am always amazed when watching this video.
Oh man T_T
That's the most beautiful watch I've ever seen.
It's only half a million dollars.
This begs the questions, is that watch really SO HARD TO MAKE that it MUST cost over 550k or are the people that made it snobby jackasses?
It's like a beautiful piece of engineering art. If a painting can be worth half a million, that certainly can. I don't know if I'd be able to wear it outside the house :p put it in a cabinet at home or something.
I wonder whether the time-keeping is actually improved by all the additions or if the extra-complexity just creates problems.
What amazes me is that Breguet invented the tourbillon in the 18th Century. Such a genius
The Tourbillon was developed by Breguet in the 18th century from a practical problem, Everyone used pocket watches back then. The pocket watches are nearly always worn in a pocket and are thus oriented one way throughout the entire day. The problem that arises is the wear on the moving parts due to long term exposure to gravity. That is how the tourbillon came to be, by putting the important moving parts in a rotating case this uneven wear causing inaccuracy was solved. (this is the reason the tourbillon normally rotates only in the vertical plane, the horizontal rotation is not needed to solved wear when the watch is kept vertical 90% of the day.)
This entire problem is largely non-existant on wrist watches because of the movement of your wrist throughout the day. Having a (gyroscopic) tourbillon in a watch these days is more an engineering feat then it is a really practical complication. There is probably still a marginable improvement in accuracy made by these because they do ensure a (nearly) completely even distribution of wear throughout the 3 axes, but i wonder if this is even detectable.
On January 21 2011 19:29 jstar wrote: Yeah, people need to realize a watch isn't for time keeping, it's a fashion accessory.
Since when does a time keeping device not be utilized for time keeping? Just because you have a phone in your pocket doesn't mean you are incapable of looking at your wrist.
On January 21 2011 20:54 Klive5ive wrote: Watches are designer/style items. Just like designer clothes "worth" is down to the individual. How much do you think a quartz watch actually "costs" to make? Yet some Tags costs £1,200+
Plus the chinese make a lot of good watches (as well as a lot of rubbish). Some of the top top swiss brands have their parts made in China and then they just "test" them at their swiss base and call it swiss made.
You are correct about quartz watches, especially these days. Most quartz movements sell for under $200 and yet you'll see them in $3,000 watches. Most people don't understand how a watch works let alone know what a good movement is, therefore the lower end market focuses on the aesthetics and you pay for that instead.
I'm pretty sure there has never been a good Chinese movement. Japan has had some nice ones but overall the best you'll see is Swiss. Invicta, an American company, got caught calling chinese parts swiss. No Swiss company has been accused of this, especially not the "top top".
That Nixon is interesting. Normally I would think it to be to minimalistic but with the 2 little inlays on the right it creates a different vibe.
The quadruple Tourbillion (although probably beautifully crafted and technologically very good) I don't like at all. Way to many dials and moving parts on the surface. All in all to busy and not clean enough for my taste.
On January 21 2011 19:29 jstar wrote: Yeah, people need to realize a watch isn't for time keeping, it's a fashion accessory.
Since when does a time keeping device not be utilized for time keeping? Just because you have a phone in your pocket doesn't mean you are incapable of looking at your wrist.
On January 21 2011 20:54 Klive5ive wrote: Watches are designer/style items. Just like designer clothes "worth" is down to the individual. How much do you think a quartz watch actually "costs" to make? Yet some Tags costs £1,200+
Plus the chinese make a lot of good watches (as well as a lot of rubbish). Some of the top top swiss brands have their parts made in China and then they just "test" them at their swiss base and call it swiss made.
You are correct about quartz watches, especially these days. Most quartz movements sell for under $200 and yet you'll see them in $3,000 watches. Most people don't understand how a watch works let alone know what a good movement is, therefore the lower end market focuses on the aesthetics and you pay for that instead.
I'm pretty sure there has never been a good Chinese movement. Japan has had some nice ones but overall the best you'll see is Swiss. Invicta, an American company, got caught calling chinese parts swiss. No Swiss company has been accused of this, especially not the "top top".
Sea-gull, Shanghai, Beijing can all produce chronometer grade watches. Chinese makes.
You're right though "top top" was an exaggeration. But to be called "swiss made" only 50%+ of the manufacturing costs has to be accrued in Switzerland; that includes salaries. There are makes that take advantage of this.
I'm probably really weird with my watch standards, but I don't understand why you'd want a watch that isn't round, has a leather strap (or anything but metal), or mixes a ton of unnecessary colors. Or having a divers watch if you'll never use it and don't know how. Seeing as a watch is the one piece of jewelry on men, it should be as manly, durable, and useful as possible. It should also reflect you & match with your general clothing style while still adhering to the above standards. I've had two watches and with both I got/get compliments from women daily. My first one wasn't expensive at all (<$100) and I have no idea how much my current one costs because I got it for christmas and haven't looked it up.
I'm looking for a pic of mine. Watches are incredibly useful for men because of this. I never carry my cell in my pocket after finding out about all the ways it screws with your balls.
here it is: Almost returned it because I wasn't sure about mixing the gold & silver, but I kept it to try it out and it got a really favorable response. I gave my parents a huge list of requirements and they pulled through. thanks ma & pa! :D
Simple, durable, no-maintenance, functional exactly what I need it for and matches a majority of my clothes perfectly. Not too gaudy but classy at the same time, and while its not that masculine I can definitely pull it off.
On January 22 2011 07:28 KurtistheTurtle wrote: I'm probably really weird with my watch standards, but I don't understand why you'd want a watch that isn't round, has a leather strap (or anything but metal), or mixes a ton of unnecessary colors. Or having a divers watch if you'll never use it and don't know how. Seeing as a watch is the one piece of jewelry on men, it should be as manly, durable, and useful as possible. It should also reflect you & match with your general clothing style while still adhering to the above standards. I've had two watches and with both I got/get compliments from women daily. My first one wasn't expensive at all (<$100) and I have no idea how much my current one costs because I got it for christmas and haven't looked it up.
I'm looking for a pic of mine. Watches are incredibly useful for men because of this. I never carry my cell in my pocket after finding out about all the ways it screws with your balls.
Almost returned it because I wasn't sure about mixing the gold & silver, but I kept it to try it out and it got a really favorable response. I gave my parents a huge list of requirements and they pulled through. thanks ma & pa! :D
Simple, durable, no-maintenance, functional exactly what I need it for and matches a majority of my clothes perfectly. Not too gaudy but classy at the same time, and while its not that masculine I can definitely pull it off.
I mostly agree with you. I have a similar watch as you do, only that it's all silver with a white dial, but basically same model. It's one of the reasons I chose to go with another Seiko 5.
However, I disagree with your definition of what it should be. Since it's a piece of jewelry (even though it's not just that), then obviously the way it looks matters a lot. I do believe that some watches look way better with a leather strap (look at the $600k watch on the other page). Some of them look better with a blue-ish hue background, etc. It's purely a matter of taste, just like pants or whatever. I have a lot of friends who did not like my choice of black/yellow, but I don't care. Also, I find mine to be a lot more "manly" than a classy one. Sure, it doesn't go too well with suits, but I won't wear it with a suit. I like the thickness/ruggedness of it. And even though I won't be diving with it, it's still very much a matter of taste.
I like the watch world simply BECAUSE there are so so so many models. Once you decide to buy one you go on a roller-coaster of watches you fall in and out of love with. And eventually, one really sticks with you for a number of reasons, and you get it, and then, a while later, things start all over again.
And don't get me wrong, I don't buy watches often, but I believe it's an interesting item, and I don't see why I would settle with just one, no matter how much I liked it. Not when there are thousands of alternatives out there.
On January 19 2011 22:45 s4rk wrote: My everyday watch
For formal events
DAIM dude! What a classy rolex, i really dont like the golden ones, but the silvery platina type is really stylish.. can i ask what you payed for it? ^^
On January 19 2011 22:45 s4rk wrote: My everyday watch
For formal events
DAIM dude! What a classy rolex, i really dont like the golden ones, but the silvery platina type is really stylish.. can i ask what you payed for it? ^^
It was my father's
His watch is an older model, but he replaced the bracelet with this type
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/dimRY.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://www.sneaker-space.com/Upload/ProductPicture/2010-1/28/armani-watch--1087-1.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://img208.imageshack.us/img208/3721/watch1v.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://cdn2.iofferphoto.com/img/item/126/076/023/diesel-classic-rectangular-leather-watches-060c2.jp)
![[image loading]](http://www.findwatches.co.uk/images/z_1694_1.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://www.seagullwatch.eu/images/tourbillon/ST8000SA-trans.png)
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/ZcdhO.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://cheapbuyus.siammix.net/images/120-Two-Tone-Seiko-5-Automatic-Dress-Watch-Silver-Tone.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://ak.buy.com/PI/0/500/208430947.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41d3FgLDx0L._SL500_.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://www.timexwatchesstores.com/cppic/timex-mens-sport-watches-51PUszhtMBL.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://www.worldtempus.com/uploads/RTEmagicC_09_2803_ROLEX_DatejustII_2_01.jpg.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/WiktX.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://schmiemann.de/Media/Shop/casio-edifice-ef-121d-1avef.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://www.dreamshopee.com/images/products/MarcEcko-E85042G1-1.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://www.edhardysale.org/images/products/gold-christian-audigier-watch-discount-new_1.jpg)
