Thread 18466190

The place to actually discuss watches, free of avatarfagging drama, including bittercelposting, pics of food or drinks, or long-ass stories about your lives.
If kofe time posts, just ignore him. He’s traumatized from a lifetime of being bullied.
Keep that shit in /wt/.

>Your budget
>Preferred brand or manufacture
>Watch type, e.g. dress, diver, pilot, etc
>Movement, e.g. automatic, hand-wound, quartz, etc
>Desired features, e.g. water resistance, day/date, chronograph, etc
>Preferred strap option, e.g. leather, nylon, bracelet, etc
>Wrist size or desired watch size

Previous: >>18461170

>>18466190 (OP)
Blancpain finally put out a real 38mm Fifty Fathoms. 12mm thick too.

>30 different threads squabbling about petty grudges dating back years
you people are mentally ill

>>18466192
shame about the date window

>>18466194
Yeah, looks like No Date FFs will forever be special edition only.

>>18466193
Go back to your containment thread.

You know full well we have your frenposting thread and this, the watch discussion thread.
The frens couldn’t control themselves so this was the only solution.

>>18466192
The 38mm Bathyscaphe looks better in the small size. The full Fifty Fathoms looks better in 42mm

>>18466202
This is fucking terrible. Look at those cuck markers.

>>18466200
meds, now

>>18466202
Agreed, the Fifty Fathoms looks too cramped on the smaller dial.

>>18466202
I'll never understand why people still revere Blancpain. These watches look so fucking cheap with the tiny ass markers, aliexpress looking sunburst dials, and in this case the brushing on the bezel markings. It's even worse on the big 44mm+ models.

>>18466222
I think it’s a reflexive contrarianism. The Sub is the “top” luxury diver but there are plenty of people out there who want something that isn’t the obvious choice.
Blancpain has successfully made people believe the Fifty Fathoms myth.

That said, though, the movement finishing is quite good.

>>18466222
Personally I like the Bathyscaphe but I recognize it’s not everyone’s cup of tea. I think it’s more the death of nuance on the internet. The watch is either the greatest thing ever made or every single facet of the watch causes you to stroke out with rage.

>>18466232
Submariner is better in every possible way though. The dial and size and proportion is all better, the bezel is better, I'm not sure but is it also thinner? Don't care enough to check. And even with the movement finish you'd need an exhibition case back for absolutely anybody to appreciate it and a brushed steel case back just feels better when you're actually wearing the watch, which is what matters.

Every luxury watch company makes a better dive watch than the 50 fathoms, with movement finishing being the one mostly irrelevant exception.

>>18466236
>Submariner is better in every possible way though. The dial and size and proportion is all better, the bezel is better, I'm not sure but is it also thinner?
It is thinner, yes. 12mm vs 14mm, IIRC.
But that’s my point, the Sub is obviously better but some people don’t like feeling like the choice is made for them. They’ll buy something different and convince themselves they’re smarter for it.

>>18466238
Even if you're going to do that, and I understand wanting to do that, like I said there are a million better and cheaper options. Tudor has a bunch of great dive watches in different sizes. Every version of the seamaster is better. Every version of the superocean is better, especially now with the new superocean heritage. Fuckin Oris Divers fuckin Date is better. Longines has a bunch of better divers. Panerai has a bunch of divers with weird complications if that's what floats your boat about Blancpain. It's not everyone's cup of tea but I think the Breguet Marine is a better. Microbrands like Christopher Ward are making better divers. Are any of these better than the Submariner? Maybe you think so, maybe you don't, but they could definitely make a better case than Blancpain.

>>18466267
>better and cheaper options
I think the hang up is the “cheaper” part. People buying luxury items don’t want to look poor.

>Buy a Sinn U50
No one will care if it’s a more capable diver, it will still be ‘can’t afford a Sub?’

Buy a diver that’s more expensive than the Sub and no one can accuse you of settling for the cheaper option.
The Blancpain is one of the few actual dive watches that’s as, if not more, expensive (not counting precious metal versions).
The GO SeaQ is another. I can’t think of many others.
The Breguet Marine is not a diver, neither is the Aquanaut.

>>18466267
>better and cheaper
>unironically defending christopher ward and tupoor
The blancpain looks good, it has heritage, it's not every NPC's default choice, and it has a DGAF factor that price filters the poors. If you're actually defending CW with a straight face, blancpain is not for you and you should NOT be spending this much on watches especially in this economy

>>18466273
I honestly don't think anyone that actually cares about watches would give a damn if you have a sub or not as long as you have good taste in watches and you wear something interesting that suits you, and anyone who buys a watch just because it says rolex or patek on it and cost a lot of money is a tasteless moron whos opinions of you don't matter anyway. Do they even care enough about watches to notice what you're wearing?

>>18466276
What percentage of real world buyers do you think actually “care about watches” in the /nawt/ sense? It’s going to be pretty small.

People who buy an expensive watch and post pictures of it obviously want everyone to know what it is and how much it cost.

>>18466274
I'm not saying CW makes good watches comparable to luxury brands, I'm saying they LOOK better Blancpains, often have better specs in some ways, and it's sad that they can do that at such a low cost compared to a massive brand like Blancpain that has full service bars in their ADs. That history Blancpain has is great but it can only carry you so far if you're making dog shit looking watches. And there's no hype around the brand anymore, so you know it's true.

>>18466281
Isn't that way more of a flex if it actually looks good?

>>18466276
I think you may be getting the real world and the internet confused again.

In the real world, no one cares about your watch unless it looks particularly unusual. When I wear my Patek or my Rolex, no one notices. When I wear my Hermes, that gets tons of compliments, despite being a relatively cheap watch.

Online, it’s the opposite. Everyone drools over the Patek, no one cares about the Hermes.

>>18466283
lol you’re right.

>>18466285
>When I wear my Hermes, that gets tons of compliments
That never happened. Also you don't have patek or a rolex.

>>18466285
I know all about that. My wife gets more compliments on her casio a168 than I get on any automatic watch I own, even precious metal. But again, I don't care if you bought a $100k watch, if it looks like shit it's not a flex. I don't care if you're the boss' boss, I'm not impressed by your gaudy new money posturing.

>>18466282
>dog shit looking watches
Yeah nah. You're just coping because you got shilled into buying a CW

>>18466298
I don't own a CW and that's not the point, you gibbering retard.

>>18466291
Ok.

>>18466190 (OP)
What is the single best clothing item to wear with a luxury watch?
And why is it POLO shirts?

>>18466305
Are you sure the compliments aren't facetious?

>>18466325
kek that’s not the coping strategy i would have expected

>>18466331
I'm just trying to understand it, because assuming you're not bullshitting about getting compliments on the watch there has to be more to the circumstances of the story, because that's an ugly fucking watch.

>>18466335
There’s not much to understand, bro. It’s unique looking and women like bright colors. They also know the Hermes brand well.

>>18466305
NTA, but i would not "drool" over these watches, they are quite mid. The Hermès is half a conversation starter, i'll give you that.

You got compliments on it the first time you posted it, cool, but you're a one trick poney. Fishing for compliments on 4chan posting the sames watches over and over is quite sad.

IRL, i often get compliments on my eyes and it didn't cost me 20K. My Explorer never got me any compliments, it got me some "it's cringe to walk around with 10K on your wrist" looks. Still love the watch tho.

>>18466355
I think you’re confusing me with another anon. I’ve never posted any of those watches here.
Either someone else is taking my pics from another site or they own the same pieces. Not like any of them are rare.

>>18466305
>someone’s actually posting watches
let the seething begin

>>18466306
Polo shirts can only be worn if you’re fit. If you’re fit, then your accessories don’t matter.

>>18466305
I really like watches with grey/silver dials.

>>18466335
It's orange, so it sticks out. The whole watch is a bit out there, just enough to catch the eye. And women have completely different tastes about watches anyway, they love Nomos for example...

>>18466391
>I’ve never posted any of those watches here.
Oh come on, you've posted that PP a number of times here.

>>18466305
The Explorer 2 is great. It has solid endlinks, which is nice.
I don't hate the Hermes but it looks fucking huge compared to the Rolex. It would be nice if they made it in the same dimension as the Santos Medium.
I find the Calatrava in this configuration very bland. Yellow gold and white dial and this would be a 10/10.

>>18466422
There’s another anon who has a 5196g but his is on a beige strap. Looks better IMO.

>>18466421
>And women have completely different tastes about watches
Ain’t that the truth? They’re like unique shapes and colors. They’re also objectively wrong about everything.

>>18466306
doesn't work if you're brown sorry

>>18466419
I like cream dials but they're hard to pull off.

>>18466499
They're produced by pulling off

Should I get one of picrel?

>>18466525
Yeah... if you're over 60

Looking for a watch that can track heart rate accurately.

Preferably something black or silver.

Any recommendations?

What is the most homosexual watch? Like you just KNOW the guy wearing it sucks miles of cock daily.

>>18466534
Seiko Alpinist

>>18466536
Small Cartier on men

>>18466525
Yes the Ventura is based

>>18466546
>was going to buy a small cartier
Fuck you. FUCK YOU.

>>18466556
Go for it anyway. Don't supress it.

>>18466556
It's very gay. Small tanks are traditionally worn by women, they are pushed by the fashion industry like men purses are.

>>18466534
>muh pulsations

>>18466573
Muhammad Ali would have beat your ass wearing his tank Louis.

>>18466536
Rolex

I don't give a fuck what watches are in your collection, if you haven't fucked a bitch wearing every one of them you ain't shit.

>>18466573
Doesn't look too small on the left, is he a wristlet?

Haven't owned a watch since high school, just looking for something nondescript (casual and formal social occasions) and reasonably cheap (AU$200 or so), what options are there for watches with a 24 hour face?

>>18466653
When you say 24 hour face do you mean a watch with an actual 24 hour hand, or would a normal 12 hour watch with 24 hour markings do? Would something like a field watch be your thing? Also almost all digital casios can show the time in 24 hour format.

>>18466653
If you mean an actual 24 hour analog watch you might be in trouble at that budget. The most famous 24 hour watches would probably be the glycine airman and the Breitling cosmonaut navitimer variant, both obviously way oit of your budget. Under $200 there are some fairly heinous shitters and homages on amazon, and Vostok makes some dive watches with 24 hour movements but they are big and notoriously hit or miss in quality. If you wanted something from an actual brand your best bet would probably be a GMT watch from either timex or seiko, depending on where you shop they might be above your price point but maybe not by much.

>>18466656
A fully marked 24 hour dial is what I mean, yeah.

>>18466685
If they're prohibitively expensive, I'll be fine with a regular 12 hour watch; I just like liked the idea of having something a bit different.

What are a few go-to brands for analog watches in my budget range, then? I don't need anything fancy, and I think a leather strap is preferable if that matters.

>>18466685
>If you mean an actual 24 hour analog watch you might be in trouble at that budget
nigga doesn't know about vostok i see.

>>18466702
I know all abou vostok and that's exactly why I didn't mention it.

>>18466710
>>18466702
Actually, I did mention it in the very post you're quoting but I forgot because I'm drinking bourbon with my wife.

>>18466712
yeah, i stopped reading after the quoted text

>>18466573
What about something that a poorfag could afford

>>18466306
SAAAAAAAAAR

>>18466691
You can always change the strap to the one you like you know.

>>18466536
nomos

>>18466586
>Muhammad Ali would have beat your ass wearing his tank Louis.
Muhammad Ali wouldn't have worn that tank as a young man today.

>>18466730
>What about something that a poorfag could afford
Something a poorfag could afford that signals that he's gay? Womens watches in general, maybe some designer shit with Swarovski crystals.
Also colorful Swatches.

>>18466222
If you think these are bad, you should see the dinnerplate Villeret, they honestly look terrible and flat.
The Bathyscaphe is pretty neat in person in the smaller sizes. The small markers fit well in smaller proportions.
But the Villeret just shouldn't be larger than 38mm.
Funnily enough, the FF ends up looking tacky if not cheap because of how shiny the sapphire bezel is and since they're all large that means you get a huge shiny bezel that's just way too flashy.
It's like Blancpain refuses to make the watches people actually want and my schizo theory is that it's a way to make sure the limited runs of "good" models sell out on the spot
>no date FF only happens when Hodinkee wants to do a collab
>sub-42 steel FF only happens in limited editions sometimes
>black Air Command always limited
My further schizo theory is that Blancpain has been directionless since Swatch bought it and their initial plan failed.
They purchased it from Biver after they had become one of the few watchmakers in Switzerland to do well in the late 80s. At that point the Leman collection was performing really well.
Swatch, at that point, was trying to grow into the higher end of the market hence the purchase of Breguet and Blancpain.
Swatch gradually phases out the Leman, turning it into the 2100 and ultimately killing it off and replacing it with the L-Evolution line which was an obvious attempt at making a Hublot competitor complete with skeletons, chronos all over the place, stark colours on dials and cases.
It was one of if not the biggest flop in the entire group's history.
They panic and retool Blancpain as "the complication brand" which is what they were already doing with Breguet.
So really, they had one plan, it failed and it really seems like they haven't really found something else to do with Blancpain since.

>>18466194
Big Date Fifty Fathoms is sexo

>>18466628
could be a seiko

>>18466691
citizen

>>18466857
That explains it. The Seiko tanks are fuckhuge.

>>18466766
This. I don't get why preferred strap option is even on the "suggest me a watch" list in the OP text.

>>18466855
Do they even still make one?

>>18466852
This is a good analysis, I think.
It looks like Swatch is positioning Blancpain as their answer to Richemont’s JLC.
JLC is, similarly, a brand that doesn’t quite know what to do with itself and has only one really notable design.

>>18466930
Yes.
In titanium.
45mm only.
Because they hate selling watches so they only make the ones nobody want.

>>18466192
>38mm BPFF
I’m not in love with it, but I appreciate what they’re trying to do.

The problem is that they’re not going far enough. The people want the ORIGINAL FF design. Simple and bulletproof.
The Sub has worked, in part, because Rolex has only changed the overall design minutely while improving the individual details as needed.

(The same can be said of the Seamaster 300, another timeless design and the reason the Peter Blake SMP is still beloved decades after being discontinued)

>>18466806
There's literally no reason he couldn't.

>>18466964
He said “wouldn’t”. Fashion has changed and a flashy professional athlete today is going to wear a Richard Mille or something.

>>18466852
>The Bathyscaphe is pretty neat in person in the smaller sizes. The small markers fit well in smaller proportions.
This. The 43mm Bathyscaphe is awful. The original Bathyscaphe from the 60s was also a tiny watch (by diver standards) like 35mm or something.

That dial photographs terribly, though. The nipple dial makes much more sense in person and the indices don’t look as tiny.

>>18466966
I bet he would JUST to beat the shit out of you wearing it.

fucking avaturdfags need to fucking get out for real for fucks sake

>>18466992
Huh?

>>18467011
>Hurr?

>>18466972
The dial photographs like real life. The nipple dial makes no sense. The markers look miniscule.

Are you mentally ill?

fukk nigga can't stop jackin my dick thinkin 'bout yo sweet stank ass homie

>>18467102
/wt/ is leaking again.

happy pride month!!! time to clean up my dookie slop again jannie!

>>18467098
I used to own a 38mm Bathyscaphe. (I got rid of it because I couldn’t deal with a non-hacking movement.)
The dial is great, though. It’s highly visible in all light conditions because the bezels around each index catch the light in low-light while the lume takes over in zero light.

But, if you hate the watch that much, I know this is all irrelevant to you.

>>18467110
You didn't own a bathyscaphe. You can deal with a non-hacking movement, you just don't want to. It looks gaudy in all light conditions. I am indifferent to this ugly watch.

>>18467110
It's honestly absurd that companies operating at this price point would even offer watch movements missing features as basic as hacking within the last 30 years.

>>18467126
BP did use an ancient movement for that watch. The F.Piguet 1150 was originally meant for thin dress watches, but BP used it so they could have a 300m automatic diver that’s under 11mm thick but still has 100 hours of power reserve. The movement was designed without hacking and ran at a low 3Hz beat rate.

I agree, though, that any new movement design must include hacking at a bare minimum.

Picrel, next to a Swatchpain I picked up as a vacation souvenir.

>>18467140
Those are objectively ugly. Those colors (orange+green+brown), it has to be the worst color coordination possible.

>>18467140
I’ve read that the cal.1150 is also not very tough. I wonder if Blancpain made it more shock resistant when they put it in a sports watch.

>>18467141
For the life of me I cannot imagine why someone else owning a watch would make anyone so angry. You normally post in /wt/ don’t you?

>>18467146
I'm not bitterfag. Your watches just objectively look like shit.
Like, who mixes bright green and bright orange on anything?

>>18467146
>I’ve read that the cal.1150 is also not very tough. I wonder if Blancpain made it more shock resistant when they put it in a sports watch.
doubtful. I don’t think Blancpain really believes that it would be worn as a diver.

>>18467150
>I'm not bitterfag.
>proceeds to flood the thread with bitter toxicity.
What, are you upset that all your gay porn spam got deleted?

Wait... is this actually good field watch? This can't be true...

>>18467163
In what shape or form is this $900 monstrosity a good watch let alone a good field watch.

>>18467163
Are there any chinkwatch companies that will make a classic field watch with non fauxtina lume?

>>18467163
what's special about it compared to the normal hamilton field?

>>18467165
>>18467187
>no branding
>nice textured dial
>decent build
>authentic size and design
>no gay window on the back
Looks pretty good to me.

>>18467195
Here, https://www.aliexpress.com/item/1005006768152972.html?spm=a2g0o.store_pc_home.promoteWysiwyg_6000301103161.1005006768152972
Same thing only 25 times cheaper. I feel like a teacher for special ed kids.

>>18467202
You're in the wrong place if you think $25 ali express quartz shitter is the same thing.

>>18467207
It is exactly the same as yours shitter.

>>18467212
Yet literally any watch enthusiast would tell them apart across the room.

>>18467215
I don't even know anymore where cope ends and genuine mental retardation begins.

>>18467215
>and if they can’t tell them apart, they’re not “true watch enthusiasts” like me!
>checkmate
>*vapes*

>>18466190 (OP)
I’m thinking about getting a skeletonized perpetual calendar or this quartz girard perregaux from the 80s I really like. Also maybe a bust down Franck muller with a aftermarket face but factory setting on the body and clasp

>>18467224
That ali watch literally has flat comic sans printed dial. Benrus numbers are actually using nice font and has some volume. Isn't it obvious?

>>18467195
>>no gay window on the back
there's no window on the back of Hamilton khaki fields

as a true watch enthusiast I'm able to tell a no-name 900 CHF shitter made in China and assembled in Switzerland from a no-name $40 shitter made in China and assembled in China

>>18467242
You're not a true watch enthusias, i am. I am able to tell the difference with my eyes closed purely by the smell. Any true watch enthusiast knows that distinct expensive watch smell.

Am I crazy for considering this?

>>18467246
I mean, do you actually like it or do you just want something with a top end name? Because, looks-wise, it’s like an AI pic of a Franck Muller.

>>18467246
PF was trash before Guido Terreni was named CEO.

>>18467253
Usually it’s the other way around: when a new CEO comes in, everything goes to shit.
Like Moser, before the Meylans took over, they made great watches, afterwards, they focused more on memes while cutting corners on quality.

>>18467247
I like the red face but I’d prefer it on a red band. I question how wearable it is otherwise. It is a nice piece though. Maybe a little too y2k for everyday wear

>>18467140
I don't know how anyone can look at that watch and not think it must be a cheap chinese shitter. All the components of the dial and hands look like they came from different watches.

>>18467259
>t. True watch enthusiast

>>18466536
Any tank watch.

Does anybody know what watch Rod Taylor is wearing in The Birds?

>>18467277
I think the gays are wearing the santos and panthere collections these days. Also Nomos.

Good afternoon watch chads. These have all been my daily pieces, in the order I’ve acquired them. In the market for a yellow gold annual calendar.

>>18467306
>In the market for a yellow gold annual calendar.
Are you looking at replacing one of them or adding? The Cartier could easily be replaced by something like a JLC Reverso Calendar. That would be very cool.

>>18467330
>JLC Reverso Calendar
Ah yes, nothing like a 50mm lug to lug rectangular watch to fit into a wristlet collection

>>18467345
> t. Stallone

>>18467306
Is even the Seiko fake?

Question: I sometimes see watch brands say the number of the jewels the movement has on the dial, like 17 jewels, 21 jewels, etc. Does more jewels in a movement actually have any bearing to the quality of the movement, or is this just marketing because more jewels makes it sound like its more expensive?

>>18467306
fakest looking Explorer i've ever seen
that bracelet is not ok

>>18467379
That’s what happens to oyster bracelets when you wear them. Extremely flexible

You don't need anything more than a Sekonda.

Good thing it's not a Bill of Needs.

>>18467378
Jewels are used as bushings within a movement to reduce friction and increase efficiency (and positively affect accuracy as a result). More jewels do not necessarily mean a movement is better, since the architecture of the movement determines the number of jewels needed.

In the late nineteenth century, the number of jewels was used as a marketing tool so companies would add pointless jewels to a movement just to say they had more. This practice stopped in the early twentieth century.

>>18466588
>rolex
dubs have spoken

>>18467378
Not really, at least not anymore.
It was important when really cheap mechanical movements were still on the market.
Jewels are a way to increase the durability of your watch by reducing friction : metal on metal has more friction than metal on ruby hence gear axles are placed in rubies. Added advantage is that the oil that eventually gunks up will only eat through the axle of an easily swapped gear instead of the gear AND the base plate or bridge (more expensive to replace).
Back in the pocket watch days, mass-produced low quality movements would have no jewels to cut costs. That transferred to wristwatches that had pin-pallet/Roskopf escapements. These types of movements just aren't made anymore. This very low end segment of the market is fully quartz now.
Even the crappiest chinese mechanical movements will have jewels at this point.
Unless you're buying antique watches, you don't really need to worry about the amount of jewels in a watch.
They're disclosed because there's lingering regulations in Europe and Switzerland that require it initially to let buyers have a rough idea of the quality of their watch : you have to disclose how many functionnal jewels there are, as in how many jewels are in contact with a moving metal piece. That used to give you a base idea of a movement's quality (no jewels : really low quality Roskopf or supercheap cylinder escapement pocket watch ; 4 to 6 jewels : low quality swiss-lever escapement ; above this you start seeing proper jeweled geartrains) and prevent fraud with some makers setting useless jewels in the baseplate to claim "100 jewels" while not having any functionnal jewels.
Nowadays, your jewel count will always be in the same ballpark and if anything it's just going to be a hint on whether a watch is automatic or manual wind.
Quartz watches don't have to disclose their jewel count, which is funny because that's where you can find some really crap movements with little to no jewels. Pic very related.

>>18467678
I should add : quartz watches don't have to disclose their jewel count on the dial or caseback, only on the movement.
So (you) as the end consumer will not know if you're getting one of the better ETAs with basic jeweled geartrain OR a plastic-molded cheapo.
There's a whole ruleset on where the jewel count has to be written and I forgot all of the details. IIRC it needs to at least be on the movement itself which is a leftover from pocket watches that could very easily be opened without any tool.

>>18467519
>>18467678
>>18467681
Thanks boys. This is informative stuff.
So saying “18 jewels” right on the dial is mostly traditional? I don’t see a ton of brands doing it with new watches, except when they’re making vintage reissues.

>>18467799
I was trying to look back into the exact regulation and (as is often the case in watchmaking history) there's a lot of conflicting info.
>USA imports were required to give an exact number of precious stones on a given product starting in the 1880s so watchmakers wrote it down on the dials (may or may not have to do with the amount of counterfeits at the times too : if no one opens the watch, no one can spot a shoddy movement)
>US customs revised as lately as 2022 require “one or more of the bridges or top plates to show the name of the country of manufacture; the name of the manufacturer or purchaser; and in words, the number of jewels, if any, serving a mechanical purpose as frictional bearings.”
>ISO apparently has jewel count in some of its norms but it's paywall'd so I can't check
>a "fully jeweled" watch has at least 17 jewels (4 for shockproofing, 1 roller jewel for the balance wheel, 2 pallets for the escape fork, 2 jewels to hold the fork, 2 jewels for each of the four wheels of the geartrain)
>a "fully jeweled" quartz watch would need 8 (2 jewels for each of the three wheels of its geartrain and its rotor)
>the highest functionnal jewel count is in the Vacheron 3750 caliber with 52 complications
>neither the Geneva Seal or the Patek Seal states that the jewel count needs to be accurately displayed, nor does the "Glashütte Rule"
>some automatic calibers used jewels on the base plate or bridges under the oscillating weight so friction once the weight becomes wobbly wouldn't create as much black dust inside the movement and so the base plate and bridges wouldn't be damaged since it's easier to replace just the oscillating weight ; no one knew if they should be considered functionnal jewels and since these movements weren't built for long, no one cared to answer

>>18467826
I don't think I've ever seen an 8 jewel quartz movement?

>>18467832
ETA E64.111 has eight jewels. It’s used by a lot of companies for their higher end quartz products.

>>18467832
I think the ETA 9xx quartz movements all have fully jeweled geartrains. Some may be missing one jewel because of the position of the seconds wheel. Sometimes when you have a central second with the axle passing through a long guiding tube, there is no jewel in that tube.
They're being replaced by the Fxx family of movements which seem to be missing jewels on the third wheel, judging from the specs I can find.
>caliber spec sheets can be downloaded from the different caliber page on boley.de
>in case you're curious

>>18467799
even number of jewels is mechanically difficult to explain so if you see a movement with 18 jewels it's either some outrageously hipstered up indie manufacture that costs $200k, or it's an anachronism from the jewel wars when they would throw jewels on the dial just to bump the count

>>18467862
It's pretty common now to see movements with 23 or 24 jewels in of the shelf calibers sold to microbrands, so they're not exactly hipster but I'm not sure where the extra jewels are going.

>>18467872
In the automatic winding bloc.
Again, the minimal amount of jewels in a mechanical watch is about 18 (17 if you have a central second and a tube for the seconds axle).
If you add complications, certain parts may have jewels in there (rollers on date disc jumping cams for instance. Not common but that can happen). If you have automatic winding, you are absolutely going to need jewels in that part of the watch because of all the rotation and torque involved. Off the top of my head, the automatic bloc for the ETA 2824 has 8 or so jewels, maybe more because sometimes the inversion wheels have jewels built-in for their inner cams. Other systems like the Pellaton from IWC used roller jewels that are going to increase the jewel count, while Seiko's Magic Lever would require fewer (something like three or four extra jewels, I dunno I don't work on a lot of Seiko movements)

>>18466190 (OP)
finally someone posted a good watch

>>18467923
where?

>>18467927
The new 38mm fifty fathoms. As shit as this brand is now you have to admit a fifty fathoms in an actually wearable size is a good move.

The best perpetual calendar HAQ timepiece out there.

>18467983
You seem to be lost, this isn't /wt/

>18467987
Excuse me? I created this thread.

>18467988
>>18466200

>>18467826
There was a hundred jewel movement that mounted like 80-something jewels on the rim of its automatic movement so they could say they were functional.
>they reduce friction between the rotor and the side of the case!

It's sunny today

>>18467973
The 42mm version they released a while ago was also very wearable. Only 47mm lug to lug, it fits just about any average man’s wrist.
I think the wide bezel and tiny dial would make the 38mm version look small, compared to the 38mm Bathyscaphe which has a narrower bezel and larger dial.

Ok but how about this?

>>18468073
If it's like hundred bucks it's alright. Bracelet looks timex tier terrible though.

>>18468077
How do you determine how much a watch should cost?

>>18468084
If it’s a microbrand, then you know where all their parts come from (China) and how much they cost. There are dozens, if not hundreds, of companies selling the same watch just with a different name on the dial, for wildly different prices.

>>18468073
>look it up
>wtf why does it cost $700
>assembled in usa

>>18468068
42mm diameter 14mm thick watches will never, ever, ever be wearable. There's no world where 38mm diameter is too big. Please learn to cope with your sexuality and whatever your mother did to you and stop spreading your oversized shitter retardation online.

>>18468105
>thoughts immediately go to sexual shit
I wish /wt/ would leave

>>18468091
>If it’s a microbrand, then you know where all their parts come from (China)
What other brands besides maybe Seiko and Citizen manufacturing their own parts under $1000 I need to be aware of?

>>18468109
There's no other explanation for the "MEN NEEEED TO FILL THEIR WRIST WITH AS MUCH GAUDY SHITTER AS POSSIBLE" posts. It's not reasonable, it's not fashionable, it's nothing but "and I wear a bigger watch than you and therefore I am more of a man than you" dick waving.

I don't get why Blancpain won't make a 1:1 reedition of picrel in stainless steel with a retail price of 12k eurobucks.
The current Fifty Fathoms is ugly and stupid, even in 38mm.

>>18468173
Nnnoooo! It’s 41mm! Too big! Too big!! [insert unresolved sexual trauma reference]

shitters

I am a complete novice when it comes to anything time piece related. I do want to get something of quality and is durable for the stuff I do.
Don't like excessively gaudy stuff
>Within $1k
>None
>Water resistant, impact resistant, date, maybe multiple time zones (I deal with the entire North American market as part of my job)
>Leather strap - I'm sure I'll find something exotic later on like stingray leather later on

>>18468180
Weren't the original ones like 35mm?

random question: what are your thoughts on intentionally wearing a fake rolex? part of me thinks it would be funny, especially to share a laugh with guys who can tell the difference, but i also wouldn't want to support fraud. any thoughts?

>>18468240
In what way is it funny?

what's with all the hate on the 24 hour subdial many chronos have
being able to tell at a glance if the watch is in "AM" or "PM" is useful for anything with a date complication, or if you're jetlagged or something and genuinely don't know if it's AM or PM when you're waking up

>>18468244
because it's so obviously sleazy and stupid.

>>18468256
Most retarded post in the general so far, can anyone top it? With anything other than gay scat porn, that is.

>>18468218
The original Fifty Fathoms was 41mm.
The original Bathyscaphe was 35mm.

Watch ID on top right

What's the concensus?

>>18468351
It would be so much better with a regular bezel.

>>18468332
Old man in the bottom right looks scared out of his wits.

>>18467983
Perpetual 8F regrets

>>18468351
That mirror polished bezel will be scratched to death within minutes wearing it.

>>18468173
I am fully convinced Blancpain does that on purpose so they can release limited editions.
If the production models are never quite right, then the limited editions with the right specs are going to be far more desirable.
Weaponized FOMO.
You're teased with the wrong watch for years and THEN you get the right version at a markup when there's only 200 copies.
They CAN make the smaller versions, they CAN make them in steel too, they CAN make the original dials. We know they can because they DO make them when Hodinkee reminds them to. They just won't and it might just be because they think it wouldn't be as sought after if it was readily available.
Which sucks because the FF is a really nice design in the right configurations.

Or maybe I'm giving them and Swatch too much credit and they've just been mismanaged and barely hanging on thanks to the russian market for a while.

>more parts -> more frictions
>more frictions -> shorter service intervals
>more parts -> more expensive to service
When did you realize complicated watches were a scam?

>>18468525
post your casio so we could laugh

>>18468529
I don't have a Casio. I have a Swatch though (not pictured).

>>18468351
Overpriced Glycine homage.

>>18468525
RETVRN TO SIMPLICITY

>>18468525
Complications are fine if you actually use them. My company is global and I’m on the road at least one week out of every month. A GMT watch is essential for me.
I don’t need a chronograph or a perpetual calendar or anything.

What do you think of the new Chrono24 ad campaign?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bk3RhmxE1UA

>>18468614
>watches?

Just dropped 110 buckaroos on a coupla beaters

>>18468649
How does it feel to be based?

I just got a Tinder match with a big tittied black girl bros

>>18468552
Is that a real model or AI slop?

>>18468719
It's real. There's two versions of it.
https://watchbase.com/panerai/radiomir-1940/pam00790
https://watchbase.com/panerai/radiomir-1940/pam00791
And because it's Panerai, they absolutely needed to make it 47mm otherwise it just might have been wearable.

>>18468722
Jesus. That brand really is in the weeds, isn’t it?

>>18468728
It's really weird.
On the one hand, the Due is selling well and they're Due-fying the rest of the Luminor collection with every other sunburst variant imaginable so clearly that has to sell or they wouldn't bother.
On the other hand, they do these as well as the nex Radiomir Quaranta with their worst movements for which they keep getting shit because of the unreliability, the downgrade in finishing and the hacking (although IIRC that's been added back in but that might not be across the whole range).
At this point I have no idea if they're Richemont's new cash cow hence making every configuration imaginable, or if nothing is working at all and so they try every colourway they have in hope one of them will work.
ALL I WANT IS A CALIFORNA DIAL RADIOMIR THAT ISN'T 47MM.
IT'S NOT HARD.
WE ALL KNOW YOU CAN DO IT.

Is anyone else done with this seconde/seconde faggot?

>>18468525
If having to service a watch bothers you maybe consider just getting a quartz instead. The way I see it entire purpose of having mechanical watch is simply conscious time keeping. Somewhat similar to watering your plants it's small responsibilities which can fill the void left by over simplified and convenient modern life.

>>18468797
It has never been a thing.

What does /fa/ think of the oysterquartz datejust?

>>18469011
Far too based for mortal men. Wear at your own risk.

>>18467163
>>18467207
I own chinkwatch (RDUNAE RA03) loosely manufactured to adhere to the specifications of what the US government procured during the Vietman war. Google MIL-W46374A/B -- its also 34mm and looks exactly like that.

The whole purpose of those watches was to be made to a specification and issued in large numbers. They were not branded, they were not swiss, and they were not meant to be special. For this style of watch having it be "high quality" and $900 entirely misses the point. Its meant to be military equipment that everyone gets, and that by definition it is rarely special.

>>18469060
>They were not branded, they were not swiss, and they were not meant to be special
Vietnam era watches had ETA movements. That new Benrus also has ETA movement. The only difference is a higher quality case materials and overall finish. Not to mention there are military watches made by IWC and JLC so idea of a swiss made watch isn't really that crazy.

>>18469011
And I bought this seiko 5 last week with almost the same strap

>>18469011
Love it. I almost bought a 35mm PRX as a cope but it was too small on my 7.5" wrist (I'd need to buy extra links for it to even fit).

What's your opinion on brands that sit right between luxury watches and high horology?
Brands like:
>Jaeger Lecoultre
>Glashutte Original
>Girard Perregaux
>Blancpain
>Chopard
They never get it quite right IMO (except maybe JLC that at least has the Reverso).
Like, why even buy a SeaQ or a Fifty Fathoms when a Submariner is less expensive?
Also I wonder how much the Land Dweller will hurt a brand like GP that relies a lot on the Laureato.

>>18469344
>why even buy a SeaQ or a Fifty Fathoms when a Submariner is less expensive?
You are asking completely the wrong questions. None of those watches are used as intended i.e. as a dive watch. They are all luxury products so if someone buys glashutte instead of rolex it's beacuse they want glashutte, the money question stops being relevant after about 5k. If you can afford to throw away ten thousand dollars to buy a hundred gramms of stainless steel you very well might buy any other brand, its a preference at this point.

>>18468256
I like casio's am pm better

>>18468256
>useful for anything with a date complication, or if you're jetlagged or something and genuinely don't know if it's AM or PM when you're waking up
What utterly childish and idiotic scenarios.

>>18469344
>Jaeger Lecoultre
Corner-cutting all around, don't fall for "muh watchmaker's watchmaker" meme. They've been going through a lot of staff layoff and constant turnover, which should be telling.
>Glashutte Original
It's a weird case : there's some increasing buzz around them but they just don't seem to sell. And yet GO is opening its own dial factory so something has to be going right or at least warrant that kind of investment from the Swatch Group.
>Chopard
I'll be interested in seeing where they go because right now they seem to do a good enough job being a competitor to Cartier. They have a jewelry sidethat does well enough, some quartz to bridge the gap (trust me, if you have been in charge of changing watch batteries then you know just how many of these shitty Happy Diamonds/Happy Sports watches are out there) and a more serious watchmaking side as well. They're not as fucky as Cartier in that there isn't as much of a gap between "jewelry-like quartz" and "ten pieces per year experimental horology", the catalog is more complete.

>>18469344
>Like, why even buy a SeaQ or a Fifty Fathoms when a Submariner is less expensive?
When you're on these price ranges, plenty of customers end up reversing the typical mindset of "what makes it more expensive and why should I pay extra for it" into "what makes it cheaper and why should I settle for that"
You can find a few possible customer profiles :
>the guy with the money who already has a Sub, or wants something else because everybody else already has a Sub and HE is mommy's special and unique little boy
>the guy with the money who already has a bunch of watches above Rolex's standards and won't want a Rolex anymore because it's just not good enough if you don't have a fully hand-decorated movement
>for the Fifty Fathoms in particular, the hardcore collector. When you start dealing with oldschool collectors, "a collection isn't complete without a Fifty Fathoms" is something you'll hear a lot, typically followed by a lesson on dive watches and which may or may not have been first (spoiler alert : it's neither the FF nor the Sub)
>the contrarian. Unlike the first type, he will be saving up hard and may not have any other high end watch but he won't have a sub because he's just cool like that. Panerai used to have that segment of the market on lock

>>18469371
Then, of course, at that level of purchase power, sometimes it really comes down to stupid little things like how well you’re treated at the boutique.

How many multi millionaires out there refuse to purchase a Ferrari because they don’t like the way Ferrari dealerships operate? (It’s very similar to Rolex, actually.)

>>18469371
You forgot a 4th demo that I fall into
>people who want a rolex and have plenty of money for one but the Rolex AD is playing their usual hooknose games with you so you buy a $20k watch somewhere else because fuck them

>>18469545
Realistically, if we're talking about the Sub, you can get pretty much any model you want grey or secondary for not that much of an extra these days though. At least not enough to reach the price of a new Fifty Fathoms.
Good on you for not playing (((the AD game))) though. They should not be able to get away with it.

>>18469548
If a brand is telling me they don't want me to have their product I'm going to listen.

>>18469548
I'm not even talking about the sub, actually, I literally just asked for any 36mm watch and they've been fucking around for years. And this is with a jeweler that I've bought other jewelry from. I finally just said fuck em, and I really hope more people have the backbone to do the same. If rolex made an actual rare artisinal product it would be o e thing, ut they're literally pumping out millions of these shits a year and they're all apparently sitting in dealers safes waiting for dumbfucks to earn enough good boy points to earn the privilege of paying retail price for a fuckin watch. It's fucking gay how they expect you to beg for this shit and buy this and that first and follow their fuckin carrot on a string.

tips for my wedding? thinking of gifting oneto my best-man aswell to match.
considering tissot prx dont want anything more expensive than that

>>18469639
That would be a nice gesture. I’m sure your best man would appreciate it.
It’s a better choice than some dress watch he’d never wear.

Just make sure he actually wears a watch because then it’s a gift that will go completely wasted.

>>18469641
he usually wears a gold casio digital watch, thinking the gold prx would be a nice upgrade

>>18469641
I've been thinking a lot about doing the same thing but it's been really hard to pick something good for my best man. He's a basketball shorts and hoodie kind of guy so it has to be something kind of sporty, but not so sporty that it couldn't also be worn dressed up, it has to be light enough that he'd choose to wear it over his usual fitbit, but his favorite color is green so he'd probably want a green dial. Maybe I won't do it, it's just too hard to know if you're not wasting a bunch of money on something that they're going to leave in the drawer.

Kofe time.

this is my current grail, I might be retarded...

>>18469675
you are 100% retarded

>>18469677
Just as I suspected.

The other fancy square is too shiny for me.

>>18469680
Lol wristlet

>>18467923
Glad you noticed that brah

Is this now the actual coolguy watch thread? Last time I was regularly posting it was still on /g/.

Anyway, here's my new project watch. Movement is probably Venus, couldn't find the markings under the balance yet. It's column-wheel, which makes button operation pretty smooth, blows modern camshit 7750's out of the water.

It's gonna need a:
>service, maybe a few parts will need replacing
>new crystal
>replace crown and pendant tube, current ones look like an old mickey mouse job
>case ultrasound cleaning, maybe some polishing, whole case is stainless steel
Also it has fixed lugs, so I'll have to think of a strap solution, a modern NATO might not fit a vintage chrono like this.

>>18469695
That’s neat!

The movement is probably a Venus 188 or Landeron 148 or something similar. That would have been appropriate for a watch like that.

>>18469639
Traska Commuter looks nice in similar price/style.

>>18469698
Yeah, checked the shape of the bridges to photos, it's a Landeron. Exact model number who knows, that will become clear once it's taken apart.

>>18469675
Looks like a calculator

>>18469700
Ignoring the TRASHka name that is problematic, those watches are just soulless copes of Rolex OPs.
Idk why you would ever buy that, the crystal looks bombed as well, horrible.

>>18469639
Great choice.
If he's not into watch, get the quartz version. Normies don't appreciate automatic.

I'd also consider a Frederic Constant moonphase, but it's less modern, more formal and less of a crowd pleaser.

>>18468531
I've been roasted on this board for having boring tastes (i also own the 36mm Explorer), but i have to say, you beat me.
That is the most boring 3 watches collection you could get. Two silver dials, all of them having pretty much the same purpose. The reverso is pretty much for elderly people.

>>18469645
>he usually wears a gold casio digital watch, thinking the gold prx would be a nice upgrade

>>18469700
>we have Tag Carerra at home

>>18469726
Not everyone wants an exciting collection. Some people want understated but quality. They don’t want to have to think about which watch goes best with which outfit.

Not for nothing, but when anons post interesting, unique watches, they get roasted even harder for trying to stand out.

The only pointless watch is the Omega. I think he added it recently (IIRC, he was posting it trying to farm some (You)s.)

>>18469726
>all of them having pretty much the same purpose
Telling the time?

>>18469738
formal/office watches

>>18468531
>>18469736
ironically, it would be a better collection if it was just the Explorer, the JLC and the Swatch he was talking about.

>>18469713
>those watches are just soulless copes of Rolex OPs
Well no shit considering Rolex cost up to 20 times more. What's really important here is Traska not looking 20 times worse. It's one of a better copies. With Rolex 90% of value is literally just paying for a brand.

>>18469717
That's nice. But I can't handle the fact that it will forever be a Patek cope

Browsing Tissot's website, they have a few new original models i've never heard of.

the gradient PRX are pretty fresh as well, too bad they don't do it in 35mm

>>18469745
Just get a San Martin at this point.

>>18467381
>das jus the soun the watch make!

>>18469322
You know they make 40mm quartz models too, right?

>someone wants to pay $10K for a Swiss watch
:D

>someone wants to pay $5K for an MR-G
nooooooooooooooooo you can't do this it's a fucking calculator why aren't you giving the mountain jews your money aiiiiiiiiiiiiieeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

What causes this?

>>18470080
Yes?
A Swiss watch is potentially cool and good looking.
A 5k Casio is some heavy nerd shit.

>>18470077
Yeah but the Oysterquartz is 36mm. And at this point I'd rather save up for the real thing.

What watch would he wear?

>>18470180
US tax payer funded

>>18470080
That’s kind of an unfair straw man argument you’re making. There are countless instances where the thread advises against anons buying expensive Swiss watches as well, using the exact same reasoning.

>>18470180
Panerai is trash, but that's a tasteful size.

>>18470154
his wife wont allow him to have nice things

>>18470080
Unironically, I think a better question is why should any G-Shock ever be $5k by any stretch of the imagination? Literally the same watch in plastic is under $100 from the same brand using the same electronic module human hands never touched during the manufacture. You're paying $5k for a case and bracelet with finishing MAYBE on the level of a $1k microbrand watch.

>>18470270
It must be one of the quarantas? 40mm. If I ever buy a panerai it'll probably be one of these, I like that it's not comically oversized and the second subdial and date on opposite sides balances it out nicely.

>>18470293
No, that’s one of the older 7750-powered versions. Reference number PAM48.

What's a good watch for every day wear that says "I'm not poor, but I'm not bein a fag about it"

>>18470339
A low-key watch from a high-end brand that only watch nerds will know.

For example, a JLC MUT Moon in steel, 36mm, silver dial. No one would ever think that you’re trying to show off.

>inb4 yeah, because it’s a shitter!!! lmfao
Don’t be predictable. It’s a sign of low IQ and poor breeding.

>>18470339
unironically.

>>18470339
No such thing simply because you don't actually need to pay a lot of money to have a watch which can be objectively qualified as good one. Access to high precision machining and materials isn't exclusive to Swiss brands.

>>18470353
yeah because of its 17mm strap lmfao

>>18469680
Not enough clutter, get on my level

>>18466536
Cartier with diamonds

>>18466536
The assless chaps of the watch world

How did Panerai go from being so loved to being a joke in 20 years?

>>18470457
by becoming like six times more expensive and trying to be muhluxury instead of utilitarian and dependable choice of a blue collar.

>>18470457
It was a lot of things and Panerai did the wrong thing at every turn.
>spamming special editions
>not controlling flippers
>not understanding what people actually liked about the brand

>>18470457
If anything, Panerai became cool again lately.

>>18470353
>JLC MUT Moon in steel, 36mm, silver dial
This one is really bad though.
First of all, the 17mm spacing between the lugs is unforgivable. There's really no reason to do that.
Also it's like 10mm thick so it's really not that thin.
And finally the design feels kinda dated and generic now. The whole MUT line is begging for a refresh.

>>18470479
I love how “for example” in real life means “one option among many” while online it means “this and only this”.

Anon was quite clear about the type of watch he was talking about.

>>18469743
Depends on the Swatch, but yeah.
A dressy watch on a strap, a sporty watch on a bracelet, and then some kind of fun, weekend, t-shirt and jeans watch, makes for a perfect trio, like in >>18466305

>>18466335
No he's right. Someone wearing a basic steel sub or a any patek is going to be overshadowed by anyone wearing an Invicta. Any Invicta. The pleb minded, of which women are a majority, don't give a shit a out your watch compared with your height and face. Pair that with some gaudy eye catching shit and you make an impression. Random doughy asian bugboy #17283399 with a sub or nautilus is not memorable to anyone.

>>18470485
Good thing he specified he was talking about that one specific watch named and not the whole category being described.

>>18470514
Anon was not clear enough, it seems, for the ESLs and the burgers.

You can always tell when someone new has come over from /wt/. It takes them a couple of threads to remember that they don’t need to get so incredibly angry about watches they don’t like.

>>18470180
as much as i hate him, it's a good choice.

>>18470560
Who is getting angry? Just because you don't like something doesn't mean you're mad about it. Post literally any opinion on any board on this website, someone will be talking shit. It doesn't have to ruin your day.

>>18470609
Whats wrong with that?

>>18470611
Poor man's Tudor.

>>18470613
Isn't Tudor poor man's Rolex?

>>18470613
Nah, Omega is Longines for the middle class.

>>18470611
Omega are dogshit now, they peaked in the 60s

>>18470646
>they peaked in the 60s
That's literally every watch brand really.

>>18470611
imagine buying a chinese watch for that much money lmao

>>18470666
True, but the same is true for the entire industry in general. That’s why the best watches made today are all throwbacks to the 60s but with modern materials and manufacturing.

>>18468073
Why is this watch named after a drill bit?

>>18468332
Timex easy reader on steel bracelet (38mm)

>>18470948
Because you're going to be drilling so much bussy in the military larper community.

>>18469675
is this the rainbow one or the normal one?

Am I a retarded person for wanting this?

>>18470957
Gaudy shit.

>>18470958
I know. That's why I think it's cool.

>>18466190 (OP)
Why would anyone ever buy a watch like this? Just get the original in the aftermarket used. This screams Rolex cope, and there is only one thing worse than actually wearing Rolex unironically - that is coping for Rolex.

>>18466305
Very nice GADA watches. Not special by any means, but a silver calatrava and a black dial exp ii are unusual, so is the hermes. they all are very aesthetic and satisfying to look at. not at all gaudy. just the right price point too.
if I owned these I would have a vintage AP RO or PP NT, some kind of special vintage sea dweller or sub etc. some watch that is the opposite of GADA for special occasions. preferably a dress watch that isn't just gold apart from a vintage president.
something to say: I own JUST these watches because I want to, they fit my rotation: city, sport, dinner - but I know how deep the iceberg goes, which is why I have selected this fourth piece as my only collectors item.

There is in fact no reason to own more than four watches in general if you don't collect for the sake of collecting.

>>18470957
I don't know, are you Will I Am or some shit?

>>18470957
how good is the bracelet?

>>18470997
Seems nice.

new thread
>>18471023

new thread
>>18471023

new thread
>>18471023

new thread
>>18471023

new thread
>>18471023

>>18467163
If you want a field watch then just give up on mechanical.
https://bertucciwatches.com/Bertucci/A4TSYIlluminated.html