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: >>18466190

shitter

casio f91w ftw rest are shitters

>Your budget
under 2000
>Preferred brand or manufacture
Rolex, IWC, Zenith (but over the budget for this watch)
>Watch type, e.g. dress, diver, pilot, etc
professional watch but fun
>Movement, e.g. automatic, hand-wound, quartz, etc
anything but quartz
>Desired features, e.g. water resistance, day/date, chronograph, etc
water resistance 100m, the rest i don't care
>Preferred strap option, e.g. leather, nylon, bracelet, etc
doesn't matter
>Wrist size or desired watch size
wrist size 16.5cm
watch size between 35mm and 39mm
max 1.2mm thickness

>>18471023 (OP)
jlc btfo

>>18471030
>>18471033
>>18471038
>>18471039
Ah, I see it's seething poorfags posting time.
Here's the right thread for you, saars >>18468730

>>18471040
Thread for insufferable faggots is here >>18469466 ,please follow.

You're wrong nigga, autistic seethe happens in this thread:>>18471023 (OP)

>>18471023 (OP)

Oh, /wt/ is trying to crash the real watch thread again. Tiresome, really.

>200M WR
>exhibition case back

>>18471148
Exhibition case backs are retarded on any kind of sports watch.
In fact they're retarded on any kind of watch but /wt/ isn't ready to hear this.

>>18471166
I really wish watchmakers would offer an option for a solid case back. It could shave off 1mm or so of thickness while making the back feel smoother and better.

Bros, I'm deep in the tank on this OQ as my first "serious watch purchase". This is about $8k, but it's from my birth year, the quartz lore speaks to me and I just kinda like it. I'm usually against the CONSOOOOOM mindset, so am surprised that I'm even considering such a blatant normie status symbol, but here we are. Does anyone else here ever feel conflicted in this way? Has Rolex's entire marketing strategy culminated in this very moment to hack my caveman brain into thinking $8k is a reasonable price to spend on a watch? I can afford it, but is it just too excessive? I think I'd despise myself for getting this, but also despise myself for not getting it. This "hobby" sucks.

>>18471285
Holy redditpost, Batman!

>>18471285
A few things to consider (imo):
1- 8K is not crazy, depending on what you earn, i feel like a good metric would be to own more in cars than in watches (even tho i own more in watches myself).
2-This watch is what, 30 years old? Did you ever own a vintage watch that old? Do you know all the downsides of owning an old watch? Did you hold that 30 year old watch in your hand in order to see if you like the feeling of an old beat up watch?
3- Are you obssessed about this watch? Did you think about it day and night for the last 6 months?
If so, buy it. If not, wait.

>>18471292
Appreciate the reply, thanks anon.
1. I earn like $180k/year, which is definitely good but not absurd when you factor in taxes and other bullshit. I can easily justify $8k on a car, but find a harder time on a watch.
2. I'm currently looking at a "storage vault" watch which hasn't really been used much. Buying online from Europe so haven't actually held it. Heard the service costs can be high, maybe $2k every 10 years. The OQ has a loud "tick" which I'm a bit worried about.
3. I didn't know about watches until a month ago, and didn't know about the OQ since like 2 weeks ago. In that month I've definitely become a bit obsessed because of various youtube rabbit holes and reading a bunch.
I think you're right, I should probably wait at least 3-6 months to see if I'm still thinking about it. Am also thinking that if I get a Rolex, maybe I should start with an automatic mechanical.

>>18471033
Basically

>>18471033
For me, it's pic related. Perfect in every way.

>so then he said he bought an Omega
>ew leave him girl
How do you respond?

>>18471339
My wife and I bought an omega for me to wear to our wedding and other events where we dress up, and to eventually hand down to our kids.

>>18471355
>hand down to our kids
Don't they only cost like $15k? Pretty paltry inheritance.

>>18471362
The gold ones are over 20k

>>18471355
Why would you choose a mass produced chinese watch as a "heirloom"?

>/wt/ is now shitting on Omega
Time to buy a Speedmaster I guess.

>>18471515
*Sneedmaestro

Kofe time.

What's the brand with the best sounding name (regardless of the models)?
For me, it's FP Journe, Jaeger Lecoultre, Girard Perregaux, Baume & Mercier, and Rolex.

>>18471535
For me it's Omega
>311.92.44.51.01.003 Speedmaster Moonwatch Professionnal Dark Side of the Moon Anniversary Apollo 'Sea of Tranquility' Landing edition"

>>18471515
Chinkmega has been shat upon itt for years, newfag. Lurk more before posting or, preferably, go back.

>>18471023 (OP)
Anyone know of a nice looking watch company that is cheap? I hate to say buy copies but I can aliexpress a chinkshit copy of a nice watch for $10. Any worth spending in the $100 range?

>>18471566
/wt/ was full of Omega shills a while ago. You were probably playing Pokemon back then.
>Captcha: P00RD

>>18471535
Casio OceANUS

>>18471307
You can afford that watch, it's not a crazy purchase, but you need to get into watches more and you need to try the watch in person.
People who buy 10K+ watches online know perfectly what they want, they know their size, they know how to check a seller, they watch many reviews, so they don't get bad surprises that a watch is too thick or the lugs too long or whatever. For a quartz, would you get over seeing the second hand ticking? I wouldn't.

>>18471535
INVCTA

>>18471577
That was before the Sneedmaster was bumped up in price. Back when you could find it second hand for 3k or less.

>>18471339
You go through all effort to evade your ban and that’s what you post?

Ressence is growing on me.

>>18471662
Just get a smartwatch if you looking for some bussy action.

Why do brands still do double deployant buckles/clasps?
Single deployant is so much better.

>>18471535
>Federico

>>18471724
Neither is as good as a normal thumbnail buckle

>>18471307
Do not make such a purchase if you got into watches a month ago you will change your mind at least 10 times in the future
I'm not telling you to waste your money on microbrand shitters either but wait a least a few months while you check your options
In my opinion the best thing about the DJ is that it's one of the most versatile watches, it looks good on a bracelet, on more rugged leather straps (buffalo...), on dressy alligator straps, exotic leather... Seeing this one with a fixed integrated bracelet ruins half the fun of owning this watch

>>18471285
>>18471307
Not a great idea unless you REALLY know what you're getting into.
The OQ bracelets were not great. It can be weird to hear now that bracelets are a big selling point for Rolex, but they used to have some really tragic bracelets on certain models and the OQ is one of them depending on the version. And since the bracelet is integrated, you don't really get any alternative, especially since it's a niche model without an ecosystem of third-party options.
Be warned that maintenance and repair is always a bit complex for out of production calibers, that's always a risk with vintage watches. Doubly so for the OQ because it's an out of production quartz movement. Triply so because there's a chance it's an electromechanical movement with a pellet fork instead of a stator-rotor system so competent watchmakers are going to be few and far between. Quadruply so because they were not very common movements so there may not be that much dormant stock compared to mass production calibers of the past. Quintuply so because Rolex no longer works on these at all.
>Buying online from Europe so haven't actually held it.
DO NOT BUY IT.
This is exactly the type of vintage watch you must categorically NOT buy if you have not had a chance to see the condition of the bracelet in person, as well as the precision of the seconds hand jump (meant to be a very tight and precise jump from index to index because the geartrain has very low tolerances. Imprecision is a sign of wear and tear on the geartrain or in the versions with the fork caliber, issue with your magnetized "balance wheel").

>>18471629
It's tragic, isn't it?

What is the watch Solar Fields (the DJ) is wearing in this video?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pnBYS_5c0E0&list=RDpnBYS_5c0E0&start_radio=1

>>18471908
Good taste in music. I watched the video but there wasn’t a shot close enough to be able to tell exactly

Haha, thanks. These guys are the best.

This video may have more visible shots of his wrist.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=19TLaHfRN10&list=RD19TLaHfRN10&start_radio=1

>>18471583
>>18471785
The OQ is really the only Rolex that appeals to me; and mostly because it's quartz. It's Rolex's momentary and temporary recognition that technology always marches forwards and time stops for no one; everyone must adapt (even Rolex). It's interesting that mechanical watches are still popular and the OQ was discontinued; it's almost like the OQ is an anti time capsule. As a technologist myself, I consider this neat and unique.

If I would ever get a Rolex, it needs to be understated and minimal. The black face and steel jubilee OQ bracelet are what I would get if I were to order this watch new (agree that the OQ oyster and gold bracelets are hideous). The watch I'm considering is from my birth year (late 80s) with the exact specs I want and in "near new" quality. I honestly have no idea how often something like this would come up, but can't imagine it's that often; so a bit nervous about letting an opportunity like this slip for a somewhat reasonable price.

>>18471848
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe Caliber 5035 uses a stator-rotor system with no pallet fork. But your point stands; there's real concern around long-term serviceability. First, it's really only serviceable by RSC (at least the electronics components) and if electronics break beyond repair, Rolex charges like $1500 for a full electronics replacement (quartz module, circuit board, and/or stepper motor). When Rolex runs out of parts (probably in my lifetime), I'll either need to do the replacement myself or find an expert somewhere. As an electronics hobbyist (hello /ohm/), I might actually welcome this development; would be fun to hack on a fucking Rolex.

>>18471577
And before that, before and after this thread was chased from /g/ years ago, omega was rightfully shat on for being chinese. Now even normiemongoloids know this fact about swatch and omega. It's hilarious.

I'm confused. So do we hate Omega or not?

>>18471972
Let me tell you something

Are there really cucks in here who get upset that retards on the internet that probably don't even have luxury watches talk shit on a brand they wear?

>>18471535
The brand name Credor, derived from the French "crête d'or" meaning "pinnacle of gold"

>>18472011
in french it sounds cheap because, every other jewelry brand has "or" in their name.
It's literally like it was called "Goldberg" (berg meaning mountain).

Early life on "Goldberg?"

Aren't new quartz gold Tank Louis retailing for something like $3? Why am I seeing them on chrono24 for $5-7k?

>>18472042
Gold quartz Tanks are between 10k and 12k USD, new. You may be looking at a different model on C24, but classic, gold Tanks are available in that price range.
There’s a million different variants of the Tank, so it’s not always easy to get a one-to-one comparison.

you guys buy weird shitters? I just got this thing, couldn’t help myself

>>18472152
Very cool, and strange.
I used to buy more odd watches, like the Corum Bubble and Ulysse Nardin Freak.
I ended up selling them. I realized that I like to appreciate the odd/unique pieces, but in terms of what I actually like wearing for myself, I’m boring as fuck.

>>18472152
Sometimes, I really thirst for the weird, wacky shitters.
Thank fuck I'm a wristlet or I'd have been dumb enough to get a Nixie watch. These are the size of a hockey puck.

>produce 95% of their components in-house
>open about which parts are outsourced
>facilities freely available for tours
>subject to stringent external rules (i.e. the legal requirements for being able to put Glashutte on the dial)
Is Glashutte Original the most honest division of Swatch?

>>18472376
There are no "legal requirements", the Glashütte Rule is not a defined label.
It's just everyone putting in the work because Nomos will sue them just like they have Mühle if stuff isn't actually made in Glashütte.

>>18472377
If the end result is better watches made in Germany, I’m not bothered.

>>18472376
>Is Glashutte Original the most honest division of Swatch?
Aside from Swatch, not the conglomerate but the maker of plastic fun shitters who have never claimed to be anything but a maker of fun, cheap shitters; yeah GO is pretty open.
I toured their facility several years ago and they were very straightforward about what they are and aren’t.

The quality is definitely there, too. They’re just not well marketed.

should i cop the seamaster ripoff?

>>18472386
Unless you absolutely love it, no, because it’s hideous.

Man I wish it was 36mm. Probably won't look as good on my skinny 170cm wrist. Is this just me or it looks like a NEET otaku Rolex with subtle jojocore influence?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vjpK3H5Q7D0

Is a watch’s movement or aesthetics more important?

So uh... what do you guys think of Omega's new ad campaign?

>>18472426

>>18472420
Ultimately, aesthetics is most important. A good or bad movement can seal or squash a deal, but if the watch is ugly, you’ll never even consider it.

A perfect example for me is the Blancpain 38mm Bathyscaphe. It’s got an ultra thin movement that still manages 100 hours of power reserve, finished to a beautiful degree, packaged into the thinnest automatic 300m diver in the world … in an ugly watch.

>>18472426
>ewwwww girls! icky!

>>18472428
I like it c:

>>18472415
you should go somewhere to try it on hand.

>>18472426
Is that the fat girl that did the sports illustrated cover like 15 years ago everyone forgot about so she had to get cast in a play or something now to come back to relevance?

>>18472434
It looks like it's fresh off of an aliexpress factory line.

>>18471023 (OP)
Cooked his ass. Imagine buying from these homosexual companies.

>>18472386
>bezel numbers not curved
this rustles my jimmies

Hi guys, looking to buy my first Rolex, would you pick the submariner or GMT?

Further, kindly be specific in your choice:

Submariner with or without date? Colour?

GMT jubilee or oyster bracelet? Colour?

I don’t plan on owning multiple Rolex’s right away (as I prefer to own multiple different brands), so treat it like a one and done as well.

Thanks

>>18472453
GMT is only worth it if you travel, otherwise the lack of a quickset date is a pain in the ass.
I would not get a new Rolex either as I think they look too blingy and have movement issues.

I would get a classic two-line Sub, the 14060M.

>>18472455
The new sub has movement issues?

The sub has the glide lock band which seems really convenient. I like how it’s all brushed metal as well (less flashy)

Would you go for the date or no date?

>>18472447
I've handled some in person and the case and bezel feel just right.
Photos and renders don't do it justice unfortunately. It's always like this with Blancpain in my experience.
Photos make them look dull. When you get to see them in person, some of them look much better than you would have thought (the black Leman have four different textures on their dials, the textures on the FF and Bathyscaphe have some depth to them that you only see with movements, and champher on every opening that almost make the date wheel tolerable) or far worse (the current Villeret look cheap and enormous, which is a shame because the original ones from the 80s and 90s are neat, the size on the regular production FF and most Bathyscaphe is silly especially with the sapphire bezel on the FF)

>>18472456
Yeah, the 32xx movements have issues with amplitude. Rolex has not acknowledged it, since that would make them liable, but dozens of independent watchmakers have documented it time and again. It’s intrinsic to the design and cannot be fixed.

I’d also go for no date. I like the clean look.

>>18472465
I wonder if that's one of the underlying motives behind the new movement. If it's really that much better than everything else out there it would make sense to make a daydate version, a GMT version, and so on, and put them in all of the rest of the line. The only reason I hesitate to say that's definitely the plan is because they've clearly come out of the gate hot with a million versions of the landdweller so they must be expecting it to sell well and the movement is honestly the only interesting thing about it. Jumping right into putting the movement in everything else would step on those sales. So for that reason I wouldn't expect that to happen for years.

>>18472470
>I wonder if that's one of the underlying motives behind the new movement.
Oh, there’s no doubt in my mind. If the 32xx movements were flawless, Rolex would have stuck with them for decades. They are a slow-moving, conservative company.

>>18472465
This issue was fixed since 2024 from new production watches. It was an issue with the lubrication.

What other brands make field watches?

>>18472470
>So for that reason I wouldn't expect that to happen for years.
Rolex, if one thing, is careful. And that has served them well enough.
So don't expect the Land Dweller movement to be used in other models or modified for complications for at least 5 years, possibly 10. They're going to want to know how the movement ages and how reliable it is in the hands of customers. Factory tests won't account for owner retardation.
It's going to take a lot of time because if they rush it and push it too quickly, and there turns out to be mid to long term reliability issues on an escapement or movement they've pushed too quickly, we could be looking at a new pre-swatch Omega where tons of investments into lemon calibers gets you to the brink of bankrupcy.

>>18472493
That’s a patch, not a fix. The mainspring is too long and too thin. They tried to have a single barrel architecture while still maintaining the same size, beat rate, and robustness while doubling power reserve.

>>18471285
I feel the same about a regular Datejust. I see the thing, and it glows at me.. my instincts tell me to get it, that wearing it will feel so sweet and good
>but also despise myself for not getting it
yeah, exactly.. Sometimes you just want to buy something nice for yourself. I'll probably get a Datejust someday, maybe for my 40th birthday, so in ~3 years or so. I have plenty of time to think about it.

>>18472496
Hamilton and Benrus if you want a brand with military heritage.
Marathon and CWC if you looking for a modern field watch.
Seiko 5 and Boldr for something more affordable and fashionable.

Overall almost every watch brand has some variation of a field watch. Which one to go for depends on your preferences and budget.

>>18472530
Typical "I don't deserve nice things" whiteboy mindset.
Just get that fucking Datejust. You'll never regret buying this.

>>18472500
Do you think they're cautious and conservative enough to have been sitting on the landdweller escapement for 20 years already so they know exactly how it performs long term? And that's why they're so confident with the landdweller to justify making it in 2 different sizes with 3 different metals at launch?

>>18471972
>we

Would it be retarded to wear an old gold plated vintage watch like an old seamaster as a daily wear "beater?" not really a beater but to wear to work in a workshop type setting and to wear doing yard work and stuff?

>>18472496
Timex.

>>18472152
Very cool watch. What model/reference is this? The day/date hands are wild. Never seen anything like it.

>>18472683
6D50-S037921, but I can’t find much information on it

What is the best daydate reference number to buy in terms of quality and features and stuff relative to cost?

>>18472496
if you get Citizen you get day/date and solar powered quartz
https://www.citizenwatch.com/us/en/product/BM8180-03E.html

Well?

>>18472898
Well what?

>>18472898
Reddit watch

>>18472898
well what

>>18472898
Is this the new one with 19mm lugs? On one hand anything other than 20 or 22 lug width is fucking gay, on the other hand more and more luxury watches are using 19mm straps and the 19mm bracelet is light and tapers so comfortably.

>>18472911
That's a 39mm with the 20mm lugs

>>18472615
>Do you think they're cautious and conservative enough to have been sitting on the landdweller escapement for 20 years already so they know exactly how it performs long term?
No. There's too many silicon parts, the development can't be older than 10-ish years because the tech wasn't there yet before, or was still proprietary.
>And that's why they're so confident with the landdweller to justify making it in 2 different sizes with 3 different metals at launch?
Nah, that's just how they're operating now with their model lineup having different sizes and materials all over. It was the same when they launched the Yachtmaster II and the Skydweller (though neither had different sizes because their calibers probably are too big to allow smaller diameters, that would be my guess).
The Land Dweller looks to be positionned in the same spot as the Daydate so you want to have different materials in order to "scale it up" in terms of value. Steel as the entry and then you can go up with precious metals. Tha has already worked well with the Datejust and Daydate collection, as well as teh Pearlmaster.

I want to wear a watch, but I don't have the money to blow on a Rolex right now. I feel like if I bought anything else, I'd always be disappointed with it because it's not a Rolex. How do you cope with this? I know a lot of you settled on cheaper brands.

>>18473032
Day-date has only ever been made in full precious metal
there's never been a "budget" day-date, and I'm guessing there never will

>>18473052
Look into other actual brands and you can find plenty of reasons to not want a Rolex.
Not in the "I can't have a Rolex so I'll settle for this instead" but in the "this is neat and I want that more than I want a Rolex".
What is it that you like in what Rolex models exactly?
>inb4 "it's a Rollie and everyone thinks it's cool myself included"
If recognition is really what you care about then you don't want a watch, you want a Rolex. Save up.

>>18473055
Weren't there some steel and gold two-tone DDs, or am I just retarded?
I thought there were.

>>18473059
no, there were not. no steel, no two-tone. only full precious metal, and it's always been that way.

>>18471315
I have about a dozen variants. All kino wasabi.

>>18473063
This confirms it : I AM retarded.

>>18473076
NTA but based me too.

>>18473063
>and it's always been that way.
Aside from a vanishingly small number of all steel prototypes that have trickled out over the years.
Not to say they don’t exist, but they definitely weren’t in full production.

>>18473052
quartz
thin case
good bracelet
/thread

You know what, I really really love this slight rainbow effect on the brushed hands and markers of the Planet Ocean.

Which should I get for my daily rugged tool watch look, the PO or a Pelagos?

>>18473183
I feel like the Pelagos maybe has the more puristic and cohesive design, looking like a render even irl.
But the PO has the more visually interesting details you can only see irl. Like that rainbow effect and the mirror facets on the indices.

>>18473032
There was no steel skydweller at launch.

>>18473076
Was there ever any doubt?

>>18473052
What is your budget and what type of watch are you looking for? There are a lot of watches at every price level that are nice and iconic, especially if you're open to looking at used and vintage pieces. Even if you want a gold piece for a dress watch you may be able to find old gold seamasters for around $2000, which is still a lot of money for a watch but for an actual heirloom quality piece with gold in it that's relatively cheap.

How would you fix Jaeger Lecoultre?

>>18472898
shitter and boring

>>18473213
First, and most importantly, correctly identify your core market. Everything follows from that: you’ll know what to make and how to price it.

Little details like making watches bigger or smaller will follow.

JLC has seemed adrift for a while now, in terms of trying to be an Omega-priced mass market or a smaller, high-end luxury brand.
I don’t actually think Richemont is too much of a problem here since, by all accounts, Richemont’s pretty good about letting brands do what they want, even if it puts them in direct competition with other Richemont brands. (They do not stratify their products like Swatch.)

>>18473226
>fire all the shit tier celebrities they've hired recently (except Anya Taylor Joy because she's hot)
>make 1:1 reproductions of their classic models (Futurematic, Parking Memovox, Duoplan Driver, etc)
>refresh the Ultra Thin line by making the watches actually ultra thin
>make 36 or 38mm versions of the models in the Master Control line
>make a 40mm Polaris
>discontinue a ton of stupid watches they make (who needs a perpetual calendar Polaris?)
>maybe launch a new every day sports watch in stainless steel and put it on the mesh bracelet they've made for the Reverso

>>18473226
NTA but aside from iced out watches and precious metals I can foresee alot of watches dropping to 2k$ and less with the coming collapse of the aftermarket. MSRP would follow pretty soon. Not to mention smart watches, phones and fashion is eating the watch market.

avaturdfags

>>18473213
Get back to their roots with classic dress watch dimensions(thin watches with simple balanced complications, maybe even stick to manual winding to keep them that much thinner, much less of this shit where almost every dress watch is 39mm and complicated duo face Reversos that look like a fun size snickers bar on your wrist.) Return to making yellow gold pieces. Lower prices on uncomplicated entry level steel pieces.

Basically run it like an actual business, make it leaner and focus on what people historically liked about the brand. Make the steel models the bread and butter for pulling in and holding mass market attention, use that money to make smaller run items with high complications and precious metals and murals painted on case backs and shit that much more special. A big part of why people used to love the Reverso was because they're unique and the steel ones were relatively affordable, now that they're pushing them over $10k people are saying "but I could get a gold cartier tank for that, I could get a 2 tone rolex on a bracelet for that, I could get a submariner for that." if that's what they need to charge to make it worth their while something has to change.

>>18473226
>First, and most importantly, correctly identify your core market. Everything follows from that: you’ll know what to make and how to price it
This is exactly it. A lot of watchmakers suffer from this same problem.

At its core, JLC works best when it’s a “best kept secret” among knowledgeable, upper middle class buyers. The challenge is how to get them to buy new, since those buyers also look for used deals.

>>18472898
Only good piece they still make

>>18473283
The DJ36, OP36, DD36 and Daytona are great too.
The current Submariner would be 9/10 if it had an aluminum bezel.
Rolex is the brand with the best desirable watches/catalogue ratio.

>>18473288
The only real dog in the lineup is the modern air king. Skydweller is too big but if you're actually a world traveler it has its appeal and the design is at least unique and interesting. People question the 1928 but as 39mm dress watches go it's alright if that's what you're into. The air king is kind of just a big ugly watch with nothing special about it.

>>18472898
>>18472955
The 36mm is more proportionate

>>18473217
>shitter and boring
It says more about yourself than about the Rolex Explorer.
Literally go find a rope and hang yourself.

>>18473336
People really like announcing they're new money showoffs with no taste, don't they? If a watch isn't a gigantic loud gaudy shitter flashing their wealth to everyone it's "boring."

One of the things I actually like about my precious metal dress watches is that they are simple and understated. Retarded normies that don't know watches beyond what the biggest hypest shit is have no idea I'm wearing their car on my wrist and I'd like to keep it that way. I can actually enjoy my watch at dinners and events and family functions and shit without anyone being weird about it or asking me for things.

>>18472898
Why does this thing cause these threads to seethe?

>>18473359
One user is not “the whole thread” no matter how much bait he takes. This isn’t /wt/, anon. No need to start fights here. We’re just trying to talk about watches.

would this make for a nice graduation gift

>>18473379
is there ever a "so bad it's good" thing with watches? this one made me laugh unironically

I just ordered this. Simple GADA and it's pretty clean looking. I love the power gauge.
Any thoughts?

>>18473412
ugly. stupid brand name.

>>18473343
what watch(es) are you pretending to reference?

>>18473217
Filtered

>>18473412
Their website is fucking garbage. White text on white.

>>18473422
Oh my mistake I didn't realize I was on a marketing website font forum. Yeah that is retarded. I was wondering about a watch

>>18473418
I'm not pretending to reference anything.

I'm wearing a 35mm watch right now

>>18473343
you answered the wrong person, this fag said "shitter and boring" >>18473217

>>18473480
I know, I was talking to the person who responded to make fun of the tasteless retard. Talking directly to retards is a waste of time.

>>18473459
Okay. So what watches are you referring to that are understated but cost as much as a car. I'm interested.

>>18473059
there was a two tone, the tridor, but it's still fully gold

>>18472898
It's the one wash straight fit jeans of watches.
Looks cool, goes with everything but also boring.

Any watch I currently can't afford is a reddit watch btw.

Any watch I like and can afford is based also.

>>18473561
Good answer

>>18473475
and a good day to you too young lady

Manta SG1000 Series
OCWSG1000ZE1A

The weebs have overtaken the design department for Oceanus. It looks odd.

https://www.casio.com/us/watches/oceanus/product.OCW-SG1000ZE-1A/

>>18473893
>The weebs have overtaken the design department for Oceanus
always has been.mp3
All japanese watches have always been phenomenally, unbelievably ugly and the anus is no exception.

Kofe time.

>>18473906
Not all of the Ocean Anus has had gaudy bezels
CASIO OCEANUS OCW-S100-1AJF

>>18473844
>he thinks women wear 35mm watches
Only trannies and hambeasts.
Real women wear 28mm watches.

The chinks are now making fakes of the Berneron Mirage

>>18473550
I think at was three-tone, it had yellow gold, white gold and rose gold.

shitters

Just picked it up. The dial is sapphire crystal with a smoked coating. Looks great irl.

>>18474118
Ref.6611, an extraordinarily rare steel Day-Date

>>18474151
you're turning into nigger or wolf mate

>>18474153
Does it even count if it was never brought to market?

I don’t feel like I need more than these. I have more but I don’t tend to use them.
Recently got the fitness watch and it’s genuinely quite motivating to do more. Makes life like an RPG so I actually walk more, sleep better and checking the weather on my wrist is really handy.
Don’t bother with notifications though and the battery lasts a week or more.

>>18474171
>Does it even count if it was never brought to market?
Why wouldn’t it? It’s not like they destroyed the prototypes. They just gave them away. They’re still made by Rolex.

>>18473920
I've always kinda liked the idea of this watch but it just looks kinda mall-tier nothingness.

>>18474180
Its nicer than that but I would like to have bought it for that mall tier price like all of my other watches.

>>18474184
Navy blue always just makes me think of teenage boys and boomers. It's the dullest colour by far.

Wanna get a smart watch for under 250euros, should I get Garmin or Huawei?

>>18474202
Go for maximum battery life as you can afford.
Do you mean smart watch or fitness watch? Garmin and Huawei make very different watches.

>>18474202
Smart watches are on entirely different grades. With regular watches you either get shitters like quartz movements or you spend a dime and get mechanical. If you need accuracy and ease of use then get a shitter and be done with it.

If you want smart watches you need to consider function alot more. Brands vary wildly and battery lifes, functions and use cases even more so.

Vintage Grand Seiko > Modern Grand Seiko

>JLC, Panerai, IWC, Bulgari, Breitling: make perpetual calendars
Luxury timepieces
>Omega, Rolex, Zenith, Grand Seiko: don't make perpetual calendars
Overpriced shitters

Casio
>God tier rape your mother shitter

>>18474221
>Citizen Chronomaster.jpg
>Perpertual coffee time.txt

>>18474220
I like my modern GS that has 100m WR on the spec sheet but tested to 200m and it's not even a dive watch

fussing around with fragile antique watches gets old eventually

>>18474264
What do you need 200m of WR for?
It's not like 50 years ago people were exposed to less water or anything, vintage watches with properly maintained gaskets are as useful for daily wear as modern ones.
This is a quote from a 40 year old watch manual with spap-on caseback.

Majority of modern Grand Seikos are huge slabs of shiny metal with minimalistic dials. Half of their lineup is just upscaled case designs from the 60s. And they cannot really make them smaller, because movements are so large, even 45GS remake is bigger than original

>>18474301
>What do you need 200m of WR for?
Retards like seeing big numbers on a spec list. It gives them the impression they got their money's worth.

>>18474301
this may not register yet because you're young, and I still wear watches that I bought before you were born, but I buy watches to wear, forever. I don't want to be stressing because I forgot to take my antique watch off before washing dishes or taking a shower. and that 200m water resistance on a brand new watch could be degraded to 50m in 5 years

>>18474313
you ever tried having a worthwhile opinion so you wouldn't have to samefag so hard?

>>18474338
Have you ever tried having a conversation without appealing to your age, grandpa? It wasn't my post. Maybe you should put your reading glasses on and then you'll see:
>properly maintained gaskets
Gasket wear is not linear and your old diver might as well have an effective zero of water resistance, you were just lucky until now.

>>18474350
>Gasket wear is not linear and your old diver might as well have an effective zero of water resistance,
Concession accepted

>>18474337
Vintage watches are another issue entirely. There's no need to worry about swimming or washing the dishes with a 5 year old watch.

Guys, I need help. I'm thinking about buying a Casio, but which one should I buy? The AE1200WHD-1A? A G Shock? If I were to buy the G shock I'd get the casioak, but that one has so many variants and the one I really like costs like 300 dollars and there's no way I'm spending that much. What do I do now? Also why is it that a Seiko made in Japan costs the same as the normal ones but a Casio that's made in Japan is super expensive?

>>18474561
I think the a158 is the best watch casio ever made. a168 has an electroluminescent backlight but it's bigger and thicker, so I go for the a158 because it's so much lighter and more comfortable.

>>18471033

it's the a116w for me, looks classy and can be paired with anything.

>>18474151
Looks awesome
Unrelated: Do u like dudes?

>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wFKN_iB4-Qw
Is it true?

>>18474723
Actual truth nuke. Also hilarious how many people got rattled in the comments.

>>18471023 (OP)
>Your budget
Under 500
>Preferred brand or manufacture
Seiko Preferably something from the late 70's or 80s
>Watch type, e.g. dress, diver, pilot, etc
anything works
>Movement, e.g. automatic, hand-wound, quartz, etc
Automatic
>Desired features, e.g. water resistance, day/date, chronograph, etc
a month and day display
>Preferred strap option, e.g. leather, nylon, bracelet, etc
leather is preferred
>Wrist size or desired watch size
I tend to like the smaller face watches

>>18474824
shave your armpit hair freak
>but that makes me gay
no, microplastics did that

>>18474723
I thought this was going to be interesting but it was just a blowhard acting like he just discovered you can size a bracelet

>>18474854
That's not what it is at all. It's literally the opposite, he's observing other people not doing it right.

So I'm a complete newbie on watches and a guy I know is selling these seikos. Been thinking about getting one. Which one do you guys like best?

Can anyone recommend some nice minimal looking watches with a compass on it? Would be useful for my job so I don't have to pull out the compass app on my phone anymore. Everything I can find has all this extra crap I don't care about or looks bad.

>>18474910
I have tested the compass feature and it does work but check accuracy with actual testing instruments if it is life and death. Also be sure to keep a high quality traditional compass on you if getting lost can get you killed you would want backups. Atleast there are a few colorways so you can choose your pickings.
https://gshock.casio.com/us/products/mudmaster/

>>18474910
forgot you said minimal
https://www.exquisitetimepieces.com/blog/25-best-compass-watches-for-all-budget-ranges/

>>18474915
>>18474921
Thanks for the article that helps. Like the look of the that orient. Don't want anything too expensive, I work in the city a lot and don't want to get mugged by a brown person.

>>18474915
>the compass feature
Total joke.

>>18474561
a158 a159 is the best but the ''bracelet'' is crap. ye i know it's ok whatever but it's still crappy. but you can have it loose and it's okayish. f91 might be better 2bh. gshocks can be big and not comfortable. either go with f-91 like or oceanus.

>>18474937
The bracelet is actually really good quality considering the design. It's smartly designed to be light, comfortable and cheap, and anything you tried to do to make it better would hurt it in one of these areas. For a $20 watch it's fucking excellent.

>>18474723
Yes, everything he says is true but the real interesting thing is how all of these are now considered "truth nukes" or even "unpopular opinions".
The most common reply in the comments is
>DURRRRRR yOu ShOuLd WeAr A wAtCh FoR yOuRsElF
This tells you a lot about the state of masculinity in 2025.

>>18474824
They've done it, they've made a chrono even uglier than the Grand Seiko chronos.
Impressive.

>>18474337
>he doesn't take his watch off in the shower
You are justifier in calling others "too young" because I have never met anyone below the age of 65 who does that.
Enjoy caseback crusts and guff inside bracelet links.
Pic very much related.

>>18471535
Greubel Forsey for me is #1 and De Bethune follow-up, then FPJ, GP and Rolex like you've mentioned
also Audemars Piguet
>>18471662
To me it has to be the one with the lugs
>>18472426
w o u l d
>>18473213
all replies are good and elaborate but i'd like to add that i think it's that they're part of Richemont it's the Richemont that decides the price range or design language, for example, Vacheron had no issue re-launching 222, or flexing on 270 years old brand; You can't really flex on "watchmaker's watchmaker" because
a) JLC probably doesn't do movements for the brands "above" them
b) One of Cartier's base movements is in Vacheron and Piaget, which means Cartier is "watchmaker's watchmaker" too
In other words, unless they leave richemont somehow, I think we're stuck with what we have (model line viewed from management standpoint to fit within umbrella of brands and prices rather than orthogonal models with distinct styles) with, if we're lucky, ocassional treatment like VC 222
>>18474151
I'm sorry, but bro, can't you trim that hair so it doesn't stand out that much? No offence

>>18475179
>Greubel Forsey
That name kinda sounds disgusting to be honest

>>18471535
Longines, Chopard, Zodiac, Panerai, Breguet

>>18474467
so you agree with e then?
>>18475047
oh no, not a smudge on the caseback!
I buy watches to wear, not as an "investment"

>>18475188
>a smudge
bruh you can't even see the engraving on the back on that pic
enjoy wearing disgusting watches I guess

>>18475198
>arms are so greasy the caseback is encrusted with dead skin
maybe if you had a watch with actual WR you could take a shower more often?

>>18475181
To me it's sounds very masculine (no homo) like it could've been some heavy machinery production

>>18475047
shitter

>>18475207
You don't say. But it seems every woman receives on when they hit the "old lady" stage and I gotta change the battery anyway.
Worst ones are the T Touch though. These get dirt and dead skin and torn hair in the space between their caseback and sensor plate. But if you're dumb enough to get a T Touch for almost a grand instead of a G Shock with the same if not more functions for less, then you're probably too dumb to understand the concept of water = clean.

>>18474880
All are ugly and not worth it. Save up 200 or 300 and buy a good vintage or slightly used new one. Or just buy a Casio Lineage and be done with watches.

>>18475222
I really don't understand why they've ruined the constellation line with these shitters. The old constellation lines were some of the best watches ever made. They'd make a killing if they brought back the old dog leg lug cases and cushion case day dates and all that shit.

>>18472386
The bracelet is less faggoty anc the hour and minute hands don't look like dicks so it has a couple of things going for it visavis the semenster

>>18474221
Seiko 5 is literally better than all of these

>>18474561
I made this post. Today I bought a Casioak :)

>>18471531
that's pretty cool, model name?

>>18475699
>Seiko 5 > GS
you're a clown

>>18471535
Breitling, Patek, Rolex

>>18475809
Patek sounds indian but i really love Breitling. Breitling Avenger sounds awesome too bad the watch is garbage.

>PVD coating
>mecaquartz
>faux vintage
This is peak dishonest watchmaking.

What does it mean if my vintage manual watch stops out of nowhere, but if I shake it very hard it starts running again?

>>18475841
>This is peak dishonest watchmaking.
you mean "Swiss Made" brands?

>>18475841
Out of all the microshit brands, i never understand the appeal of Furlan Marri.
There's always a lot of them on sale on Chrono24 as well.

>>18475844
It means that it's an automatic, not a manual.

>>18475912
>i never understand the appeal of Furlan Marri.
Heavy inspiration from vintate Patek.

>>18475913
It's actually a manual, that's why I'm asking. Wondering what the problem could be.

avaturdfaggots

>>18475947
Honest question: what is wrong with you? I’m genuinely curious. Why do you insist on spamming this stuff in every thread?

>>18474151
no offence, but with this hairy thing nobody will ever notice you are wearing a watch at all

>>18475900
Why are German brands more open about where they source their parts from?

>HELLO WELCOME TO MY REVIEW/REDDIT POST OF MY EPIC WATCH
>HERE ARE SEVERAL CLOSE UPS OF THE DIAL, ALONG WITH A TRACKING SHOT WHERE I MOVE THE CAMERA COUNTER TO THE SECOND HAND
>HERE ARE SOME MORE MACRO SHOTS OF THE APPLIED INDICES
>*2 seconds of it on wrist so close that it has lens distortion*
why are so many reviews, youtube videos and forum posts like this? i just want to see what the watch will probably look like on wrist from a normal distance away.
just post some candid shots how hard is that

>>18473893
When people talk about how nice Oceanus are, they're talking about the T200 or maybe the S100

When people talk about how cool G-Shocks are, they're talking about the square or maybe the casioak


because the vast majority of them are gaudy monstrosities

>>18476260
When people say they love pork, they talk about your mom.

yeah ma

>>18472427
>>18472426
uff the niggering

I haven't watched a single watch video in 2 months. I sold most of my dead weight watches and bought a mini-grail, perhaps i'll buy another one with a better case later because this one is a bit knackered, but i don't care... I think i'm done with watches, it's been fun.

>>18476714
>and bought a mini-grail
What was it?

>>18476714
>mini-grail

>>18474880
those look tired
just buy a brand new seiko they last forever

>>18476722
Some very specific vintage model...

avaturdfaggot

>>18476775
ok, gate-keep your shitty "mini-grail" (what a fag term anyways).
The absolute useless fags of this board.

>>18476787
even watchuseek is better than shit show
fucking shitters

>>18476181
>i just want to see what the watch will probably look like on wrist from a normal distance away.
Most people care how their watch looks to them, not to others.

>>18476787
who the FUCK is going to post his grail ITT so /wt/ scumbags can come by and call it a shitter?
that's literally the only treatment other than indifference you can expect in this shithole and the reason why only mentally ill spammers ever post their own watch

>>18476852
cope more filthy poorfaggot

>>18476852
Fuck you and fuck your Seiko Alpinist.

>>18476916
>>18476917
raid of TWO people so that's the power of the discord of the greek loser is parasocial relationships with whores

alright, I've got a concept for a watch, let's see what you /fa/ggots think:
>minutes and hour hand work normally, but the seconds hand runs backwards
>either VH31-like quartz (ideal) or automatic (fucking gross) if that's really what it takes to make watch nerds like it
>sapphire crystal, AR coating, microadjust bracelet, 100m water resistance, all that bullshit
>no text on the dial besides logo and index numbers - no brand, no "[country] made", no water resistance label, no clarification that it was "certified" by some swiss guy's nephew, etc

>>18476961
Why though?

>>18476973
why spend 5 figures on a mechanical swiss shitter that's objectively worse at telling the time than a $20 casio? watches have been solved functionally, what interests people is things outside the norm

>>18476805
the candid shot i posted is actually probably closer to what I will realistically see than the endless macro shots. I don't slam my face into the crystal of the watch to tell time.

>>18471285
Don't get a rolex quartz, i'm sure it'd be a bitch to repair if it fucked up.

>>18476852
he’s the one that brought up his mini grail, in a watch thread. if he didn’t want to show it he didn’t have to mention it. also I’ve had several positive replies to watches I’ve posted, don’t be a baby

Where do we come down on GMT watches with timing bezels?

>>18476961
there are already some very minimal dials like some from arcanaut, ming, or venezianico (or moser for higher end). So if the only difference you’re offering is a backwards second hand it’ll just seem gimmicky. Raketa already offers an anticlockwise watch and has way more brand history so why go with some new microbrand?

>>18476993
>also I’ve had several positive replies to watches I’ve posted
yes, I wrote all of them

>>18476999
>there are already some very minimal dials like some from arcanaut, ming, or venezianico (or moser for higher end)
is anyone else doing the design where all of the hands and indices are lumed rectangles, though? this design is minimal, but doesn't get too high on its own farts like something where there aren't even hour markers
>Raketa already offers an anticlockwise watch and has way more brand history so why go with some new microbrand?
every other reverse watch has the minutes, seconds, hour hand all going anticlockwise. this would be the first watch to have them opposing each other, simply for the sake of being more interesting visually than any watch made by an established manufacturer

>>18476929
what the fuck is this schizo on about

>>18471285
great watches. i wear mine almost daily. the tick is really satisfying.

>>18477005
I think you got me, unimatic has some minimal dials and spinnaker has the rectangles, but both have some text. But wouldn’t a backwards second hand require a special movement or at least some expensive modifications?

>>18477046
forgot about the hands, for that you’d have to go to zodiac, but again they have text on the dials.

>>18477046
>But wouldn’t a backwards second hand require a special movement or at least some expensive modifications?
yeah, I think the challenge would be figuring out how to make the backwards second hand work. zodiac seems to come close to the dial design, but it's always paired with a dive bezel, and dive bezels are always fugly. doesn't seem like anyone is doing this kind of design paired with a more attractive case

I want to make a chrono like this, but the subdial at 3 o'clock would be a 24-minute subdial

>>18476852
>who the FUCK is going to post his grail ITT so /wt/ scumbags can come by and call it a shitter?
Get your testorone levels checked homie

>>18477106
I want to convince the world that pegging isn't gay.

>>18474220
i prefer the 231. that said, i respect the high-beat master race

>>18477158

Kofe

>>18477190
Alright I will bite. I'm new to this but I obviously understand your schtick of spamming this. But why this watch? Is it any good?

>>18474337
>and that 200m water resistance on a brand new watch could be degraded to 50m in 5 years
lmao, who cares nigga 50m is still more than you're realistically ever gonna need

>>18477193
I have this watch and honestly it is the best watch ever made.

>438 times better than COSC performance
>Perpetual calendar
>Deadbeat seconds
>7 months power reserve

Let me guess, you need more?
The high accuracy thermally compensated quartz movement keeps it on the EXACT time pretty much always. plus it has a perpetual calendar that you'll never have to set again.
It also comes very nicely packaged with a mixed zaratzu polished and brushed case with a super comfy and solid bracelet. The double coated antireflective sapphire crystal is so clear you don't even realize it's there.
Anons seethe at it though, must mean I'm doing something right.
Cheers.

>>18477196
Is this copypasta?

>>18477207
Absolutely. Avatarfags know no other means of communication

>>18477207
Can't be a copypasta, this is the first time I see this and I searched 5 different archives for certain exact line matches, no results.

New grail just dropped

>>18477255
The height to width ratio is so off on these RMs.
They flare out way too much in the middle, they look bloated.

Pic is far better proportioned as a tonneau case.

>>18477255
>>18477270
shitters

>>18477310
You just 2poor bro.

>>18477325
Don’t worry about him. My wife and I adopted a severely autistic child and we tried to teach him about watches. We thought the mechanisms would soothe him. Instead, all he fixated on was posting “shitters” and “avaturdfaggots” in this thread. I try to keep tabs on his screen time but sometimes he sneaks off.

>>18477352
Did he start posting the exact same pic with the exact same two words attached ever few hours every day for years?

>>18477239
>>18477248
It’s not exactly pasta, since that retard types it out each time. But there’s definitely no thought behind it, much like a pasta in that regard.

>>18477196
>deadbeat seconds as a feature
>on a quartz watch
end it all Ben
before you die of liver failure
its for your own good

What's with the shitposting and seethe in this thread?

>>18477193
>But why this watch? Is it any good?
It's a shitter, probaly found it in a bin he was rummaging through.
SHITTER.

>>18477369
We regularly get raided by /wt/ when they catch us talking about watches. They want the thread to die so we go back to /wt/ and feeding the avatarfags (You)s.

fucking avaturdfaggots

>>18477380
desu niggerffaggot, this feels more like a chrono24 or pleb it raid.

NEW THREAD WHEN

>>18477352
Your kid is loose again. Can you put him back in his hug box or something?

>>18476996
Does it really matter? It's all just design at this point, all the good combos have already been done so now it's time for the weird ones.

>>18477482
A combination diver-GMT is possible.
People forget that the original GMT Master didn’t have an independently adjustable hour hand and so could only track two time zones, not three.
Most people don’t need to track three, so reducing the number of time zones back to two and adding a timing bezel can potentially be a plus.

>>18477255
nice invicta

>>18477498
Doesn’t Richard Mille just use a modified Bauer and Mercier movement?

ermmm is that a jaeger and mercier movement?

>>18477523
They get their base movements from a number of sources. I think they use a lot of Vaucher movements. Obviously, they do a lot of modifications.

I just got my secret grail watch today, i'm so happy!!

>>18477633
grrrr it makes me so angry that you won't post what it is I wanted a chance to tell you it's shit hurrr I'm so mad

>>18477639
You ok?

Is it worth overpaying for a used watch you like?

>>18477647
depends how much you want it, if it's your """grail""" but you've been interested in watches for 2 months it's way too early to overpay for anything
if you've been looking for years then why not

>>18477639
I can't tell you what it is, it's a secret vintage watch, tee hee.

>>18477647
Never overpay for anything. Buying a more expensive version of a watch is not always the wrong choice, though. If it’s in better condition or has boxes and papers or a more desirable color, etc. then it’s worth more.

>>18472838
6218-8970 ;)

>>18477633
No you haven't, it's still on the way in the mail.

Pretty sweet fleurier and mercier movement

NEW THREAD
>>18478339

NEW THREAD
>>18478339

NEW THREAD
>>18478339

NEW THREAD
>>18478339

NEW THREAD
>>18478339