Rado opinions

Muppet Man

Can I get people's views on this rado watch:

rado watch r27741162

I saw it today in New York in Woodbury common outlet mall for 1250 USD and I fell in love with it. Really thin, with a nice wide clear face. Original RRP is apparently 2200 USD

Are they reliable, and will they depreciate considerably? Although I'm not awfully concerned about depreciation I suppose. I like thin watches a lot.

I'm not a fan of TAG or Rolex. Just don't like the look.

Thanks
muppet man

The_Guvnor

Muppet Man wrote: »

Can I get people's views on this rado watch:

rado watch r27741162

I saw it today in New York in Woodbury common outlet mall for 1250 USD and I fell in love with it. Really thin, with a nice wide clear face. Original RRP is apparently 2200 USD

Are they reliable, and will they depreciate considerably? Although I'm not awfully concerned about depreciation I suppose. I like thin watches a lot.

I'm not a fan of TAG or Rolex. Just don't like the look.

Thanks
muppet man

No offence implied; but I would not purchase that piece.
Reason being PVD coated pieces look terrible after a short time when they get scratched and it wears off. Unlike a stainless steel piece which can easily be brushed or polished; one cannot with these pieces.
I don't rate Rado as a brand to be honest with you.
Reason being, Longines are producing better Swiss made pieces often for less.
One can get a slim, Longines Flagship dress watch for example for much less.
When it comes to resale value, Rado is low.
Honestly, at this price tier; for a slim piece; I would go for Longines.

Oafley Jones

VostokIreland wrote: »

No offence implied; but I would not purchase that piece.
Reason being PVD coated pieces look terrible after a short time when they get scratched and it wears off. Unlike a stainless steel piece which can easily be brushed or polished; one cannot with these pieces.
I don't rate Rado as a brand to be honest with you.
Reason being, Longines are producing better Swiss made pieces often for less.
One can get a slim, Longines Flagship dress watch for example for much less.
When it comes to resale value, Rado is low.
Honestly, at this price tier; for a slim piece; I would go for Longines.

It's ceramic. The watch might be the first Rado I've liked the look of.

The_Guvnor

Oafley Jones wrote: »

It's ceramic. The watch might be the first Rado I've liked the look of.

Apologies, I stand corrected.
I thought the dial was ceramic, and the rest of the watch PVD coated.
It's the first ceramic watch I have seen to be honest with you. I always assume black watches to be PVD coated.
In that case it should wear well I suppose. I think if you like the look, buy it.
One shouldn't ever consider what others think. If a piece is to your taste, and you feel good wearing it; that is what matters.

Muppet Man

Thx all, appreciate the feedback. I'll take a look at Longines too as they had a good selection of those watches.

I'm not brand loyal - just want to get something that I like the look of (and won't breakdown in a year!)

btkm8unsl0w5r4

Very expensive for a Rado, you could get a very nice watch second hand for that sort of money that will have some value in a few years if you want to trade it in. There is a Longines Master collection chronograph on adverts.ie at the moment for around that price and thats a proper watch.....Rado would be classed as a fashion watch really.

Cienciano

Ok, first of all, I'll warn you that I know fúck all about watches. But I do know if you tried something on and really like it, buy it. A watch style is a personal thing, I think going for something unique rather than a dive watch that looks like a submariner or a speedmaster is cool. On reddit watches, every second watch is a submariner variant of a speedie!

An interesting article here about Rado materials:
https://www.hodinkee.com/articles/the-unbreakable-allure-of-the-rado-diastar

The ceramic technology alone would have sold me on it!
After a search, you probably know, they're owned by the Swatch group. If you're worried about watch quality, the swatch group tier them on their website so you have an idea of how they're rated alongside other swatch owned brands:

http://www.swatchgroup.com/en/brands_and_companies/watches_and_jewelry

Prestige and Luxury Range: Breguet, Harry Winston, Blancpain, Glashütte Original, Jaquet Droz, Léon Hatot, Omega.

High Range: Longines, Rado, Union Glashütte.

Middle Range: Tissot, Balmain, Certina, Mido, Hamilton; Calvin Klein.

Basic Range: Swatch, Flik Flak.

Interestingly enough, they're rated alongside Longines by the company that makes them!

Wibbs

I like some of Rado's output myself. They look good in the flesh. I would aim to buy one used though as they do take a big hit of depreciation. And as CC said "A watch style is a personal thing, I think going for something unique rather than a dive watch that looks like a submariner or a speedmaster is cool. On reddit watches, every second watch is a submariner variant of a speedie!".Yep that tends to be the case alright. Which is fine too, but variety is the spice of life and that.

HDMI

Spent a good while looking at the Rado range last week with my wife. I think they are in a category all on their own with no real competition, some of the range are 100% hypoallergenic with ceramic case and titanium casebacks and clasps.

The prices on some were a little scary at 2k plus, but I think a lot of Rado buyers are in it for the long game so devaluation matters less. Some like feeling the weight of their watch on their wrist and find titanium and ceramics make their watches feel cheap. I find it rather liberating when I have been wearing a heavy watch and then switch to a lighter one.

At the right price especially with Jomashop and Ashford sale prices I could find Rado appealing, so I say go for it and buy what you like.

HDMI

Ezekiel Teeny Painting wrote: »

Very expensive for a Rado, you could get a very nice watch second hand for that sort of money that will have some value in a few years if you want to trade it in. There is a Longines Master collection chronograph on adverts.ie at the moment for around that price and thats a proper watch.....Rado would be classed as a fashion watch really.

Not a fan of the term "proper watch" Casio make some really cheap watches that you can beat the life out of and it will still tell the time.

I understand the point your making but Rado are a proper watch company with real history and not remotely like the modern day flash in the pan fashion watch companies. Longines are a brand I love but the modern range is not immune to drastic depreciation either, very few brands are immune.

btkm8unsl0w5r4

HDMI wrote: »

Not a fan of the term "proper watch" Casio make some really cheap watches that you can beat the life out of and it will still tell the time.

A watch being "proper "is a function of value, functionality, and wide desirability. A cheap casio may be "proper" because its good value and very functional, a GMT2 batman is functional and highly desirable. That Rado doesnt really register on any category for me. If the OP likes it enough then its proper to him/her. But asking opinion on here I dont think there are many here who would but their money down on that watch....am I wrong? Looks like a 150 euro Swatch SVOB103GA

HDMI

Ezekiel Teeny Painting wrote: »

But asking opinion on here I dont think there are many here who would but their money down on that watch....am I wrong? Looks like a 150 euro Swatch SVOB103GA

This is a tiny little community so I doubt anything we say here could make a valid point as to whether it's "proper" or not

At full asking I wouldn't put my money down, but the reason I was looking at the brand was for my wife who breaks out wearing "normal" watches. So if by being ceramic and titanium it fills the purpose of being a hypoallergenic watch then it is proper, functional and desirable.

Using a Swatch watch to make the argument proves nothing other than saying Rolex have no purpose because Steinhart and plenty others make a similar watch much cheaper.

art

HDMI wrote: »

Spent a good while looking at the Rado range last week with my wife. I think they are in a category all on their own with no real competition, some of the range are 100% hypoallergenic with ceramic case and titanium casebacks and clasps.

The prices on some were a little scary at 2k plus, but I think a lot of Rado buyers are in it for the long game so devaluation matters less. Some like feeling the weight of their watch on their wrist and find titanium and ceramics make their watches feel cheap. I find it rather liberating when I have been wearing a heavy watch and then switch to a lighter one.

At the right price especially with Jomashop and Ashford sale prices I could find Rado appealing, so I say go for it and buy what you like.

Think you are spot on with all of that. I’ve a rado that’s several decades old (which is certainly a proper watch to me: https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=107314313&postcount=5145) but I’ve also a friend with a modern ceramic and he’d simply wear no other watch, he loves it. As you say, they are in their own bracket, worthy of a look at the very least.

art

VostokIreland wrote: »

Reason being PVD coated pieces look terrible after a short time when they get scratched and it wears off.

Aside from he ceramic nature of the watch in question, as the owner of several PVD watches I have yet to see this “looking terrible” you speak of here. There are different levels of treatments, some highly resistant to scratching, and highly dependent on how the watch is worn and used anyway.

Edser

Muppet Man wrote: »

Can I get people's views on this rado watch:

rado watch r27741162

I saw it today in New York in Woodbury common outlet mall for 1250 USD and I fell in love with it. Really thin, with a nice wide clear face. Original RRP is apparently 2200 USD

Are they reliable, and will they depreciate considerably? Although I'm not awfully concerned about depreciation I suppose. I like thin watches a lot.

I'm not a fan of TAG or Rolex. Just don't like the look.

Thanks
muppet man

I like it. I have a similar one (True multifunction) and I love it.

As mentioned, they are owned by the Swatch group, so there should be no issues with reliability, etc.

Regarding depreciation, are you planning on selling it on? If not and you like it, why worry about depreciation? As others have said, if you like it, buy it (although not many on this forum will tell you NOT to buy a watch )

Finally, while these are ceramic and very resistant to scratches, links may shatter or chip if they get a hard knock. The good news is replacement links are not expensive as I found out..

Ed

Wibbs

HDMI wrote: »

This is a tiny little community so I doubt anything we say here could make a valid point as to whether it's "proper" or not

It's an interesting topic. For me anyway . What has passed for a "proper watch" has varied quite the bit through the years. If nothing else as fashion, never mind technology has changed. I can remember a time when mechanical watches were very much seen as old hat and Japanese stuff was more in vogue than Swiss. While pocket watches(which were once seen as "proper" and the wristwatch were seen as inferior, a passing fancy, even foppish) always had a small cadre of collectors, vintage wristwatches weren't seen as collectible until the late 70's/early 80's at best - IIRC the first time Sothebys even included wristwatches in their horology sales was 1978 - and even then it was only among a tiny number of collectors. It didn't take off much beyond that until the mid 90's and the interwebs and really only took off around 2000(with another spike around 2010).

"Value" is an even more murky debate. However consider that something like a Rolex Sub or an Omega Speedie is quadruple and more the price when adjusted for inflation, cost of living, wages, even the cost of property etc compared to when they were new and current, even though more are made and made more cheaply now that raises one talking point. If you look at CC's hierarchy of brands at Swatch what is interesting when they were independent companies back in the day, they were mostly competing with one another and because of that price points for similar watches were very much the same. If you were in the market for a "good" divers watch in say 1973, the offerings from Omega, Longines, Rolex, Blancpain, Hamilton and other French and US marques would be all vying for your custom and within ten twenty percent on pricing.

At full asking I wouldn't put my money down, but the reason I was looking at the brand was for my wife who breaks out wearing "normal" watches. So if by being ceramic and titanium it fills the purpose of being a hypoallergenic watch then it is proper, functional and desirable.

I've had reactions from watches myself and it was a mixed bag as far as what would cause a reaction and what wouldn't. I've had "white metal" case backs, even nickel alloy, heavy on the nickel, that gave no issue and stainless steel ones that did.

Another consideration is that it's for your wife. One major difference between the male and female markets is that the latter overwhelmingly favours quartz movements. Even among Patek, if you look at their offerings for women, even the bejewelled stuff costing as much as several houses, they almost inevitably have a quartz movement. As a demographic women buying expensive(or cheaper) watches never really got into the luxury mechanical as superior thing/marketing the way the male demographic did. I suspect simple convenience is the bones of it and especially with watches worn for special occasions they don't want to be faffing around winding and setting it, they just want to grab their Cartier or whatever and go. Very sensible.



*falls on sword for going a bit off piste* :eek::)

The_Guvnor

art wrote: »

Aside from he ceramic nature of the watch in question, as the owner of several PVD watches I have yet to see this “looking terrible” you speak of here. There are different levels of treatments, some highly resistant to scratching, and highly dependent on how the watch is worn and used anyway.

Well here is something you haven't seen before then; a scratched PVD coated watch. And yes, I think it looks terrible. As the thread says, this is after one day of desk wear. But don't take my word for it, read it for yourself.
No offence implied, just my opinion. I accept many people like PVD coated pieces, personally I do not; and that is fine. Wear yours in good health. Regards.
http://forums.watchuseek.com/f2/pvd-coating-wearing-off-after-single-day-wear-539726.html

art

Well, as the first response states "That's not right at all - send it back."

The_Guvnor

art wrote: »

Well, as the first response states "That's not right at all - send it back."

So now you have seen a scratched PVD watch (for the first time), would you agree that they look terrible?

Wibbs

VostokIreland wrote: »

Well here is something you haven't seen before then; a scratched PVD coated watch. And yes, I think it looks terrible. As the thread says, this is after one day of desk wear. But don't take my word for it, read it for yourself.

Ahh c'mon, to be fair and no offence to Orient owners, but it is an Orient, a watch containing many parts made from the finest chinesium. I wouldn't trust their PVD process. Well clearly. The quality of PVD coatings is extremely dependent on cost and expertise and type and one can't compare something like an Orient to something from one of the higher tier Swiss or German marques.

Example. A watch that belonged to my dad. Bought it circa 1983/4(bloody pricey at the time too. 1000 quid in old money, when an average jewellers window "good watch" was more like 4-500). Longines in a titanium case with PVD finish. That became his daily hack watch until he passed away, nigh on twenty years of bashing and scraping it off things. This is it from last year.



The only discernible wear is to the gold links. The PVD coating literally looks like new. Even under a loupe. And I'd expect it to as Titanium nitrite(another ceramic) has a hardness rating nearly ten times that of the average stainless steel found in watches. One of the selling "tricks" dealers sometimes used for those watches to demonstrate their toughness was to take one outside and scrape it down the bricks of the shop and the show the potential customer. PVD can be an extremely tough finish.

btkm8unsl0w5r4

I agree Wibbs...and remember watches are totally pointless ornaments.

Re PVD, I have had cheap PVD bracelets look like crap after a week, I am sure good ones are much better. I work with ceramics and Zirconia and titanium all day, and while they have many marvelous properties they also have some issues. Hardness and brittleness go hand in hand, See the dark side of the moon lugs issue.

I have had bad skin reactions to Titanium watches, and OP you will find that while the majority of the watch is ceramic of titanium the screws and the link bars in the bracelet will be metal, so if there is a risk of allergy I would not bank on it being necessarily perfect.

If all depends on what you want from a watch.....and one thing I have learned from buying watches for my wife if get her the one SHE wants. Not the one internet buffoons like me say she should have (Cartier tank )

The_Guvnor

Well I have to concede that is in excellent condition. I would never have thought any PVD coated piece would look like that after 20 years wear.
Also I did not know that Longines made titanium pieces; so that is something else I have learned.
I don't doubt that there are different qualities/thicknesses of PVD coating, just the same as there are different grades of lume.
Personally I like stainless steel, or gold pieces. But I accept some people like PVD, personal taste at the end of the day.
I can also appreciate if someone has allergies to plated metals, why they would prefer a ceramic watch to a nickel plated brass one etc.
The Rado piece in question is fully ceramic anyway, so whether PVD is good/bad is irrelevant anyway.
Just the same as people getting worked up over defining proper/quality/value watches.
The way I see it is this, some people like Rado, and some do not like Rado. One should never take another man's opinion on his taste in watches personally.
I for one do not care at all what others think of my pieces. I bought them for me, not them.
So I say good luck to the OP with his ceramic Rado if he likes it. I respect he likes something different, and has the confidence to wear it.

art

VostokIreland wrote: »

So now you have seen a scratched PVD watch (for the first time), would you agree that they look terrible?

As the thread you linked to itself stated, it is highly debatable (I'd reckon irrefutable almost) that it was actually PVD treated. And even if it was, it was poorly done and should have been returned. Wibbs has it well covered there above though

Wibbs

Ezekiel Teeny Painting wrote: »

I work with ceramics and Zirconia and titanium all day, and while they have many marvelous properties they also have some issues. Hardness and brittleness go hand in hand, See the dark side of the moon lugs issue.

Very much so. I note that IWC and Longines who largely pioneered the metal for watches(though Citizen were first way back in the early 70's) made the case from "raw" Ti, adding the PVD coating, rather than make the whole watch from Titanium nitrite. I suspect exactly because of that hardness/brittleness issue. Pure Ti is quite flexible and can be flexed without losing strength. It doesn't corrode, resists damne near any solvent and is lighter per weight than steel. Ti is a wonder metal in many ways, but like any material has its pros and cons.

I have had bad skin reactions to Titanium watches, and OP you will find that while the majority of the watch is ceramic of titanium the screws and the link bars in the bracelet will be metal, so if there is a risk of allergy I would not bank on it being necessarily perfect.

+1 and someone could be one of those rare people who are actually allergic to titanium. It is very rare (1-100 IIRC) but it does exist. I knew a woman who is. She got a ring made from Ti and came out in a very obvious rash on her finger. I gather there is an actual blood test for metal allergies, she took it and found Ti was a trigger. Oddly enough nickel wasn't. Funny old world.

Muppet Man

Thanks all for some very interesting replies. I didn’t expect so much dialogue! I had not idea about the various coating challenges, so that’s an interesting read to this watch noob!

To contextualise,I have a 100 euro “police” watch with a deep purple face and I treat it like its a 1000 euro watch. I absolutely love it, more than most watches I’ve owned and thankfully people have noticed it too when I do wear it.

So like many have said, why worry about dereciation when it’s the watch you would like to wear, and thanks the lesson on ceramic versus PVD.

All I need to do now is figure out how I can hide the price from the missus... LOL

Thanks again,
Muppet man

Oafley Jones

Is the brittleness of ceramic watches overplayed? It seems to be the same few photographs of failure that appear over and over. Given the amount of ceramic watches that are in circulation it seems a remarkably limited set.

Deep Thought

I just think it a bit expensive.

But, if you like it, who are we to tell you what to do.

Me, I would be looking for better bang for buck.

DT

2shea

My wife has a PVD gold Longines that she wears almost every day. It's a year old and looks like brand new. I must post a picture of it to my instagram account actually it's a really nice women's watch.

But I think Rado are pretty cool. But it if you like it.