Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest
SOTC(state of the collection) thread.
Comments
-
-
Hi All, Glad to be back after my enforced time off. I have been watching the forum and was sorry I could not participate, of all the forums on boards, this is the only one I missed. I spent a lot of time thinking about my watch collection over the last 3 months and decided to make a few changes both in collection mentality and collection content.
I am a self-confessed Rolex fanboy, and for robustness, recognisably, classic design, and resale value they cannot be beaten. However, it has become a bit of a “chase the popular model” game, and really, I want out of the game to stop chasing the cliche and enjoy the ones I have. Paying way over retail is not for me either, if I am paying 20k I want a watch the manufacturer values at 20k, not a 9k watch that the fake scarcity has distorted the grey market values to 20k but that you find is worth far from it when you go to actually sell.
I am getting bored of Rolex, and chasing and waiting for slight variants of the same old watch has become a bit tedious for me, the new releases have really confirmed this for me. Rolex don’t really innovate, they iterate. And while that’s fine and dandy, its easy tire of it once you have had a few. Been there done that, had loads and over it now.
I realise a lot on here would class my frequent watch trading as flipping and wonder why I do not stick to a lot of watches. Like a sailboat into the wind, I need to tack from side to side to get to the intended destination. It is a form of fun saving so long as I do not make stupid decisions. It also allows me to better form opinions on my collection and changing tastes. I think I am not a huge big fan of dive watches; I have had a lot but I think apart from maybe a discount diver, I don’t want a big money diver.
Recently I have ditched a lot of watches, trading them up and culling ones I never wear. If I seem to have dismissed a watch that you like, there is absolutely no offence intended. There are almost as many watches as there are collectors, and everyone has their own tastes. But remember I never bought a watch I did not like, because you never know when you will get stuck. At the same time, I actively try not to buy watches that nobody likes.,. This notion on watch forums of “wear what you like” is fine if you are a) Really rich or b) buying cheap watches. If you are neither you need to take a bit of care not to impulse buy things. I got stung recently with a watch I purchased while drinking too much beer and lost more money on a 500 euro purchase than I did selling a 9k datejust.
What I have come to realise is that for me interesting watches are often not popular and often popular watches are not interesting. However, I am not into being a “wacky crazy and unique guy”, I would rather a few generally desirable and quality, iconic pieces than a ton of average watches that get no wrist time, or worse soak up wrist time I could be spending with my heavy hitters. Iconic watches is a naff term, but these designs that have stood the test of time are usually really nice, and usually have a broad resale market. A friend aptly described filler watches in your collection as “blockers”, so I ruthlessly culled them all. I just look at them and feel guilt for never wearing them no matter how affordable, or wonder when I am wearing them why I am not wearing one of my better ones (often thought I need a “my other watch is a Rolex tee shirt”). Hell, you only have so many days left of watch wear in your life, why am I bothering not wearing my best watches?
I sold the Hulk and no date sub. Both were fantastic watches. I had dismissed the hulk before but I was wrong, it’s a stunner and the green colour is fantastic…its just not 13-15k fantastic (or 29k fantastic if the internet is to be believed, which it is not) by any stretch of the imagination, so I got out while the going was good and riding the wave of “soon to be discontinued” hype. Great watch, I would have one again at retail. No date sub was good too, however my wife stole it on me, and I never got to wear it, so I got that gone before she got too used to it.
So, I have trimmed the collection down to the following 4 watches
0 -
Rolex Milgauss – This is an excellent everyday watch. Just back from Rolex from its service. They do such a good job of polishing the watch it is as good as new and keeping excellent time. I really love this watch, that hint of Rolex green is recognisable from across the room and the dial is fun without being ostentatious. Simple 3 hander wind and wear. Its not a hype model, so the pressure of recognising and selling at the peak is not there, although they are on a steady rise. This was the first Rolex I bought and where the bug really started for me for quality watches, or more accurately watches of a value where the purchase was very considered.
It is got a good size to it also, it’s not a dainty watch and has good presence. This is as close as Rolex get to personality. People go on about polished centre links, I don’t get that. A brushed watch gets a scratch just the same. And the secret I learned is that it doesn’t matter if you scratch a watch, unless you take a big chunk out of the case. Fine scratches are irrelevant and are in fact easier polish out of a polished surface than a brushed one. The notion that an expensive watch is a “tool” is really dumb. It’s the only acceptable bit of jewellery lads can wear, and jewellery should be shiny.
JLC Master Calendar – This is my dress watch although it is still informal enough. I like that heavy complication look to the Dial and classic case shape, the moon phase is useless but lovely and everything about this watch is perfectly executed. The level of finishing on the dial and hands is flawless, far better than many of the Rolex. There is a newer version (two actually) of this, but if you look those up, the Day & Month windows are the eyes to a very sad face (once you see it you cannot unsee it) this version as well as having a reserve complication has wider set Month/Day windows and is a lot less sad looking.
I like this watch a lot and it was great value. Got it from Watchfinder. The 40-hour reserve is a little short on a watch like this TBH but its fun to set with all its little pushers, although I tend not to choose it if I am in a hurry. This has a display back, which is nice, but honestly on any automatic watch except micro rotors, all you really see is the rotor and bridges, the strap gets in the way. It adds unnecessary height IMHO, I may be one of the only people that find display back pointless and unnecessary. I really like this watch, and every time I put it one I wonder why I don’t wear it more. Ideally, I would move this up to a similar style yellow gold Patek or Vacheron, so I cannot say this is a permanent part of the collection.
0 -
Rolex Daytona – I wanted a Daytona like everyone else in the world and was doing a futile wait for one retail, I was on holidays in the Canaries and this cropped up on adverts with photos so bad Unkle could have taken them, the scariest purchase of my life, transferring that much money to some unknown fellow in the midlands. Turned out a great purchase from a great bloke and we have since become good friends, it has been back to Rolex for service and its good as new.
It’s a solid white gold watch, and while it can look in photos like stainless, its got a slight gold sheen to the metal that side by side with stainless is quite different. Yellow Gold bracelet watch is a strong statement that I don’t feel is really me, maybe in time. The white gold is the humble brag. The dial is silver sunburst with red accents and is quite unusual. I like the light dial as the Daytona wears small enough watch and the light dial and metal bezel opens the face out more. Although the Arabic’s are a little cluttered. The weight is something else at 200 grams, and along with the Daytona case shape it is a lovely comfortable watch to wear. Anyone that tried it on, immediately sees the quality, but at a glance its just another Daytona. The eagle eyed will spot the dial which is a PM only dial, and the little triangles on the bezel indices that only come on PM. I bought this when gold Daytona’s were less expensive than stainless ones (another sign of the dysfunction of the Rolex market) but its flipped back now, but it still sells for well under retail price, which is rare in Daytona land however retail on this watch is a preposterous €38k. This is a keeper never to leave unless I consolidate everything into one watch, I could never replace it for what it owes me in a million years.
The downside is that it is hard to read the time on any Daytona, busy dial. Another one that is easy to pick as it’s a fast two hand set without date. Great water resistance, and a hardy watch. This watch really feels good to wear.
Audemars Piguet Royal Oak Chrono – Latest watch and unbelievably happy with this one. Had my eyes on one for a long time. It’s a fairly predictable move from Rolex to AP, but AP does not have the resale value of Rolex so you have to tread carefully, an almost impossible watch to try on in Ireland, but tried a few in “Watches of Switzerland” in London last year (remember international travel…good times). The offshore is an acquired taste, and despite what Thin wrists Mosso would say the 37mm Royal Oak is far too small for a man of my “huskiness”. I was careful to try choose one that is popular, in case I needed to bail.
My contact in Watchfinder eventually came up with a trade that made some “man maths” sense. Aggressive looking watch and the shape is unmistakable. Bought the big boy, 41mm with blue “boutique only” waffle dial. Went for the Chrono because I prefer that it is a complex AP and strangely chronographs are cheaper than the 3 hander/date. In the 41mm the 3 handers dial is a bit empty looking. The star of the show is the bracelet and case. The design and finishing are exceptional, the way the light bounces off the brushed and polished facets is mesmerising. Wherever you look there is a detail and a play of the light you never noticed before. Large lug to lug, and 41mm but it is beautifully thin, and wears big but not obnoxious. I have a larger than average wrist anyway.
I always wanted one because the shape is similar to the head of a common type of dental implant with which I have spent my adult life using ( and thanks to which I have the opportunity to own these watches). The watch is honestly stunning and anyone that knows what this is, is most certainly a watch person. It’s a very angular and masculine and edgy watch, and when it comes to overpriced stainless watches this is the original, Gerald Genta blah blah blah. Imposing, interesting and actually rare to see. Have it 4 weeks now, and already have had more unsolicited interest in it than all my other watches put together. The finish is flawless, and the level of detail is like going from SD on a Rolex television to HD holy trinity watch. Of course, like busses, as soon as I get one another one pop up on the forum (Time where are the photos dude?), such is life.
The Others:
My wife has a 31mm Two Tone datejust and a Cartier Tank. I have a Ani-Digi Tag Heuer that was my wedding watch, a Raymond Weil that was a 16th birthday present from my parents. Space for my Solas whenever that comes and my dads Omega Seamaster Quartz. I don’t count these as part of the collection honestly and once I stopped thinking of them there, I got a lot more focus.
What’s next?
Hopefully watch collecting maturity, but that is unlikely. Working on a 3-piece collection plus an everyday steel, I feel that is the perfect size for me, everything gets a go, no beaters, no sh1tters, no bullsh1t. Maybe 3 Chrono’s, that has some continuity and focus. Omega Dark side/Grey side of the moon interests me. But really the JLC/Daytona and AP make an exceptionally fine and ever so slightly unconventional 3-piece collection. All bases covered and all vastly different. Maybe trade the JLC to a rose or yellow gold dress watch (JLC polaris chrono rose gold? VC traditionalle? Simple Calatrava?) Maybe flog them all and get a Patek 5712 (love that watch but barely worth retail yet alone the looney money they go for). I do not know? I am nudging phase 8 (having skipped the vintage thing, that’s not for me).0 -
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
So, I have trimmed the collection down to the following 4 watches
It is an extremely refined 4 piece collection. Real heavy hitter watches. I am not into chrono's but that AP keeps looking at me!
Still think that the Milgauss dont fit but it is a fun Rolex not doubt.........Stick a VC overseas in there though............0 -
-
Chauffe, Marcel, chauffe!Join Date:Posts: 64437
It is an extremely refined 4 piece collection. Real heavy hitter watches. I am not into chrono's but that AP keeps looking at me!
Still think that the Milgauss dont fit
I don't agree. If I was to reduce it 3, the Daytona would be out. Has been replaced by a superior chrono now. But I suppose it is the sportiest now. I think I would replace it with a diver. James Cameron maybe
My ads on adverts.ie
0 -
I don't agree. If I was to reduce it 3, the Daytona would be out. Has been replaced by a superior chrono now. But I suppose it is the sportiest now. I think I would replace it with a diver. James Cameron maybe
Interesting, the Daytona is a column wheel chrono so unless you go turbillion you dont get a technically better one, unless you go split seconds or zenith defy type. I would see the Daytona as "peek Rolex" so to abandon it is to abandon all Rolex. Might put it on a Rubber B strap to see whats thats like? James Cameron is a bit big and top heavy for me and going to try move away from stainless if at all possible.0 -
I don't agree. If I was to reduce it 3, the Daytona would be out. Has been replaced by a superior chrono now. But I suppose it is the sportiest now. I think I would replace it with a diver. James Cameron maybe
I would agree if it was a stainless Daytona! But it’s a solid gold Daytona that is pretty much top of the Rolex foodchain so time speak.0 -
-
Advertisement
-
Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,170 Mod ✭✭✭✭
Join Date:Posts: 59098
Flyback would be another. Though unless you're going really cheap I'd have thought column wheel was a given these days? Though in fairness Fitz I wouldn't know as tbh I'd only be vaguely aware of the current lineups.Interesting, the Daytona is a column wheel chrono so unless you go turbillion you dont get a technically better one, unless you go split seconds or zenith defy type.
It's mad how things change. Not that long ago Daytonas were barely on the radar. They weren't popular when they came out for a few reasons; Rolex had never been known for chronos and they were a bought in movement(Zenith IIRC?). It's why they're relatively rare in the vintage world. Few bought them. If I had a time machine I'd nip back to the 80's(even into the 90's) when you could barely give them away. :eek: Ker...ching! Then again with a time machine...I would see the Daytona as "peek Rolex" so to abandon it is to abandon all Rolex.
Good idea in my humble. If I were in the new market at higher price points I'd generally be avoiding the SS, as it's a fashion thing* which will pass and go for the actually precious metals; gold, white gold, platinum. Especially on the man jewellery front. Precious metals never go out of fashion in the long term.going to try move away from stainless if at all possible.
*some of that initially sprang from the vintage collectors market. In The Old Days(tm) a man's "good watch" was almost always gold(or plated) and in the higher end stuff the vast majority were made from precious metals. I mean if you're forking out what was a years wages for most you'd want to both see the money on the wrist and to telegraph that. The SS examples were the real rarities. You see this when some Patek reference XYZ1234 from the 50's comes up in steel and goes for mad money because so few, sometimes one or two were ordered, whereas gold examples could be quite "common". And since when did the term "reference" kick off? Hodinkee I suspect. Can't recall seeing it much at all before them. Makes things sound more fancy I suppose, but I digress....
Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.
0 -
-
im no expert but there's also the 'cam' operated speedmaster movements? non 321 - 861, 1861 etc? not sure if there's much difference accuracy wise... what i read was omega moved to cam operated chrono's as they were more durable and lasted longer with less issues... the column wheel ones are much smoother to operate? i wouldnt say my one is awful i don't think i need it to be smooth like the acceleration in a carFlyback would be another. Though unless you're going really cheap I'd have thought column wheel was a given these days? Though in fairness Fitz I wouldn't know as tbh I'd only be vaguely aware of the current lineups.
It's mad how things change. Not that long ago Daytonas were barely on the radar. They weren't popular when they came out for a few reasons; Rolex had never been known for chronos and they were a bought in movement(Zenith IIRC?). It's why they're relatively rare in the vintage world. Few bought them. If I had a time machine I'd nip back to the 80's(even into the 90's) when you could barely give them away. :eek: Ker...ching! Then again with a time machine...
Good idea in my humble. If I were in the new market at higher price points I'd generally be avoiding the SS, as it's a fashion thing* which will pass and go for the actually precious metals; gold, white gold, platinum. Especially on the man jewellery front. Precious metals never go out of fashion in the long term.
*some of that initially sprang from the vintage collectors market. In The Old Days(tm) a man's "good watch" was almost always gold(or plated) and in the higher end stuff the vast majority were made from precious metals. I mean if you're forking out what was a years wages for most you'd want to both see the money on the wrist and to telegraph that. The SS examples were the real rarities. You see this when some Patek reference XYZ1234 from the 50's comes up in steel and goes for mad money because so few, sometimes one or two were ordered, whereas gold examples could be quite "common". And since when did the term "reference" kick off? Hodinkee I suspect. Can't recall seeing it much at all before them. Makes things sound more fancy I suppose, but I digress....0 -
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
...Speedmasters are not for taking into water, I learned that the hard way.
All this Speedy talk got me to take off the Starlight for a while and put my Speedy back on :pac:
3ATM can allow swimming too
Though modern speedies moonwatch are 5ATM so even better piece of mind. I do swim with my 3ATM one (but it is pressure tested as you can see).Deep Thought wrote: »Spot on there Wibbs, same as. I’ve had 2 Speedie and I felt too much going on.
If you don't like the unbalancing from the 3 registers you can always go for the quad-compax layout (as seen above)
A moonphase on a speedy is quite apt (despite it being a sports chrono) I think (I got it for the date feature rather than moonphase though).
Here's a proper photo of it:
0 -
-
-
-
but thirdfox, I dare you press a chrono pusher in the pool
They are not screw down and easy to knock off and depress when swimming. I would class a speedy as as hand washing proof no matter the 5atm rating.
I find the chrono pushers pretty hard to depress (accidentally), as in my wrist bending backwards definitely won't cause them to depress and my right hand generally is nowhere near my left when swimming. Mileage varies for everyone but for me, I'm generally confident that I won't push a pusher by accident (don't jinx me now!)
And yes - that 3ATM water resistance won't be any good if you push the pushers underwater - but the same can be said for the Seamaster chronos too which also don't have screw down pushers. People do swim and dive with those and also avoid pushing them underwater so I apply the same principle to the Speedy.Should a Speedie not have an Earth-Phase?
Isn't that a day/night indicator? :pac: - ironically probably more useful than a moonphase (for those of us who aren't werewolves) but somehow a moonphase just seems classier than the sun/moon dials 0 -
All this Speedy talk got me to take off the Starlight for a while and put my Speedy back on :pac:
3ATM can allow swimming too
Though modern speedies moonwatch are 5ATM so even better piece of mind. I do swim with my 3ATM one (but it is pressure tested as you can see).
If you don't like the unbalancing from the 3 registers you can always go for the quad-compax layout (as seen above)
A moonphase on a speedy is quite apt (despite it being a sports chrono) I think (I got it for the date feature rather than moonphase though).
Here's a proper photo of it:
I had thought about a GSotMThe narrower a man’s mind, the broader his statements.
0 -
Here is my SOTC at the moment. I had sold off a good few watches in the last 6 months, but the empty spaces in my watch box have slowly filled up again without me really noticing it happen!
The watches are:
Tisell 9015
Seiko Cocktail Time
Seiko Blumo
Casio Edifice
Seiko Samurai
Bobo Bird (gift from my in-laws)
Seiko SNK805K2
G-Shock DW-5600BBN-1ER
Timex Easy Reader
Steinhart 39 GMT premium 500
Casio MDV106-1A
Vostok Amphibia
They all get worn, but some more so than others. I think there is space there for at least one luxury watch in the future (thinking a Milgauss at the moment, but that changes like the weather!); but I just bought a house at the start of the summer so I need to build up funds and justify it to myself!0 -
Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,170 Mod ✭✭✭✭ Join Date:Posts: 59098
My current Longines corner of the stable:
From left; 1988, 1927, 1952, 1916, 1912, 1972, 1985.
Missing are my 71 UltraQuartz and a 1916 half hunter Trench watch.Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.
0 -
Advertisement
-
-
-
Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,170 Mod ✭✭✭✭ Join Date:Posts: 59098
That's an Ultronic(tuning fork, very smooooth seconds hand) diver only produced in 1972(Olympics year). Reference 8484 in Hodinkee speakVery nice Wibbs, tell us more about that 1972 diver.
They usually come with an orange bezel, the green is much less commonly found. Very nicely built watch and expensive at the time. To give an idea, a Rolex no date sub was 300 dollars, a Speedie around 200, these were 500. A chap on TZUK with a large collection of very nice vintage divers of the period reckoned it's just as good quality, if not better than the Rollie of the time. I can say the dial and hand finishing is superior having compared the two myself. It's also a better design for a diver. The standout hands are the minutes and seconds, the ones that count. Low light visibility as you dive deeper is also better as are the colour choices. Florescent orange(and green) stays legible way down, as does white against a black background and the chrome never loses its glister. And lots of tritium. Even today after the trit has long lost any glow it's a very easy watch to read in low light. However the Rolex bracelet was better, the bezel clicks more positive and robust and the screwdown crown is far superior as the Longines relies on the newness of the rubber seals. Though neither were as good as a Doxa and a couple of others like Spirotechnic(who copied and improved on the Blancpain 50 fathoms design) at the time. Though for me the best of the best of the early divers is the above Blancpain 50 fathoms. It was the one that started everything and who everyone copied.
Hard to say B, they had a few peaks over the century.When do you think they reached their peak? I know they won lots of prizes for accuracy in the 50s-60s but were the early 70s their best designs overall?
Their current selling point at least in western markets is raiding their vintage back catalogue and firing out homages, usually much larger than originals. Funny enough in Asian markets they're more about their current designs. They're very popular among women in those markets as it happens. EG in China they sell the same percentage of women's watches as men's.
Their 20's and 30's pilots watches, weems etc were a definite peak and a load of of the famous names wore them, folks like Lindbergh and Earhart. They also developed the first GMT in the early 30's. Then their chronographs of the same time(though they had chrono wristwatches in 1914). Their 30ZN is a real classic and blows the doors off pretty much all of the competition at the time and for a good while after(first flyback too). They've a fair history in military watches in WW2 and before. Though unlike Rolex, who were very admirably adamant from early on to not supply the Axis powers* and they didn't. All the other Swiss big names fed both sides, only reducing that to Germany after the Germans ran out of hard currency. Rolex were the only ones to take a stance and from the get go and it says much and well about the founder and his company that they did.
In the chronometer trials Longines were winning from early on; 20/30/40/50's. They won more of the same in one year than Rolex won in the entire history of the trials, Omega were neck and neck. Zenith and Movado were big winners too. Oddly they rarely put customer models through for accreditation, though they could have, so they're very rare. Take that diver above. It used the same movement a the Omega f300's and they were all certified(and it would beat the mechanical criteria without breaking sweat, so a sure thing). It seems Longines didn't think it mattered so much from a marketing point of view. A bit silly IMHO, given they had set their rep on "The world's most honoured watch" early on.
One thing I always liked about them was their movements. In Longines movements there were no low end/mid range/high end movements or finishes. They're 90% all the same frosted gilt and number of jewels.
The round Trench watch on the left is - save for the lume - 100% original 893b. A matching numbers car.How “original” are the 100 plus year old ones? The movement is pristine. It looks like it was put away not so long after WW1. The watchmaker marks I can make out are mostly in the 80's(I got it in the 90's). Hence it runs like a train. About the most consistently "accurate" mechanical watch I have. In that if I wore it day in day out for a year I'd only be bothered to set the time when summer and winter times change. When new these level of watches were made and guaranteed to be accurate to a few seconds a day. I have a 30's Zenith that has a WW1 design movement in it that after some incredible servicing and balance work(a rare skill these days) was well within COSC chronometer spec. Like consistently fast(IIRC) 10 seconds a week on the wrist.
The 1912 had a more storied history. Originally sold in Milan, it had been in the wars. When I got it it had a wrong and later(20's) dial and some modern cathedral hands. Over the years keeping a look out I sourced a dial and handset from 1914 that were correct. Note the Longines around the subdial, to leave room at the top for the retailer's name as was very much a thing at the time. In the UK Longines sent out a missive to UK retailers telling them they'd not put their names on the dial. Rolex and Hans Wildorf was the one who changed that in the UK by insisting on having the company name on the dial(not just Rolex but all their other brands at the time). My 1916 is very rare for a UK watch in that it did have Longines in the enamel(and the date letter on the dial back is correct). Many of the ebay Trench watches with Rolex and Omega and Longines are later additions, often the ink is still wet... Though they did have names in some of Europe and the Americas 90% of those from the UK are dubious(most have the wrong hands and crowns too). The movement is original and again all numbers match.
Interestingly and further on the stuff above about the consistency of Longines finshes, it has a Geneva striped movement, not gilt. Gilt was much more an English thing and a large market for the Swiss as movement suppliers and full watches so gilt seems to have stuck after WW1.
Jesus, that was a long one, as the actress said to the bishop.:D
*save for in a very roundabout and it seems unofficial way with the original Panerai diversRejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.
0 -
-
Terrible photo, but 4 of my favourites. Not pictured is my Breitling Airwolf (needs a new battery) - that and the Seiko Chrono have sentimental value, so will never be sold.
Rolex 114060, Seiko SNAC05, PAM 111, GS SBGN0090 -
Chauffe, Marcel, chauffe!Join Date:Posts: 64437
Very nice. The Panerais are growing on me. Very masculine watch and ever so perfectly matched with a good leather strap. Which is a bit weird for a watch meant to be used in the water
The no date sub doesn't look like it's the maxi case. Is it the pre-ceramic version 14060(M)?My ads on adverts.ie
0 -
Very nice. The Panerais are growing on me. Very masculine watch and ever so perfectly matched with a good leather strap. Which is a bit weird for a watch meant to be used in the water
They took a long time to grow on me, but I do like it a lot now. If you are looking, be sure to get one with a sandwich dial.The no date sub doesn't look like it's the maxi case. Is it the pre-ceramic version 14060(M)?
It's the ceramic model, just sitting at a funny angle in the box.
0 -
Chauffe, Marcel, chauffe!Join Date:Posts: 64437
Ah yeah that pic shows it's maxi alright
Richard Hammond got one recently and so did Andy Kirby. Not sure if either got date or no date. But you probably know of at least one of those fellas My ads on adverts.ie
0 -
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
I did but I moved it on, lovely watch but I got ferocious rash and grazing from the crown every time I wore it for more than a day.
Still a watch I miss, the finishing on the raised numbers, and hands is beautiful.
Ugh, I was keeping an eye out in case you did!
Did you move it on here? They're definitely up my street, love the look of them. Had a Steinhart Aviation which is not dissimilar in shape but quite big - kind of missing that one recently, the only piece I've moved on which i've had that with.0 -
Advertisement
-
Frankie5Angels wrote: »Ugh, I was keeping an eye out in case you did!
The guy I bought it from actually sold it to me on condition of 1st refusal so it just went home so to speak.
They are a big watch but wear smaller IMO.0 -
-
Chauffe, Marcel, chauffe!Join Date:Posts: 64437
It is a classic. The one that is growing on me a lot My ads on adverts.ie
0 -
It is a classic. The one that is growing on me a lot
Well I'm both financially embarrassed currently along with definitely, 100% certainly, totally and utterly not left purchase another watch unless and until I get rid of something...
So have at it
Sure it's got to the point I'm giving away Invicta's herself doesn't know I have :P0 -
Chauffe, Marcel, chauffe!Join Date:Posts: 64437
Sure it's got to the point I'm giving away Invicta's herself doesn't know I have :P
Next step up the ladder is you'll be giving away PAMs after your coins have mooned
My ads on adverts.ie
0 -
Advertisement
Advertisement