View Single Post
      11-29-2013, 02:55 PM   #172
tony20009
Major General
tony20009's Avatar
United_States
1042
Rep
5,660
Posts

Drives: BMW 335i - Coupe
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Washington, DC

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by TSM330i View Post
Fantastic write-up and comparison! Plus adding some other brands that most people don't think of.

Clerc is a very cool watch, but as you said, probably not able to pull-off dual-duty between casual and formal.

I do like Omega quite a bit. They have great styles and a very good movement.

The B01 is Breitlings first in-house movement (BR01) in 2009. Personally, I only like the B01. Other Breitlings just don't do it for me.

For most watch wearers, it's about asthetics and reliability. So far for me, Rolex offers everything I'm looking for, especially the Daytona. The alloy used in the Rolex spring actually helps to counter-act gravity and is not affected by magnetism.
I was invited to a Rolex party at my local AD and the regional rep was there. I was the only person present that actually wore my Daytona when I raced and was into racing. We had some very good conversations about racing and all the racers who love them (and whom he was able to meet and interact with).
TY. I appreciate your having taken the time to read it. I forgot to specifically discuss the Vulcain watch, but the short is is that it suffers from the same aesthetic drawbacks as the Clerc: not able to do double duty.

In truth, if I were buying a purpose-only dive watch, because I had a genuine need for such a thing, I might choose either over a Rolex Sub, or a far less expensive watch that is made expressly for divers, maybe UTS or something. Thankfully, true divers don't actually have to spend $7K to get a a very, very capable dive watch. That's probably just as well since most divers aren't likely keen to spend that much for a watch when they have plenty of dive gear they need to spend it on. LOL

The reality for me, one who will never dive below 100 feet - and most likely not below 50 feet -- and I suspect for many others, is that a Sub tends to be a watch folks buy long before they find out there is actually a watch or two that can hold it's own against the Sub as a sport watch for diving. Then, years later when they find out about Clerc, Vulcain and even a few more boutique brands that I can't think of surely offer something comparable. But then that's the problem isn't it? Who the hell can think of them and why try so damn hard to do so when the Sub is such a damn good choice to begin with?

Omega:
Yes, Omega's 8500 co-axial movement is sometimes touted as being in the league of movements of the JLC, VC and PP ilk. Just stay away from the 2500 co-ax and it's chrono sibling. There's no shortage of folks, and even in the horological press, moaning about how the things are literally "up and dying" on them. It's no secret that the 2500 was a bit rushed to market; the issues being reported are likely the consequence of that haste. Folks don't seem to be having the same issues with the 8500, so it seems the sins of the 2500 are forgiven, even if there are still plenty of them on the market.

The benefits that accrue from the design of the co-axial escapement are obvious, even if they come at the expense of thinness. We're in a "big watch" era where watches apparently have to match the corpulence of their owners. That is what it is. Eventually folks will get back to normal size and so will watches. By then something else will have come along.

Aesthetics and reliability:
I have to say first that if one is really seeking a dive watch, this is one indispensable site: http://oceanictime.blogspot.com/

Hell, those are the two primary factors for me. I will say that if manufacture movements aren't critical, the Tudor Pelagos is a damn fine watch, and arguably a better machine, but it'll have ETA inside. Since Rolex own Tudor, there's a lot of overlap in the execution process. Indeed, vintage Tudoer (1990 or older) the case and bracelet are Rolex cases and bracelets. The fact that back then a Tudor was literally a Rolex with an ETA movement inside had a lot to do with why Tudor didn't really come into it's own: it was seen as the poor man's Rolex, even if the price wasn't anywhere near something a poor man could afford. Rolex finally has figured out that while others can clone their products and do so profitably for thousands less, Rolex can't clone itself for the price of a Seamaster and think people will buy it. Tudor is now coming into its own.

Vintage Tudor


Tudor Pelagos - You can see Tudor really put a lot of thought into this watch. For example they deliberately don't use a pearl in the little triangle on the bezel. Why? Because the damn things fall out. I know for a fact that's exactly what happens too. They use matte surfaces to keep reflectivity down and legibility high. No, it doesn't have the cyclops, but then neither does a Sea-Dweller.


Marcello C makes a very nice Rolex homage for about $1000 to $1500. Debaufre used to but they appear to have gone belly up. Still if one can find a "new, old stock" Debaufre, it's a great low price ($700 or less) alternative. Steinhart's Ocean is another maker who puts out a quality product with the right look with an ETA 2824-2 inside. Nivrel is yet another good alternative carrying ETA inside. Ditto Davosa. For folks who want the Sub look without the price and who don't care about much beyond the look and that the thing will run reliably, any one of these watches is more than fine.

And, of course, there is always the option of buying a pre-owned Sub. Since the movement hasn't changed one bit since about 1990 for the no-date and 1988 for the date version. The basic style has been constant for even longer.

All the best.





Attached Images
 
__________________
Cheers,
Tony

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
'07, e92 335i, Sparkling Graphite, Coral Leather, Aluminum, 6-speed

Last edited by tony20009; 11-29-2013 at 03:42 PM..
Appreciate 0