What watch do you wear?

GSXRMovistar said:
Why the hell would anyone spend that amount on a fake?!?! So many nice watches in that bracket.
Click to expand...

You see, you say that but I don't think there are that many nice watches in that bracket. Pretty much the only watch I like below £200 is the Seiko Monster. Under £500, I don't think I can think of one that's out now. My Hamilton cost less than this, but it's discontinued.

Next cheapest watch I like that I can think of, is the Sinn U1 which is over a grand.

To my eyes, sub £1000 watches simply don't have the timeless designs that the more luxurious brands have.
 
Maybe you've only seen ones you don't like though. There are going to be thousands of watches that look and feel every bit as substantial as a 4 figure watch but then the price tag is merely a price tag and not an indicator of quality.

A Sub costs a few K easily yet I wasn't impressed by the bracelet feel and lack of heft at all. Just one example.

Would never think of spending any amount of money on a fake personally. I'd have that feeling inside that I'm wearing a fake all the time. There's different feeling wearing something genuine.
 
Last edited:
I personally can't see the point in fakes. Knock Off Nigel... Just spend the same money on a watch that's actually worth it's value for it's engineering and design for it's price.
Fake buyers = wannabes = sad.
 
JayMax said:
I personally can't see the point in fakes. Knock Off Nigel... Just spend the same money on a watch that's actually worth it's value for it's engineering and design for it's price.
Fake buyers = wannabes = sad.
Click to expand...

That would be true if one pretend it is real.

It's not about the money for me, I can go out and buy an Omega if I wanted to, I just choose not to. The fake was for a bit of fun, at no point ever I pretended it was real.
 
Last edited:
Something I read in Watchhuseek forum in the past few days and made me think.

We should also remember that "cheap quartz" was an oxymoron in the early 70's. At that time, quartz watches were premium products and mechanical watches were the workaday models people wore just because they needed to tell time. That situation did not reverse until Casio came on the scene in a big way. By that time, the successful Swiss companies were making quality quartz movements--EBEL, for example, made many of the quartz movements used in the Swiss watch industry. That's when quartz movements went "price point" with Casio and Pulsar. Seiko watches were at that time still considered fairly expensive to those who just wanted to tell time. It seems to me that the S'watch made the final crossing to the concept of watches-as-jewelry. That actually set the stage for a resurgence of mechanical watches, since people were no longer required to think of them as utilitarian.
Click to expand...

My Hayek Sr also has the credit of saving the industry by creating the S'Watch watches, all those funky colours sold a bucket load in the 80's and was seen as an fashion accessary, as opposed to something just to tell time in.

Huge number of brands rely on ETA for the movements inside their watches. ETA is part of the giant monopoly known as the Swatch Group. Hayek Jr. is the Big Cheese in charge of that giant monopoly. He no longer wants ETA to supply any brand outside of the SG with movements. (Something that ETA has been doing for a very, very, long time. So long in fact that it became an industry norm for "Swiss-Made" watch brands.) Hayek would prefer cutting off the supply immediately. But he needs permission from the Swiss government before he can do that. Hayek gets his way when it comes to dealing with the Swiss government. He just does. It's basically a ridiculous formality. In order for the Swiss government to Save Face, and not appear as though they bend over backwards for Hayek whenever he snaps his fingers; he was asked to slowly diminish the supply of ETA movements to those brands outside the SG, instead of cutting off the supply entirely and immediately. Hayek agreed to this. And we are currently in the very early stages of the diminishment. Brands outside of the SG have no choice but to turn to other movement makers. All of the independent makers currently in the nation, are small. This presents a problem with regards to supply. Some brands will still be able to get quality Swiss-made movements. (Namely the big brands out there.) Some won't. Doesn't mean they'll go out of business though. Both Japanese and Chinese companies exist that make quality watch movements. (Expect their profits to significantly go up in the next few years thanks to Hayeks decision to cut off the supply of ETA movements to non-SG brands.)
Click to expand...

The whole thing basically will drive up the masque of the Swiss Made watches brand even higher with nothing more than exclusivity. Raymond Weil uses ETA movements and famous for it, what will they do then when their supplies stops? Or Christopher Ward? Or smaller people like Steinhart? They basically have to find other suppliers. We have already seen Omega Seamaster's prices going up in the past 2 years, it is no coincidence.

My point? The perception that mechanical engineering watches is nothing more than a perception, once upon a time Quartz was seen as great engineering too with a premium and was expensive. But due to a certain Mr Hayek Sr, Swiss Watches now have the perception of being superior, where once upon a time it is as regular as your kettle, something you buy for its function.

If the yardstick that we measure the quality of a watch by is with its accuracy to keep time and time only then mechanical watches would fall behind Quartz, the concept of a watch losses or gain +/- 10 seconds a day is new to me (that would make it a minute a week, 4 minute a month and 24 minutes in 6 months), having have only a Quartz watch like forever, I have never need to adjust my watch between daylight savings. But in the past 3 days i have bought 2 mechanical watches, one Japanese (Seiko), one Swiss (Steinhart), and to be honest, I would be pretty annoyed if I miss my train because the watch !

Us humans like tactile objects, we like things how it works, we like to see how it works, we like to hear how it works, we get a kick from our senses, sight, sound, smell, touch and taste. We like the sound of a V6 over the silence of an electric car (some even like the smell of petrol), we like seeing film developed in front of our eyes in a pool of toxic chemicals over digital. We like to see the movement of a mechanical watch. It's just human nature.
 
Last edited:
Sometimes it's just nothing more than fun and novelty value !

In the street market stalls in Hong Kong I picked up a fully functional, accurate, hand wind "Omega" (I put the word Omega here in quotes, as you know, i am not pretending it is genuine) pocket watch with a clear back, with sweeping second hand for the price less than a big mac meal.

I don't think there are that many great watches for under £5.
 
Last edited:
Bigpops said:
You see, you say that but I don't think there are that many nice watches in that bracket. Pretty much the only watch I like below £200 is the Seiko Monster. Under £500, I don't think I can think of one that's out now. My Hamilton cost less than this, but it's discontinued.

Next cheapest watch I like that I can think of, is the Sinn U1 which is over a grand.

To my eyes, sub £1000 watches simply don't have the timeless designs that the more luxurious brands have.
Click to expand...
Maybe if your range is limited to a small amount of high street chains it can be harder to find a something really nice/special at that price range, but looking around at more of the lesser known brands online you can find hundreds of fantastic watches in the sub £500 / £200 price range.

I can understand a £20 knock off, yes it's naff and probably going to fail in the longer term, but it maybe a laugh to buy one for fun (personally wouldn't).

But spending a larger amount on a fake seems madness and a little sad, those that know their watches will spot it's a fake, and those that don't wont care. To me it seems like a poor attempt at faking status.

Personally I like variety so perfer to have a wider collection of lower price watches than one or two high cost pieces however I have a lot of friends who have some serious watch collections and all of them still appreciate good quality lower price brands (e.g. JDM Seikos, smaller brands).

Say no to knock off Nigel. :p
 
mrk said:
Maybe you've only seen ones you don't like though. There are going to be thousands of watches that look and feel every bit as substantial as a 4 figure watch but then the price tag is merely a price tag and not an indicator of quality.

A Sub costs a few K easily yet I wasn't impressed by the bracelet feel and lack of heft at all. Just one example.

Would never think of spending any amount of money on a fake personally. I'd have that feeling inside that I'm wearing a fake all the time. There's different feeling wearing something genuine.
Click to expand...

Was it a ceramic bezel sub you tried or the older version
 
Arbutus1.jpg

Arbutus2.jpg

Arbutus3.jpg

Arbutus4.jpg

Arbutus5.jpg

Liking it so far!

Looks great on. Strap feels comfy but I think I might change it for a Hirsch if I fancy a different design :)
 
Last edited:
I have a genuine quartz Omega Seamaster 300m and a Chinese replica Omega Seamaster Planet Ocean. The replica cost £100 and uses a Chinese replica of an ETA mechanical movement. The replica also uses the same stainless steel as geuine Omegas - there is very little difference between the two in terms of fit and finish and certainly not £1,000 worth of improvements in the genuine. Replicas now also offer a range of genuine Swiss (usually ETA) movements in well-constructed cases that look almost identical to the real deal bar the odd small tell (the lume pip on my replica just about touches the side of the triangle detailing on the bezel whereas it does not on the genuine). I think if you're buying it as a status symbol then it's clearly quite desperate/pathetic, but if you like the design(s) of some of the premium Swiss watches and want a well-made watch for a few hundred quid then replicas offer a lot of choice. In my personal experience, the finish on my replica is better than all watches I tried on from the high-street in the £200 - £400 bracket, including several Seiko, Citizen, Rotary and Tissot watches.
 
aayzof said:
I have a genuine quartz Omega Seamaster 300m and a Chinese replica Omega Seamaster Planet Ocean. The replica cost £100 and uses a Chinese replica of an ETA mechanical movement. The replica also uses the same stainless steel as geuine Omegas - there is very little difference between the two in terms of fit and finish and certainly not £1,000 worth of improvements in the genuine. Replicas now also offer a range of genuine Swiss (usually ETA) movements in well-constructed cases that look almost identical to the real deal bar the odd small tell (the lume pip on my replica just about touches the side of the triangle detailing on the bezel whereas it does not on the genuine). I think if you're buying it as a status symbol then it's clearly quite desperate/pathetic, but if you like the design(s) of some of the premium Swiss watches and want a well-made watch for a few hundred quid then replicas offer a lot of choice. In my personal experience, the finish on my replica is better than all watches I tried on from the high-street in the £200 - £400 bracket, including several Seiko, Citizen, Rotary and Tissot watches.
Click to expand...

if its fake, then you are fake.


My real Rolex says high !!

qTCyQfL.jpg
 
Last edited:
Cyrus said:
Was it a ceramic bezel sub you tried or the older version
Click to expand...

I don't know but it looked the same as the one Soundood posted above. It was Jez's but with cyclops.
Also soundood, how dare you post the same watch again! What an outrage! ;-)
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom