which one next....?
Discussion
They are not as "common" as a Rolex or an Omega. Which in a way is good as there are a lot fewer fakes out there. The down side (if there is one) is that not everyone will recognise it on your wrist.
I think they are spankingly good watches, well made and beautifully designed and I love all of mine to bits!
The best advise one can give is to try some of them out. You may not like them. Or you may like them enough to buy a few
That’s how I bought mine. The Rolex has not seen the day of light in a good few years!
HTH
I think they are spankingly good watches, well made and beautifully designed and I love all of mine to bits!
The best advise one can give is to try some of them out. You may not like them. Or you may like them enough to buy a few
That’s how I bought mine. The Rolex has not seen the day of light in a good few years!
HTH
Edited by Cuchillo on Saturday 19th April 23:03
Brompton said:
I'm thinking about getting another watch but not sure what to go for. I've got an Omega Speedmaster (2001) and an Omega Seamaster Chronometer (2004). I quite fancy a Rolex (explorer or datejust). Any other suggestions?
I had a Seamaster Chrono (earlier model) and it kept the worst time of any watch I've ever owned. My £100 Seiko Orange Monster (which, to be fair, is a bit of a cult watch with an in-house mechanical automatic movement. Even though Seiko AFAIAC are a true 'manufacture', they do use too many cheap materials, i.e. lots of plastic, in their movements) kept infinitely better time than the Seamaster Chrono. I'd go as far as saying that the Seiko Orange Monster is cooler to watch geeks than the Omega Seamaster Chrono as well!!!I got rid of that Seamaster pronto. The Speedmaster (2000 Schumacher limited edition) automatic keeps fantastic time though, 8 years later without a service (naughty cyberface...)
In my case back then, my next watch was a Rolex Explorer II. I think all watch enthusiasts have to get one of the classic Rolexes at some point or other... even if the snob-bug of 'haute horlogerie' bites bad and Rolex become a mass-market brand to be sneered at... in my case I bought the Explorer because I really wanted the Daytona but couldn't afford one (none available at list price from any dealer, but loads available in the reseller channel for 2 times list... the main thing that makes the Rolex brand a bit grubby in my irrelevant opinion these days). The same s
t rolls on - the 50th anniversary Sub with the green bezel was impossible to buy from a 'professional' certified dealer, but readily available from the usual suspects at a premium to begin with... as will be the new Deep Sea, a watch over-engineered for any task still done by humans (another thread about this one )If you like the classic style of the Sub (copied by everyone - if you're looking for people to recognise a ROLEX on your wrist (shame on you) then virtually every middle to low-tier watch manufacturer makes a watch that is a direct replica (save the brand logo) down to the bracelet links and the bezel design) then it's an easy question - do you want to pay a couple of grand for the Rolex name and to tell people that yes, it is real, and no, it's not a fake. The Explorer II is just as capable for most people who do diving for a hobby (and in many cases, more than enough for real hard-core jobs) and IMO a more minimal, attractive style. It is bigger in diameter than the Daytona (which was the perfect size for my wrist, and after more than a decade of want I finally bought one at a preposterous markup in London - it was the best feeling and looking, size and design-wise, watch I ever owned until recently (my current watch is the best I've owned) - I had to sell the Daytona last year as I ran out of cash... ooops...). However apart from the Daytona, they don't offer any special complications that set the watches apart from the chasing counterfeiters - and even the Daytona doesn't have a date complication, which I'd say is almost a necessity these days
If you're more skinny-wristed than I (unlikely) then the Explorer may be too big, but otherwise I'd recommend this as a first sports Rolex if you have a 'New Rolex' itch that *must* be scratched. It will serve well and keep good time, until you either give up on mechanical watches completely or 'get the haute horlogerie bug' and end up wanting a top-class example of multiple different complications... which becomes an expensive hobby!!!!
FWIW the Explorer fitted much better and looked much less 'in your face' than the Seamaster Chrono, which was a large, heavy chunkster of a watch - perhaps suited to the fashion of watches becoming much larger and attention-grabbing as was the theme back then, but not ideal if you like to keep your watches (or in my case, if you like to keep time at all... my Seamaster Chrono was losing 2-5 minutes a day, which was unacceptable. But it made a great goodwill contribution to the purchase of the 2000 Speedmaster, which I still own and keeps great time. Lovely watch, seems incredibly small for an automatic chronograph movement, and they only made 4000 so it may be worth a few quid by now....In my case, my 2000 Schumacher Speedmaster looks tiny against today's offerings, it seems that everyone wants big status symbols rather than fine movements in that price bracket at the moment. My Speedmaster's a keeper (and has a fine movement, regardess of how well it's finished given the lack of a display back) - fashion will change and the 'bling' aspect of obtrusive watches (Paneria and AP ROO, currently on my 's
g-off' list for any 'status-symbol' owner of said brands who hasn't heard of the brand on the watch I'm currently wearing (Breguet)... :lol: Of course, I am not impugning neither Panerai nor Audemars Piguet here - they make *some* beautiful watches that are certainly worth the price - but there is this City subset of blokes prepared to spend silly money on a watch that has complications they'll never use, just to show 'status' and that they're not 'back office maggots' (real live quote from an FX trader.... Franck Muller is apparently the watch to show that you are 'The Man' when it comes to FX, allegedly 
) I don't know, I'm a consultant, not a front offce sales type 
I just choose what I find tasteful and from a manufacture with a fine history, who have been responsible for serious innovations and, preferably, make their own movements in-house. There is a Swiss firm called ETA which makes mechanical movements for wholesale to brand manufacturers, their old Valjoux 7750 is the chronometer used just about everywhere by smaller watch firms establishing a brand... however IMO just taking a third-party movement and chucking it in a case of your design is merely jewellery, not watchmaking. And the prices can take the piss - a Valjoux 7750 isn't expensive so the likes of AstroAvia will sell modified, finished (with display back showing the movement and gold-plated rotor) watches for around £100... which makes Tags with 50p quartz movements look a little silly IMO.OK, stop rambling cyberface - my opinion? Sell the Seamaster chrono, keep the Speedmaster, put the sale proceeds of the Seamaster chrono towards an interesting Sinn (I love their watches), and buy yourself a Rolex Explorer II. I have gone off Rolex as a brand, but they still make virtually-indestructible watches and if you want to own a Rolex, I'd say go for a standard Explorer II, ask for discount and play all the local dealers against each other to get the best price. I wouldn't bother with any Rolex that's currently profit-taking for the speculators, who seem to be able to acquire the watches before any real member of the public... which once you get past the teenage necessity to own a steel Daytona. As soon as you pay twice the retail price in Bond St just to acquire one, you find that virtually everyone else has one too
One neat thing about non-SS-Daytona Rolexes though is that they are tough as old boots, and thus buying one second hand from one of the usual suspects who post here or get referred from here (you know who you are!
) shouldn't worry you in the slightest. If you find a steel Daytona at list price, buy it immediately so you can sell at a profit, otherwise I'd get an older Explorer II at a much nicer price. In a similar way to some cars, some watches gain 'character' with age... along with reliability problems. But Rolex are pretty damn good in this regard, I wouldn't worry much about a second hand Sub or Explorer.Another benefit of the Explorer II vs. the Daytona etc. is that the case and bracelet is all brushed steel - no polished blingery and less of a target for thieves as well as looking more tastefully restrained, IMO.
Do try to get a friendly authorised dealer to let you try all the models on first though - you may have your heart set on a watch only to find it looks stupid on your wrist. I sadly experienced heartbreak on an IWC Doppelchronograph - I wanted the complication and was determined to acquire one, but the watch was simply far too large for my wrist. Head overruled heart, a first for the cyberface!!! ! (can't think of many other examples....)
Gassing Station | Watches | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff