Reply With QuoteI'm not a massive fan of the dial. Case is nice but not what I would call ground breaking.
Still, nice to see something local!
Unfortunately no relation to the original company that once made cases for Rolex and Omega (amongst others) and perhaps a tad pricey for an ETA 2824-2 based watch. A great size at 38mm though. What do we think, chaps?:
https://www.hodinkee.com/articles/th...a-uk-made-case
I'm not a massive fan of the dial. Case is nice but not what I would call ground breaking.
Still, nice to see something local!
Really not a fan of the oversized bezel.
Quite nice but the pricing tells you everything you need to know.
Quite nice and the story behind it. Apart from the name what does the case actually share with the original? ie is it made from the same tools, or same location? does it use the same blue print? etc
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Overpriced and boring.
Suffers in comparison with the elegance of the Tudor. Makes it appear somewhat heavy handed.
Bezel too thick, hands too big and movement not worth that kind of price.
Looks a bit too thick on the case, as others have mentioned. I love the texture on the dial.
The vintage Tudor, however, is stunning. Perfectly proportioned.
In a post I made a few days ago, I alluded to the fact that 'resurrected brands' we're nothing of the sort. This brand has not be resurrected in any way, save for the name. The company using the name has absolutely nothing to do with Dennison, never had anything to do with Dennison, and is using the name only to give his product pseudo authenticity.
Dennison, at least, as far as I know, only ever made cases, nothing at all to get excited about, unless you happen to own a rare Dennison cased watch.
If you read the Hodinkee article, it waxes lyrical about the company, giving lots of history, and associations with famous watch manufacturers, none of which is valid at all in the context of the new company. Does the new company owner have a background in watch, or even case making? As far as I understand, he is a serious collector, and owns a company which sells watches.
so, what does the new watch offer? A case, not made by Dennison, a movement, not made by Dennison, a dial which looks as though it has been designed by committee on a bad day, and various other components, most of which could be bought from Cousins!!
In fact the whole kit and kaboodle could probably have been bought from Cousins, though I suspect quite a lot of it was sourced and assembled in the Far East.
The result is a watch which is of mediocre quality, and it's doubtful that it's as well put together as a Time Factors watch, which will probably sell for shed loads of cash, and make a fortune for the new brand owner.
In fact, a boutique brand, which will cost as much as a product from a major Swiss manufacturer.
I can see the design ethos, and I like it, but why on earth have bno finish contrast on the case.
Every other one of the vintage watches shown benefits from contrast between polished, bushed and other surfaces on the case.
This one is a uniform blasted (or is it possibly very finely brushed).
Either way, the total lack of contrast makes a nice case look extraordinarily dull.
I can't see why they've done it
D
I like it - it would be better still if it had a Benson movement in it
Whoever does not know how to hit the nail on the head should be asked not to hit it at all.
Friedrich Nietzsche
See 'Graham' for more details.Originally Posted by doug darter
It does how a very vintage feel to it though. Though if I was paying that sort of money the might ad well get a truly vintage watch
Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk
Nothing wrong with the appearance of these watches and I'm sure they're nicely made.
What I`m not sure about is the price; £2400 is a lot, they're trading heavily on the nostalgia/heritage theme and that doesn`t cut it for me. The link with the original company is tenuous to say the least.
An ETA 2824 is fine, but it's nothing special and I`d prefer to see a 2892 which I believe to be a significantly better movement.
Needless to say I won`t be rushing out to buy one.
Paul
Looks nice, but can't imagine ever parting with that much for it. I do like the tudor though!
Not that I disagree with this in principle but I understand they are using Dennison's original machinery for case making.
From SalonQP:
Inspired by the expedition pieces of the 1950s, the Revival watches (as they are being called), have their cases produced in the UK using some machinery from the original Dennison factory.
They state on their website, as they did at the launch event a few weeks ago, that the watches are assembled in England. The cases are also made in England. The dial and hands are Swiss-made.
My fav, This one has a nice contrasting effect with the case. They say its bead blasted but I think brushed steel would be a good option instead.
best regards
Agree!Looks a bit too thick on the case, as others have mentioned. I love the texture on the dial.
The vintage Tudor, however, is stunning. Perfectly proportioned.
Its totally bogus to put "Swiss Made" on the dial if they are assembled in the UK...
Wiki would suggest otherwise:
"A watch movement is considered Swiss if: the movement has been assembled in Switzerland and, the movement has been inspected by the manufacturer in Switzerland and; the components of Swiss manufacture account for at least 60 per cent of the total value, without taking into account the cost of assembly."
Well noticed! Oh dear, either they are misusing the 'Swiss Made' trademark or the watches definitely cannot be assembled in the UK!
That's just the watch movement.
For the watch as a whole to be 'Swiss Made', as claimed on the dial of these watches, requires similar rules to apply to the watch as a whole. In particular, the watch must be assembled in Switzerland and final inspection must be carried out in Switzerland by a Swiss national (as I recall).
The English-made case would also need to be a relatively small part of the overall value of the watch (i.e. <=40%). However, that does seem feasible, given that most of the value would be in the movement and other parts.
It looks ok, but just ok to me. The handset looks pretty awful.
I'm not doubting the provenance of the movement, the article states the movements are imported from Switzerland and that the watches are assembled in the UK, it should say "Made in UK"...our definitions are more lax so that would be ok. Perhaps the article is wrong and the cases are shipped to CH?
A bit expensive and :/
Not my type!
I wonder how long it will be before they have to remove the 'Swiss-Made' from the dial?
You know, considering they aren't.
I wonder how much they paid Hodinkee to feature it on their site......
So a 1940's Omega, for instance, with its Swiss movement (and dial marked "Swiss Made") housed, in England, in a Dennison case is "totally bogus"?
I was wondering about that too.
Specifically, as it aesthetically most follows the vintage Tudor OysterDate the Hodinkee article shows, and given that the Dennison website describes this newly manufactured watch as having "... Slightly domed durable plexiglass. ...", does the standard Dennison "Denco53" model also actually use the same pre-sapphire vintage classic era Rolex/Tudor OysterCase design having the bezel clamped plexiglass crystal of the (I assume Dennison cased) vintage Tudor it visually compares to?
I think that would be great if it did, and make this watch extremely desirable for some, probably me included, but at the 2.4K GBP they retail these at, I'd personally want a Faraday Cage in there so it would be almost as good as the .325K TF Smiths PRS-29A Eddie sells.
https://dennisonwatches.com/watches/denco53-black-dial/
It would be regarded as such now with the current "rules"....but even back then, were the cases shipped to CH....and if not, who did the assembly over here?....genuinely interested...never seen this discussed before....
In the distant past, import taxes for assembled watches were high in some countries. It was commonplace to import movements and have the watch assembled into a locally made case , on grounds of cost. This happened in the 1950s and onto the 60 s. There are plenty of 50s Omegas around that were assembled into 9 ct gold cases in the UK. Cases were also produced in the USA and Omega watches were assembled there; plenty of 14 ct gold - filled Omega Seamaster Devilles were produced this way. No - one disputes the validity of these, it's just that things were done differently in the past. Omega even produced movements with a lower jewel count for some markets.......... Import taxes for watches were based on the number of jewels in the movement!
Times have changed.
Paul
Thanks for this perspective Paul. Every day's a school day!
Saw one of these in the shop today and they look VERY nice. If they sold at the Black Bay 36 price point, I would be in... But £2400-£2800... No bloody way.
Photo added from their Instagram because I feel too awkward taking photos in shops... Bit of a Japanese tourist move.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Last edited by RG1825; 29th June 2016 at 13:42.
+1. So dull ...
Out of interest, do you find this more boring than, for example, an Explorer I? V interested in what defines boring as opposed to simple/understated.
Cheers!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
+1. So dull ...
I'm probably not the person to ask about Explorer I's as I'm just not a fan of that whole brand! Minority I know. Too me Panerai Luminor base is as simple/understated as I go. I prefer Breitling's, Panerai's etc. But I do see ascetic merit in some "simple" watches Grand Seiko's etc.
Just my opinion there's no wrong or right.
J
Yes of course - totally subjective. Interesting to hear opinions on where the boring line begins though! I think the shiny bezel and date just about keeps it in the interesting camp for me. Just...
I quite like them, good size, nice dial etc. Like others though I don't like the use of bead blasting on the case, brush would have been much better suited for the vintage look. There is something else not quite right that I can't put my finger on aswell(could be the logo being too large for my taste).
Wouldn't consider buying one at those prices though.
Last edited by Tetlee; 29th June 2016 at 15:23.
I did state quite clearly in the shop today that the price was way out of line compared to competitors. Got offered a discount but not enough really... I would expect this to cost no more than a BB36 for it to be palatable. Perhaps a bit less due to no modified movement and established brand. Although I suppose the lack of company size doesn't make pricing so easy.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
My plumber? Just rang him. He says he knows nothing about it and I was disturbing him at the pub
Sent from my E5823 using Tapatalk
I actually like it very much. At 38mm it's also more attractive to me than the vintage Tudor / Rolex (which, I agree, is much nicer, albeit too small).
The price however is completely ridiculous. At a third of the price it might be enticing, otherwise no no.
I rather like this one - admittedly the price is a bit steep but comparable to Schofield and Bremont .
Interesting point, you get a much more innovative case from Bremont, ironic considering Dennison's origins.
Ironic certainly, but it's not the same company and no historic ties, someone just bought / resurrected the brand name, and that's it.
As to the watch itself, decent enough little 'dress' watch. Simple clear design. Price wise I think it's a little ambitious for such a new brand with a generic movement, but comparable to other more established brands.
Personally I quite like it, would I buy one? Possibly but at used prices, not new or anywhere near RRP
I like some of the versions but why bother with the 'Swiss Made' text, when the aim is to shout about breathing life into a dead and almost forgotten English company? Change the text to 'Made in England', reduce the price to something more reasonable and knock the big boys for six. All that said, I wish them luck.
It's a brand in itself, the illusion of above average quality
Unfortunately nothing to be proud of anymore
Wishful thinking, but never going to happen
Posting Permissions
