Reply With QuoteDoes that mean you'd do a day/date dial then, Eddie?
Count me in please Eddie!!
Does that mean you'd do a day/date dial then, Eddie?
Dave E
Skating away on the thin ice of a new day
I am now totally confused as to what watch is being proposed ...Originally Posted by Dave E
john
Costume jewellery. Ouch!!!
Eddie, did I understand it right that you are planning on using prs-50 case with this movement?
Probably me confusing the issue. Eddie hasn't said anything about a day/date, I was just curious given that the movement offers it.I am now totally confused as to what watch is being proposed ...
john
Dave E
Skating away on the thin ice of a new day
The SB 1903 has the date function but it's not enabled.
With the proposed LIP/inner track dial, date at 6 or no date is fine by me. Day date is a no go!
I'm even more interested now that it may not have a 2824 in it. I'm all in favour of more watches with movements besides the 2824 in 'em!
For myself, I would very much prefer this possible new version of the PRS-50 have the very reliable, consistent, ubiquitous, well reputed, and still current ETA 2824 movement of the highest grade reasonably accessible. I've sure had great luck with this movement and the manual wind ETA 2801 (which is, as I understand it, a 2824 without the auto wind rotor mechanism) over the years.
The PRS-50's case is compatable with the 2824 as already spec'ed, and, though some may think it is mundane, boring, overly ubiquitous, and short of esoteric thrill, it works and in 10 - 20 years even skeptics will like the fact they have no trouble finding all the parts and service they may need. They will have also probably experienced the near rock-like reliability and wonderful consistency the movement is well known for over most or all of that time period of ownership and use.
Besides that, I'd personally hate to see a new version of the PRS-50 and the ultra neat dials proposed for it to be unnecessarily cluttered up with the addition of the day of the week complication. :tongue6:
Maybe the I assume long discontinued but well made and designed New-Old-Stock ETA 2789 movement available could be used for a dress watch design in the works that could have its case specificationed specifically for it and won't have to endure heavy and hard use, and that could benefit from the movement's incorporated day mechanism as well as the quick-set date, and also from the inherent esoteric prestige older long discontinued movements seem to have for some people concerned with that.
For myself again, I'd rather have rock reliability and consistency, and the future parts and service availabilty guaranteed by the present state of massive ubiquity and continued manufacture in the movement chosen for a new dome shape screw-down "stepped" acrylic crystal version of the PRS-50.
Lest my question earlier imply otherwise, I'd like a date on it, not keen on the day.
Dave E
Skating away on the thin ice of a new day
Apart from Seiko and Citizen I cannot think of any other diver with day-date ... but I am ready to be corrected.
john
Costume jewellery. Ouch!!!
And being the Mr. Know-all that I am, I am ready to correct you.Apart from Seiko and Citizen I cannot think of any other diver with day-date ... but I am ready to be corrected.
john
Bill Yao's Mk.II Seafighter.
^^^
If Rolexes have great lume how come Bond needs a lighter to read his? :P
I never thought of that :lol:
Neat watch though, and movie.
I suppose the stupid Jock forgot to charge it up under the bedside lamp while he was getting ready to go out.
Tutima Pacific has. I've got a feeling there's at least one Hamilton like that, but not sure. If you count Anonimo as a diver, there's one of those as well.Apart from Seiko and Citizen I cannot think of any other diver with day-date ... but I am ready to be corrected.
john
Dave E
Skating away on the thin ice of a new day
I think he's disguising the fact that he's checking his watch by lighting a cigarette. 8) 8)
Of course it may be a futile attempt to seal the NATO strap after removing the additional bit. :?I think he's disguising the fact that he's checking his watch by lighting a cigarette. 8) 8)
I wasn't proposing to make a day/date, just pointing out that the movement has day/date capability. My interest was piqued when he said it wasn't quickset because then I could have made a dateless watch without having the detente for the date correction on the stem.
Eddie
Whole chunks of my life come under the heading "it seemed like a good idea at the time".
Tritium don't need charging up, stupid :twisted:I suppose the stupid Jock forgot to charge it up under the bedside lamp while he was getting ready to go out.
Because a Stingray ISN'T a Precista.
Hi John.
Like I said in a previous post, I've owned the PRS-50 and both the Stingray 50 MOD1C and MOD2C.
50 MOD1C:
50 MOD2C:
Like most people, with the Stingray I was hoping to have a slimmer alternative to an FF homage. And although Bill makes a very fine & well-put-together watch, the Stingray was missing something. Like I said previously, it was "flat & sterile" looking - no "POP!".
This on the other hand is how to do an homage to the 50:
Eddie's choices - style, lume, hands, bezel, case - all add up to a totally different animal when compared to the Stingray. I mean the 50 has "POP!" in spades. Unfortunately during the time I owned it I felt it was just too thick for my wrist and an accident waiting to happen. I was always "aware" of it on my wrist and concerned about it's thickness. Plus I have small wrists to begin with.
The Stingrays were definitely slimmer & a better "fit" for my wrist but left me cold, especially after seeing and handling the 50 in the flesh. Again, the Stingrays were very well made and executed but just lacked that extra "spark".
So, Eddie, if you do another version of the 50, would there be any way to cut down on the thickness? Maybe to the thickness of your 14 (great watch & one of my faves)?
Thank you.
Dave
in defense of Bill, his stingray case and bezel *is* based on a FF that has a flat profile case & bezel, along with a sterile dial. the only difference is that the stingray has a slightly flatter crystal profile.
the prs-50 is based on a different FF variant.
two different homages based on two different FF designs, both are true to their originals.
i have both a stingray and the prs-50 and enjoy them both for what they are.
it'll be interesting to see if this proposed design comes to fruition.
Hi Denizen!in defense of Bill, his stingray case and bezel *is* based on a FF that has a flat profile case & bezel, along with a sterile dial. the only difference is that the stingray has a slightly flatter crystal profile.
the prs-50 is based on a different FF variant.
two different homages based on two different FF designs, both are true to their originals.
i have both a stingray and the prs-50 and enjoy them both for what they are.
it'll be interesting to see if this proposed design comes to fruition.
Absolutely no reason to defend Bill. Everyone knows he makes a wonderful watch and offers A LOT of watch for the money.
And I am very familiar with the different variants of the FF and understand fully that some variants & combinations of the Stingray try to emulate or try to give the "feeling" of the original FF variants they were inspired by.
When delivered to the French in 1953, the FF did indeed have a slightly domed epoxy bezel. It also had slightly thicker markers & numbers than Bill's offerings. Maybe if Bill offered an acrylic-coated bezel instead of the flat matte bezel he currently does, that would help add that little "spark" I'm missing. But when I talked with him about it I was told it was too labor & time intensive and stopped offering it - even as an option on custom orders.
I personally like the "uncluttered" look of the original FF as first delivered and would love to see an homage to that with Eddie's flair and resources.
And again, no taking anything away from Bill Yao & MKII watches. Absolutely wonderful offerings for the money.
Thank you.
Dave
There's also this but I am not sure if it can be classified as a diver. In general, day-date never appeared to be very popular with divers.
I don't see any reason to have the day on any watch anyway. I feel it was 'invented' just for something to do. The only time I ever lose track of the day is when I am on holiday.
john
Costume jewellery. Ouch!!!
^
You clearly haven't retired yet! (No, I'm not that old - in my case it was my health)
Twigfarm(Dave), and Luso & CPF too,
For myself, I still feel the same way I did and more so about "thinner" as above when this thread started and I hope the beautiful heavy-duty "real diver" technical specifications of the PRS-50 are never "F"ed into just another fashion diver because some buyers are concerned about the extra millimeter or two of thickness the superlative technical specifications require.
Another thought with all good intent: The PRS-14 you are fine with Dave is 14.3mm thick and the PRS-50 is 15.3mm thick. Look on your ruler just how small an increase that is and you might stop worrying about it. I hope so.
Rollon
I quite like having the day on a watch. Yes I can keep track of the day (just not the date) but I think it looks good. Maybe not in all cases. Not on 3 dial chronographs for instance. But I think it looks good on damaskos and my Seiko chrono
Rollon - the original fifty fathoms was thinner than the PRS-50, as is the Submariner, So I don't think it would be turning it into a fashion diver. And 1mm makes a difference - especially since the case goes 'straight' up - the 14 comes in for the bezel.
Also as far as I can tell this would be another version, rather than completely replacing the present 50. And if you've got your 50 why is it of such concern? It's a little demeaning to Say we are trying to f*** the 50 into a fashion watch.
CPF(Chris),
If you want to compromise the integrity of the genuinely outstanding heavy-duty technical specifications of the PRS-50 and the small degree of additional case thickness that requires for the primarily cosmetic purpose of making this watch thinner, then I feel doing so is the definition of "F"ing it into just another fashion diver.
I'm not demeaning you, Dave, or Luso, or anybody else feeling as you do personally in any way, Chris, but I do have a measure of contempt for the idea because there are hundreds of good quality press-fit crystal fashion divers that are thin and very available, but only a mere handful of watches like the PRS-50.
Rollon
Well now, how's that? I have several 60's watches with lume and 2 of them are clearly marked T Swiss T. Languishing in the watch drawer there is not a glimmer, but after ten minutes under the bedside lamp they are glowing like good 'uns. So, could you elaborate a little further - just why you say that 'Tritium don't need charging up'.Tritium don't need charging up, stupid :twisted:I suppose the stupid Jock forgot to charge it up under the bedside lamp while he was getting ready to go out.
I'm sure Gunscrossed can answer for himself but my new Traser doesn't react much at all under the charging light, but it keeps its lume all night even when charged Luminova watches like Seikos are fading.
At first I thought I'd bought a duff watch but the hands glow well all the time: it just stays readable no matter what the light (or absence thereof) conditions.
I don't believe this. Back from vacations and another "must have" is shown here.This has always been my favorite dial.
Cheers,
Andy
Better start pack my things before my wife does it for me... :D
And like this ?
My favorite choice
Amicalement
"Une photo vaut mieux qu'un grand discours"
HarJac,
I think you are saying there below that a picture is worth more than a thousand words(iether that or you are telling me or us that I or we talk too much----I'm not sure).
Vraiment, je ne parle pas francais mais:
Merci beaucoup, HarJac, il est une photographie tres bonne. Bienvenue a TZ-UK aussi. TZ-UK il est une forum de discussion superlatif sur montres et les participants et les gestionnaires sont tres intelligent et hoborable ici, et Monsieur E. Platts surtout le plus.
I definitely hope I said that right. Maybe somebody might even tell me exactly what in the hell I said.
That aside, I think the above version of the original Blancpain Fifty Fathoms you put up with the date at 6 o'clock added looks extremely good and I like it very much also. As I mentioned previously, though, along with the date, I personally would like to see what this particular FF dial design looked like with a similiar style outer minute/second track tipping on the minute and seconds hands in addition to(NOT in lieu of) the inner minute track tipping on the hour hand. That would make precise timing easier if it didn't muck up the aesthetics of this neat dial's styling or the essence of the original.
As I also mentioned previously, and assuming the date window would, necessitated by correlation with the movement, end up placed a bit inboard toward the pinion shaft than you show above and replace the triangular luminous 6 o'clock hour marker, I'd personally like to know if a black date numeral on a fully lumed background treatment for the date wheel would possibly, given that type of lume treatment's apparent ability in showing small detail well, serve to allow the date to be read in the dark and secondarily allow the lumed date wheel windowed at 6 o'clock to also serve as the lumed 6 o'clock hour marker in lieu of the regular triangular hour marker it replaced. I thought, and still think, this might be an option worth considering, but otherwise, the white numeral on plain black background date wheel treatment windowed at 6 o'clock would be more than fine with me.
The other thing I previously mentioned and would personally like to see considered for this domed screw-down "stepped" acrylic crystal version of the PRS-50 in addition to the above, would be the small Sinn U2 EZM5 style viewable desiccant capsule windowed discreetly on the dial with a second unseen desiccant capsule hidden inside the case perhaps screwed onto a movement plate or to a fixture on the underside of the dial as space allowed. However, this type of case interior moisture absorbing technology would only be available for use if the patent privileges I believe Sinn has held for years on it have by now expired and I don't know on that.
I'll also add that I personally, strongly, DO NOT LIKE the way that Sinn screws their desiccant capsule onto the exterior of the watch's case(i.e. onto one of the lugs) on most of its watch models using desiccant protection technology because I feel that drilling an extra hole in the case and attaching the capsule externally thereby unnecessarily compromises the integrity of the case and only serves as another possible avenue for moisture to enter if the sealing falters or fails or should the capsule's window break. I only personally like the totally enclosed interior attached desiccant capsule design Sinn uses exclusively for their U2 EZM5 Dive Watch model.
Rollon
You couldn't get the date in that position with the ETA2824/2789/AS2063 unless the dial was only about 22mm diameter.
Eddie
Whole chunks of my life come under the heading "it seemed like a good idea at the time".
Wait, that's not your photo in your avitar? :D
I would personally prefer it as the original - no outer minute/second track - for two reasons:
- This way it'll look more distinct from the 1st version of the PR-50[/*:m:2h9emtj3]
- The outer track will make the "percieved" dial look smaller (a thing that kept me away from the original PR-50)[/*:m:2h9emtj3]
The date will have to go inner the dial, but that might be workable without changing the look of the dial.
I would personally prefer it as the original - no outer minute/second track - for two reasons:
- This way it'll look more distinct from the 1st version of the PR-50[/*:m:3t6q2g0e]
- The outer track will make the "percieved" dial look smaller (a thing that kept me away from the original PR-50)[/*:m:3t6q2g0e]
The date will have to go inner the dial, but that might be workable without changing the look of the dial.
Hi Paulo. While for myself, as regards your first reason above, I don't see something made different for the sake of being different to be in itself a necessarily positive thing---if I did I'd like one hand watches and three wheeled cars, I think you may well be right as regards your reason #2 for opposing the idea of adding an outer minute track to the inner minute track only design of the original FF dial illustrated above.
However, I would still personally like to see what the above dial would look like mocked up with a discreet similiarly styled outer minute/second track that tips on the minute and second hands in addition to and supplementing the original's existing inner chapter that tips on the hour hand. The intent and purpose of the idea is to discreetly allow for more precise timing in actual use than does the original design without ruining or damaging the dial's outstanding vintage aesthetics.
So not knowing for sure if this idea would ruin or damage the aesthetics or essence of this great vintage FF dial design, or create the dial "shrinking" effect that very understandably concerns you, that is why I would, as I stated, like to see what it looked like---first. Rollon
Hmmm, Only 80, polished case...no date, definitely interested.
Your point in precision reading is a valid point too. A side by side comparison of minute track and no minute track is definitely the best way to go. :-)
BTW my 1st point is purely market driven. A watch with some differences might get different buyers (like me, for instance), whilst a similar one will be directed to the same people that allready purchased the PRS-50.
Tritium doesn't need charging up because it's radioactive,Well now, how's that? I have several 60's watches with lume and 2 of them are clearly marked T Swiss T. Languishing in the watch drawer there is not a glimmer, but after ten minutes under the bedside lamp they are glowing like good 'uns. So, could you elaborate a little further - just why you say that 'Tritium don't need charging up'.Tritium don't need charging up, stupid :twisted:I suppose the stupid Jock forgot to charge it up under the bedside lamp while he was getting ready to go out.
http://forums.watchuseek.com/showthread.php?t=144
I haven't been following this thread very well but I would add that I wanted to get one of the MKII versions of the earlier model 50 fathoms, however 2 things put me off big time;
1) The acrylic bezel was a custom job
2) The acrylic bezel was then removed as an option leaving me no choice but to pass on the MKII.
Ben4watches had one with the full lume acrylic bezel and if you look at the pictures he put on here it looks amazing, especially love the cut on the bezel edge much nicer then the coin edge on the other MKII variant.
If Bill can't do it then maybe Eddie can.
BTW just to chuck a spanner in what about the "other" 50 fathoms, the Bund. The MKII seafighter is IMHO the most interesting watch Bill does right now but I haven't seen one in the flesh and again the acrylic bezel is a custom job which means several months wait and at current exchange rates not such a great deal.
Hello,I think you are saying there below that a picture is worth more than a thousand words
Rollon
Yes it's exactely the translation in English
I wrote this expression because my english is poor and i can't say it better
Regards
NB: you can found a history of the FF in "Lettres du Brassus" # 3 page 4 in English
http://www.blancpain.com/e/content/down ... us%233.pdf
Date : May be this solution (like archimede pilot) very "discrète"
That really doesn't do anything for me. If a new 50 is to be a homage, the original PRS-50 already is one. Homages are fine but to justify their existence (for me) you need to add something. Timefactors' military watches are better than the originals which does the job in that respect, or you need to add some more modern element or you might as well raid the vintage sales forums.
I do doubt the need for a new 50 except perhaps to remove the controversial radioactive logo. Whether Eddie would sell enough of a new version to justify the expense and effort is a judgement call for him.
I imagine given the rabid fan base the BP FF has (I don't like it) that I'm fairly much on my own here. :|
:shaking: As regards those thoughts Glamdring I hope you are on your own :rabbit:
Date : May be this solution (like archimede pilot) very "discrète"
Hi HarJac. It may be just me but I think the date window looks terrible :tongue6: ---tres terrible---in that 4:30 position. The one I liked was when you had the date window at the 6 o'clock position.
I believe what Eddie is saying above about the way you had it in the previous FF photogragh that you put up showing the date window at the 6 o'clock position is that the date window itself was placed a bit too far from the center pinion and too close to the edge of the dial to correlate with the specifications of the movement on the PRS-50's 26mm visible diameter of the dial.
^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^And like this ?
My favorite choice
Amicalement
"Une photo vaut mieux qu'un grand discours"
In other words, I think all you would have to do is keep the date window at the 6 o'clock position but raise it up toward the center pinion (the shaft holding the hands) just a bit so that the top edge of the date window cutout is placed right about at the inner minute track. That is approximately I believe where the date window cutout placement would correctly correlate with the specifications of the movement and 26mm visible dial diameter of the PRS-50 and is where I would personally like to see the date window end up I think. This would block out part of the original dial's 6 o'clock lume triangle, but I think the triangle itself would perhaps just best be left off with this window placement anyway.
This is very much a subjective thing, but I think the reason I would myself prefer the window at 6 o'clock on this dial design is that it stays symmetric and in balance without skewing things to the side, which would I think damage the aesthetics of this particular dial's styling pattern. Even given that though, I'd still like to know where yourself and others think it would look and work best.
And thanks again for these excellent modified pictures you've put up HarJac---it works out a lot better seeing it than imagining what changes might look like.
The simple solution to all these date window problems is to simply skip having a date on the dial :)
One thing you might consider is the possibility, if not probability, that more, perhaps many more, prospective purchasers would pass up this watch if it did not have a date than would pass it up if it did have a date, especially if the date were as tastefully done and congruent with the dial's styling as possible.
You would lose the triangle at 6 if you put the date at 6 or lose it at 3 with the date at 3. I strongly believe you need to keep all the triangles to maintain dial symmetry. No date is the obvious solution.
Eddie
Whole chunks of my life come under the heading "it seemed like a good idea at the time".
I think that's the point. Symmetry is crucial to the look of this dial.
I have exactetly the same opinion the symmetry is very important.
I have an Archimede Pilot, and a very small date, for me of course, it's a solution (and no date another one)
Posting Permissions
