Reply With Quotesome may disagree but i think a speedy pro on leather works as a dressy chrono
Anybody know of any nice dressy chronos similar to the likes of the
steinhart marine chronograph ,stowa ,etc.. that's not a fortune.
some may disagree but i think a speedy pro on leather works as a dressy chrono
Agree with that.Originally Posted by exp-
If something the size of a Planet Ocean (42mm across and a centimetre and a half thick) can be considered dressy, you must be wearing quite a big dress ;).
Longines Conquest Heritage chrono is the best I can think of. 1950's styling, all polished, straight steel lugs, 38.5mm across and 12mm thick. So still thicker than an actual dress watch, but it is a chrono after all.
...but what do I know; I don't even like watches!
Hamilton do a few:
http://www.hamiltonwatch.com/collect...rono/h32766513
Depends what you mean by "not a fortune" but the Zenith Class Sport, especially the handwind version as it is so slim, is pretty dressy.
Nice!
Agree with that.
This Zenith is a watch for all occasions, sadly it will be with it's new owner this morning.
IWC Portuguese chrono is stunning but as other have said, it depends on what you consider a fortune
They don't get much dressier than the Junghans Max Bill Chronoscope!
that max bill is really nice, these forums really provide some nice watches I've never heard of!!
You write ´dressy´ so it is not persé but nevertheless the chronograph is inherently not a dressy týpe of watch.
For it to be as dressy as possibe it should be understated, low key; of modest dimensions, have a white/cream/silver dial with modest markings and be on a leather strap; again modest.
I tried on the new Longines column wheel chrono yesterday (white dial/gold hands), which wore really nicely.
I think you are right.
Except dressy ones?
How about...
Looks pretty dressy to me (for a chrono!)
Agreed.
Don't get me wrong - wear whatever watch you want, wherever you want - but don't for one second think that by clicking your heels together three times you can make a tool watch look dressy...
As "dressy" can also mean a big, heavy, brushed-steel sports watch that's usually found on a bracelet, apparently, how about an IWC Spitfire or Pilot chrono?
...but what do I know; I don't even like watches!
Change it back to the original black strap & my Zenith looks dressy
[IMG][/IMG]
That looks stunning !How about...
Looks pretty dressy to me (for a chrono!)
Got a copy of the rule book?
Excellent :-)How about...
Looks pretty dressy to me (for a chrono!)
One bloody thick case though...
Glashutte Original Sixties Chronograph.
Definitely dressy
It is and thank you again Paul.This Zenith is a watch for all occasions, sadly it will be with it's new owner this morning.
Stunning watch what is it
Nope, just hoping (in vain) for some consistency in vocabulary so it's possible to communicate.
Since you don't like to bother with rules, and we can call whatever we want, whatever we want, how about this dressy little number:
Useful, much?
...but what do I know; I don't even like watches!
I think everybody should take a look on Longines when looking for a dressy chrono. Heritage, Master and Conquest collections provide very good examples
I used to have a Zenith captain chronograph which was, by this threads' definitions, quite dressy.
Mine was the steel version, but if you check out the gold one it wouldn't look out of place in a semi-smart environment.
There's plenty of dressy chronographs with the good old Poljot 3133 movement inside. Mostly cheapy-cheap too.
Get your 3133 fix here: http://www.polmax3133.com/
Actually, no. I fully support your position that we need consistency and accuracy in use of language (for ref. see my comments about people using "redux" to apparently mean "reduced") but, we also have flexibility and the ability to convey meaning with subtle changes.
In this case I think the intention is fully conveyed by using the word "dressy" - that is to say not a strictly "dress" watch but one which displays elements or attributes of one whilst at the same time being, in this case, a chronograph.
I think this is also pretty dressy .
At 42mm probably slightly too large and thick to be 'very' dressy... but it's not a sports watch!
Depending on budget, the Daytona is pretty dressy.
A bit further into the affordable range, you'll struggle to do worse that a longines.
Or, for something less than £100, what about one of these
I guess this is the part I find strange. Personally I don't find anything dressy at all about a big, full-size, heavy Speedmaster, other than the fact that a variable segment of the inside of its lugs is polished, on the basis that dress watches tend to be highly polished, and thus anything with a part-polished finish can therefore be called "dressy". I mean, a Breitling Super Avenger II is all-polished, but well, you know...:
...but what do I know; I don't even like watches!
There's few chronographs dressier and more beautiful than the IWC Portuguese Chronograph, IMHO, but as it's a bit out of my price range at the moment I've lent an eye to the Stowa Chronograph 1938. Not at all in the same division, obviously, but a beautiful and dressy chronograph nonetheless.
If you don't mind quartz and patience tracking them down the 7AXX series offer unbeatable value at around £100 +/-.
7A28
7A38
7A48
Cheers
Neil
Bell and Ross BR126?
In 38mm it's a nice size for modern dressy.
Looks pretty good to me - functional centre minute chrono + GMT hand, plus classy styling:
Indeed. I just happened to be wearing this dressy little Seiko 7A38-6080 this morning.
But in their various re-branded guises Seiko 7Axx's can offer whatever level of dressiness you might seek:
Both these examples cost me around £50.
I agree with this too. I was simply arguing that the original request for a "dressy chronograph" was not a complete non sequitur ... the fact that some of the suggestions are not at all (in my opinion) dressy does not change that.
Awesome, what a fantastic looking watch.If you don't mind quartz and patience tracking them down the 7AXX series offer unbeatable value at around £100 +/-.
7A38
Cheers
Neil
There are other dressier variations on that particular model (7A38-7280) besides.Awesome, what a fantastic looking watch.If you don't mind quartz and patience tracking them down the 7AXX series offer unbeatable value at around £100 +/-.
7A38
Here's one of the more subtle ones (a 7A38-728A - SAA128J version without the gold sub-dial rings):
Last edited by Seiko7A38; 14th September 2014 at 13:11.
I have this Oris it is the same size as the Steinhart
I was about to say max bill chronoscope but pacific has beaten me to it.
Theyre a beautiful watch.
The Max Bill is very nice, and pretty unique looking.
The OP does state that he wanted one that didn't 'cost a fortune', which somehow meant Zenith was a great choice. This was followed by suggestions of Parmigiani and JLC, so just wondered what doesn't cost a fortune means on this instance? :-)
When terminology like "Cost a Fortune" is used I have no idea what is meant. This is a watch forum. Watches range from less than £100 to well over £200,000 . A fortune is a different sum of money to all sorts of different people. To many people watches under £20,000 are watches which don't cost a fortune. To others they need to be under £5000 to qualify. Assumptions about what "doesn't cost a fortune" means are without logic.
There was a thread a while ago, in which it was established that £13000 was an expensive watch and not mid range. I can't find the thread.
Last edited by java; 14th September 2014 at 18:07.
Posting Permissions
