Reply With QuoteSomewhere between the meh and utterly tasteless area of the spectrum.
Sorry, forgot to mention, I'm not a coked up nouveau riche type who's watching a boxing match somewhere and posting on instagram. Ymmv.
Let me start by setting out my stall. I’m no fan of Hublot. In January I picked up on the news that they have released a Big Bang Integral, complete with integrated bracelet. I appreciate this is old-ish news but am keen to hear your diverse opinions. To me it’s the love-child of an AP and a G-shock. I suppose in isolation, they are not bad looking watches, but I have never been able to get past the fact that they are a rip-off of the Royal Oak. I recall hearing Jean-Claude Biver making a statement that Hublots are made to be on rubber straps, not bracelets - his comment was made in response to continued criticism that Hublot had mimicked AP. Thoughts?
Here’s a link to the press release for those that haven’t seen it:
https://www.hublot.com/en-us/news/big-bang-integral
Thanks all
Sent from my iPhone using TZ-UK mobile app
Somewhere between the meh and utterly tasteless area of the spectrum.
Sorry, forgot to mention, I'm not a coked up nouveau riche type who's watching a boxing match somewhere and posting on instagram. Ymmv.
You do though seem to have become very tetchy since the lockdown: raargh raargh raargh hear me roar my opinions etc etc. Pubs are open now, chill a bit, huh?Originally Posted by 200mwaterresistant
Me neither. To me the Royal Oak’s bracelet is the aesthetic pinnacle of luxury sports bracelets so I’m pleased, at least, to see that they haven’t tried to replicate it.
Sent from my iPhone using TZ-UK mobile app
I quite like it for a Hublot..
the video is very slick work..
It’s a really cool video. And it has to be said that the finishing on the bracelet looks to be of an extremely high standard.
Sent from my iPhone using TZ-UK mobile app
Yeah, I actually like it, bracelet looks well done.
My first thought is not complementary...Looks like a tag in an expensive case.
I like the looks and agree, it looks a bit like a Royal Oak (just less ugly) in much the same way a Steinhart looks like a Rolex - i.e. only a 5 year old might fail to tell them apart, and only a 65YO with painful piles would complain that a genre watch looks generic...
However Hublot do not exist for me until they start to align their bloody screw heads! FFS! £20K plus watches that look like they were assembled in a Mumbai sweatshop.
Just look at it! Monstrous!
I've had a few Hublots and despite the hate they get in parts they are very well made and at that level you can see a clear quality step up compared to Rolex and Omega. Get a discount (25% is a cinch). I really like it.
Aligned screw heads are almost an impossibility and something Hublot can’t do at this scale of operation. The only solution is to not use them.I like the looks and agree, it looks a bit like a Royal Oak (just less ugly) in much the same way a Steinhart looks like a Rolex - i.e. only a 5 year old might fail to tell them apart, and only a 65YO with painful piles would complain that a genre watch looks generic...
However Hublot do not exist for me until they start to align their bloody screw heads! FFS! £20K plus watches that look like they were assembled in a Mumbai sweatshop.
Just look at it! Monstrous!
I quite like these. I think the bracelet transforms it. I also find myself looking at the ceramic 42mm Spirit of Big Bang. Sure, it’s derivative of a Richard Mille, but there’s very little that’s truly original anymore. From what I understand, they’re very well made watches overall, it’s just the people who wear them is the issue for most.
I am relieved that someone said that. I was stretching my very limited imagination and engineering knowledge trying to figure out how that could be done. I can only conceive of solutions that would cost a fortune to execute.
Hublot start with sellita and Eta mod chronos which offer no value in my mind then when they go in house they are up against AP which is whole different level. Some of the designs I quite like, need to be purchased max 40% of rrp if you don’t want to take an absolute bath, unless you plan to own for life.
I wasn't expecting to like it but I do. I wonder if we will see Lineker and the other MOTD lovies sporting them soon?
So you can do 'timing' - where you work out the turn of the threads but that is very pricey to do as manufacturing tolerances are crazy tight. Definitely not practical.
Personally I prefer Hublot using proper screws versus what AP do.
The BB Integral I think is fab. Hodinkee recently have done a good indepth look at it as well. I reckon this may be a hot seller.
Found this online:
https://timeandtidewatches.com/the-p...-bezel-screws/
Sent from my iPhone using TZ-UK mobile app
I quite like it, but wouldn’t buy it, even if I had the money, The footballer chic look isn’t one for me, but as said before the finish looks good.
I think the bracelet looks better than the watch.
Me too!
Sent from my iPhone using TZ-UK mobile app
Watch manufacturers: "Twelvety-trillion words on how precise our engineering is!"
Also Watch manufacturers: : "We can't possibly align our screws."
And yes, I know AP use bolts, bolts which - for some almost-as-annoying-reason - they also cut slots in! Why do they do that? GAH!
Of course it's feasible to cut threads precisely and align screws - but it's a faff. You can cheat in various ways - probably the simplest is to use bolts which are torqued-up, trimmed-off and the slots cut in with lasers afterwards.
...but I digress...
Or use a screw head with more than one axis of symmetry.
Aligning torx heads is easy, you have 6 chances to line it up every rotation, not 2, like this, or 4 with philips or Pozi.
I’d say it’s one of the best looking new bracelets I’ve seen in a long time. Hell of a lot better than that thing on the Lange Odysseus for example. Also better looking than any non-Nautilus bracelet Patek have done in the last 20 years.
Last edited by cmcm3; 6th July 2020 at 07:48.
The bracelet is from the Rolex Ref. 5100.
"The whole purpose of mechanical watches is to be impertinent." ~ Lionel a Marca, CEO of Breguet
I knew there was a reason I liked it! Hans Wilsdorf - smashing it since 1905!!
The time and tide article in an earlier comment has more info - threaded nuts, screws are on the underside.
Don't really mind misaligned screws in functional looking tool watches like B&R or the Cartier Santos. Can give them a nice rugged look.
I've always thought most Hublots are ugly as sin anyway so the screws have never really been the issue. I think it would spoil the look of a Royal Oak though.
It gets worse, latest AP chrono also have fake nuts on the screw down chrono pusher, i.e. they no longer screw out but are just for show
Nice looking watch. Hublot have far too many models/variations now and complicated to navigate through them. I find their models to be in opposite extremes, I either like them or just hate them! The finishing and quality is really good, however an in house movement on the ‘lower’ models would be the next step forward.
I like Hublot for many reasons.
a) they really offend tiny men on watch forums.
b) the build quality is very good, and I rarely see them back in for repair work.
c) they're just a bit different and away from the same old same old.
d) they make a deliberate effort to be current and involve young up-and-coming artists/designers etc.
e) they keep beehives and involve themselves quietly with bee conservation.
I agree. They are pretty marmite. For me, even the models I like the look of, I would never buy. I’m just not a fan of the brand overall.
Sent from my iPhone using TZ-UK mobile app
That's not correct though: -
It's the other way around, they are bolts (aka screws) on the front and nuts on the back as correctly stated here https://www.hodinkee.com/articles/wh...in-watchmaking Interesting trhat the heads are offset wrt the thread (though might not always be the case) https://www.amazon.com/bezels-Audema.../dp/B07Z62N3FQThe screws on the AP’s bezels aren’t screws. In fact, they’re threaded nuts that fit neatly and immovably into the perfectly hexagonal holes in the bezel. They’re secured via the screws on the caseback, which —surprise surprise — aren’t neatly aligned.
Last edited by Kingstepper; 6th July 2020 at 13:43.
I know many on here love to hate Hublot but as so called watch enthusiasts they really are no joke.
The bezel screws only irk in photos and they mean the bezel can easily be changed if damaged - in real life you don't notice the mis-alihnment.
I agree the original BBs were (very) expensive for the movement they originally contained but they are now in house and if you look at many of Hublot's other avhievements in watch making I think they are very relevant - gold alloys, coloured ceramics, depth achieved, power reserve etc. all with an instantly recognisable DNA.
Because they only really "arrived" in 2005 they can't hark back to 60s and 70s designs and like them or not they have changed watchmaking for good.
Has nobody seen the Dolby Surround Sound video in the cinema? Must be the same production company surely?
Posting Permissions