Reply With Quote:shock: thats why i like this place so many different viewsOriginally Posted by thegobetween
Omega PO 42mm on the rubber strap.
Not even sure why I didn't like it - I just never bonded with it. Sold it now but when I see one on the net I think that looks a great watch! :?
:shock: thats why i like this place so many different views
That's a proper answer, James!! (Speaking as a fellow Nato-fanatic)
I tried to contact the Japanese site selling some with the fold hardware
but never got a response.
Frank
Speedie Pro
Couldn't live with the chrono second hand that stepped unevenly, it went back twice and came back with the same fault (well done Omega!!). Eventually I borrowed a high-speed video camera and recorded it to DVD before the AD would take it back for a third time.
Thankfully the damn thing is now long gone
The most disappointing watch I have owned (and moved on double quick) was a Sinn Flieger 103 ST. It just felt small and nasty.
Lots of people here disappointed with their Rolex's, so I will just chip in that I love my GMT2 to pieces, it never gets noticed and never gets commented upon. However, what it does do is keep superb time, fits under my double cuffs without shredding the fabric, goes with any clothing I wear be it jeans and t-shirt, business suit or DJ and doesn't depreciate (should I ever decide to sell it). Out of the few watches I have owned (PAM001, Omega SMP, Omega Speedmaster, Sinn UX, Orange Monster, Glycine Combat etc) it is the only watch I have had that I could wear all day (and all night if I am in a hotel) without having to take it off 'for a rest', it never pulls hairs and sits perfectly on my wrist.
As previously said, each to their own.
Probably the Damasko SA37 for me. Nothing wrong with it, and quality was very good, but I expected to really bond with it, and after about 1/2 an hour I knew it wasn't a keeper. I still like them in photos, so I know I wasn't being deft getting one in the first place - just didn't do it for me, in the metal. :(
Has to be the sub for me. I don't know how Rolex can get away with charging what they do with the bracelet thats supplied.
I've seen Seiko's for £200 with better bracelets.
Vacheron Constaintin Overseas Dual Time.
I ordered one, waited ages for it to arrive, went to get it.
So far, so good.
Having had it for a day or so, I noticed that the sweep of the second hand is "jerky" rather than smooth.
The AD (who have been very good) contacted Vacheron as well as checking the sweep on another one they had ordered for another customer who had not yet collected it.
It was exactly the same.
Completely unacceptable for a watch at this price and supposed quality :roll:
A refund awaits.
Are you sure you are not comparing it with a watch with a higher-beat movement or one with a short sub-second hand?
No mechanical watch's second hand is perfectly smooth.
My VC OS is fine.
Funny you should day that! I have long fancied a Rolex Sub. Well I had a look at a used one today, it was 7 years old, really really nice, all papers, boxed the lot. But I was shocked when I put it on. It felt very light, the bracelt was much lighter, and seemed less substantial, than the one on my Seamaster which is about the same age. To be honest it felt quite flimsy, I was shocked I have to say! But what a great looking watch though. I still love the look of them, but I cannot say that I would part with that sort of cash ( in this case £2650) for one, even though they do hold their value so well.
No. I have many other mechanical watches (including VC) to compare with.Are you sure you are not comparing it with a watch with a higher-beat movement or one with a short sub-second hand?
No mechanical watch's second hand is perfectly smooth.
My VC OS is fine.
It looks like it's housing a $10 Chinese movement.
The AD and Vacheron both admit that there is a problem and are talking about replacing the spring.
Hollow links in a 3K watch :lol:Funny you should day that! I have long fancied a Rolex Sub. Well I had a look at a used one today, it was 7 years old, really really nice, all papers, boxed the lot. But I was shocked when I put it on. It felt very light, the bracelt was much lighter, and seemed less substantial, than the one on my Seamaster which is about the same age. To be honest it felt quite flimsy, I was shocked I have to say! But what a great looking watch though. I still love the look of them, but I cannot say that I would part with that sort of cash ( in this case £2650) for one, even though they do hold their value so well.
Completely agree, the Seamaster feels so much more substantial.
At least I didn't imagine it then! I was really shocked. :shock: They still look really nice though, but it has kinda destroyed a bit of a dream for me. :cry:Hollow links in a 3K watch :lol:Funny you should day that! I have long fancied a Rolex Sub. Well I had a look at a used one today, it was 7 years old, really really nice, all papers, boxed the lot. But I was shocked when I put it on. It felt very light, the bracelt was much lighter, and seemed less substantial, than the one on my Seamaster which is about the same age. To be honest it felt quite flimsy, I was shocked I have to say! But what a great looking watch though. I still love the look of them, but I cannot say that I would part with that sort of cash ( in this case £2650) for one, even though they do hold their value so well.
Completely agree, the Seamaster feels so much more substantial.
Seriously at the other end of the scale - uber budget bracket...
Learning it wasn't quite what it purported to be... still, a relatively inexpensive lesson :roll:
Disappointing, nonetheless.
I think a lot of people buy a Rolex to impress other people, once they have " impressed " ie bored the hell out of everyone they know the watch then becomes just another watch and in time fails to satisfy their need to impress others with what they have got. then they go out and buy another a bit bigger another grand, more blingy, the same thing happens all over again,
I decided to buy mine because it was very good quality, very discreet compared with the rest of the range, and I have never been dissapointed with mine.as you might of guessed it's an Explorer 1. a classic in it's own right in my opinion......Mark
if you buy a rolex to impress other people, then quite simply you are a tool....
i have one, none of my mates like, or even care about watches, i dont really care! I just watch that seconds hand sweep and thats it for me!!
Seamaster Pro Chrono, had blue and black but just couldn't get on with the weight!!
And of course solid links must make the price shoot up being that steel is so expensive. :wink:Hollow links in a 3K watch :lol:Funny you should day that! I have long fancied a Rolex Sub. Well I had a look at a used one today, it was 7 years old, really really nice, all papers, boxed the lot. But I was shocked when I put it on. It felt very light, the bracelt was much lighter, and seemed less substantial, than the one on my Seamaster which is about the same age. To be honest it felt quite flimsy, I was shocked I have to say! But what a great looking watch though. I still love the look of them, but I cannot say that I would part with that sort of cash ( in this case £2650) for one, even though they do hold their value so well.
Completely agree, the Seamaster feels so much more substantial.
Hollow links are far more comfortable IMO in that they allow more movement in the bracelet.
The Seamaster bracelet feels more substantial (i.e heavier) but is is better?
The clasp on the SM is held together with a thin bent spring which when it loses its tension can drop open.
The Fliplock on the Rolex once flipped over will not open.
Function over form. :)
Cheers,
Neil.
Wash your mouth out - this is 2009 for pete's sakes :lol:
...but what do I know; I don't even like watches!
i have a 45 PO and a SD at the minute and can see both sides, the omega is a big heavy watch that i like the feel of when worn, and i love the claspWash your mouth out - this is 2009 for pete's sakes :lol:
the SD feels alot lighter but does not feel flimsy, agree that the clasp its dated but it works well IMO
another thing worth saying is the SD is the only watch i can wear in bed, the omega is far too heavy for this.
Why? The poor sod who devoted the best years of his life to inventing the bedside table must be turning in his grave. :)
Dave
:roll: :roll: :roll:Why? The poor sod who devoted the best years of his life to inventing the bedside table must be turning in his grave. :)
Dave
Omega Flightmaster. Way too thick and top heavy and the shrouded lugs made it even worse ... by holding the head from ‘underneath’.
Being the mid-‘70s didn’t help either.
This was also my last watch with crowns (and stuff) on the left. :pukeleft:
john
THIN is the new BLACK
Probably 1998 Rolex Explorer 1 for me. I bought into the history, Everest etc. It was a poor timekeeper, the spring bars would bend and so the end pieces wouldn't fit snug to the case (when I took it back to Rolex service in London, they said it's because the spring bars aren't the right width for the weight of the watch!), but most of all, over time I just found it DULL. I like the classic 1016 Explorers but the modern range doesn't really capture the same look and feel. I suppose I've answered my own question from last night about 5513 vintage vs new Submariners - it'll be the same story I'm sure.
Cheers David
For me it has to be the Christopher Ward C4 Peregrine. I bought into the CW concept that i'd be getting something at least comparable to the brands mentioned in the sales blurb and now know that it wouldn't even compare with a Seiko. The bezel action was slack on all three replacements and it eventually went back to pay for a movement upgrade to my Stowa Airman.
Rolex Steel Daytona - tried a few times - just had to get it out of my system -
now added my second White gold one (first one I fell out with the dial colour on sold it on- black is definatley best) and it feels a completely different watch and gets worn a lot - a lot.
It's just a matter of time...
20 years ago, I had a bi-metal Tag 1500 model. Somehow it let in a little bit of water, and never managed to get rid of the condensation from the crystal, real bummer.
I like Royal Oaks. However as I mentioned in another thread, an encounter with a mid size one caused me some bother.
Paul
GOT...TO...KILL...CAPTAIN STUPID!
You didn't like it? Wow don't hear that much about steel ones. How long since you had it?
Paul
GOT...TO...KILL...CAPTAIN STUPID!
See worst impulse purchase! OK save you the bother, it was a Hamilton Khaki Air Race GMT Orange and Black.
No. I have many other mechanical watches (including VC) to compare with.Are you sure you are not comparing it with a watch with a higher-beat movement or one with a short sub-second hand?
No mechanical watch's second hand is perfectly smooth.
My VC OS is fine.
It looks like it's housing a $10 Chinese movement.
The AD and Vacheron both admit that there is a problem and are talking about replacing the spring.
A replacement is due from Geneva tomorrow. :D
I'll wait to see the 2nd hand sweep before deciding whether it's still the most disappointing watch I've owned. :)
Posting Permissions
