Reply With QuoteHence why I am a big Panerai fan :wink:
I want to like brands such as JLC and IWC as I know they make a great quality watch (and an alternative to Omega and Rolex) but I just can't.
The problem is these days the designers just wont make a plain and simple watch that's practical.
I don't want a dress watch - not rugged enough for everyday wear. I find chronographs cluttered and I don't want or need the stopwatch feature (hardly anyone does, it's just fashion).
I don't want a dinner plate size watch either. It needs to be comfortable.
The new IWC Aquatimers are even worse than the old ones (IWC used to make the 3536 what happened?) the JLC Master Compressor Diver GMT (their plainest model and without the pathetic US Navy Seal nonsense) is also just so childish. Other models from JLC and IWC have weird date windows that show multiple days and random cogs in the middle of the dial and have ridiculous crown supercharging keys.
Is it just me or do other people long for the "other makers" to go back to basics and come up with something sensible?
Hence why I am a big Panerai fan :wink:
"dinner plate size"^^^^^^
ktmog6uk
marchingontogether!
I agree! There's watches available at those characteristics thou! Rolex Explorer and watches with similar styling. Then there's smaller versions of few dinner plates available like 36mm version of some Glycine watches, smaller versions from Omega, Tag, so forth. And the BEST part, lovely vintage pieces. I'm currently in process of purchasing nice 34mm Eternamatic and then there's one 36mm Eterna in mail waiting for me to pick it up. And plenty of watches even smaller then that.
Wake up people! 34mm - 40mm is perfect size for mens watch. I'm most comfy around 36-38mm sizes but wear larger pieces from time to time (those larger pieces are mostly divers or chronos).
Bah, be a man and grow a pair :P - you get used to 44mm very quickly and I think it is a very wearable sizeOriginally Posted by ktmog6uk
The designer of this one did....
Cheers :D
Maybe - but it must get banged on things, can look a bit pretentious (sorry!) and what's the point? There's no practical reason for having it that large.Bah, be a man and grow a pair :P - you get used to 44mm very quickly and I think it is a very wearable size
It's an (WIS) age thing, I think. I hardly wear "busy watches" now, I like them clean and readable. The busiest watch I own is actually the JLC Master Compressor Chrono, but I almost never have it on the wrist. I love this watch, but it's just that.... well... it's just full of things I never need :lol:
I'm not as think as you drunk I am.
Actually they do not wear that big. The dial is pretty small compared to the case/bezel/cg. Same with the CA btw.
A 40mm Stowa Automatik wears almost as big as a 44mm PAM, at least from a few feet away.
I'm not as think as you drunk I am.
34?! even 36-38mm is perfect for a woman :D
I dont think that 44mm watches look pretentious IMO its not the size but the style. Granted some of the 44mm+ can look a bit comic in proportions. Practically if you are a larger chap 44mm are fine :)Maybe - but it must get banged on things, can look a bit pretentious (sorry!) and what's the point? There's no practical reason for having it that large.Bah, be a man and grow a pair :P - you get used to 44mm very quickly and I think it is a very wearable size
My 2p
Size is the least of the problems with all these fussy, busy watches. Too big is a subjective quality so means something different to all of us. Suffice to say "too big" offers no advantage and is impractical.
Nah! Far too small - look like they belong to a small child or woman! For me, 42mm is the min size and 44mm is the max! At the end of the day it comes down to personal preference.
With regards to watches that focus purely on provision of the time without bells & whistles.... I can understand why that is attractive (classic, eternal style, elegant) - I like them (eg the non chrono omega po is one of my targets) but I also like quirky designs... Hence my purchase of an OX PRO anonimo Zulu time - bonkers but I love it!!
I've lost track of the number of times I've read people telling me I don't use my chronographs. Speak for yourself - I use the function most days and it's certainly not fashion.
Big watches are arguably a fashion thing, in that there's no practical reason for having a case that much bigger than the movement. A big dial maybe, but do we really need a dial bigger than that on, say, the SB3?
Watches are all fashion - I'm pretty sure someone could make pocket watches fashionable again - heck it kinda is already fashionable - the mobile phone!
[/quote]
So it does - but don't complain when someone calls a big watch a hockey puck or a soup dish :lol:
42-44 is pretty restrictive isn't it? A 42mm Stowa flieger looks a sight bigger than a 44mm Oris diver with a steel bezel because its dial has almost twice the surface area, so you can imagine some 40s looking bigger and 46s looking smaller. And unless the dial and hands are big to go with a big case, a big watch is is big for no reason except to make the owner feel good about himself - nowt wrong with that, as long as there are no spurious justifications regarding readability. (I also find once you get above a certain size, that the date window and subdial positions give away puniness of the movement.)
...but what do I know; I don't even like watches!
Sinn 656 anyone, just about perfect for those wanting something not to big, well made, legible etc
They are very plain and practical in nearly every aspect but for me the minute markers are just too bold and actually it's not really necessary to have them so "in your face" and unsubtle.
The dial is stark rather than plain, making a fashion statement rather than quietly blending in.
+1 and this is coming from someone who enjoys Sinn designs most of the time. Any elegant suggestions, anyone? But with out being flashy (that's for dress watches) This thread just might find some more watches to my to-get list :)They are very plain and practical in nearly every aspect but for me the minute markers are just too bold and actually it's not really necessary to have them so "in your face" and unsubtle.
The dial is stark rather than plain, making a fashion statement rather than quietly blending in.
+1 and this is coming from someone who enjoys Sinn designs most of the time. Any elegant suggestions, anyone? But with out being flashy (that's for dress watches) This thread just might find some more watches to my to-get list :)They are very plain and practical in nearly every aspect but for me the minute markers are just too bold and actually it's not really necessary to have them so "in your face" and unsubtle.
The dial is stark rather than plain, making a fashion statement rather than quietly blending in.
Well, Ive just grabbed this one from the SC. Nice size around 38mm, good lume by all reports. Drilled though lugs so I'll put it on shoulderless bars and it will be very secure like an Explorer and also with a beautiful domed acrylic with screw down crown.
So I agree with all your criteria and I think this one fits, very practical and I personally I like cream/ivory dial, a bit less obviously military.
Now all I have to do is put up with pics till I get it in my hands :cry:
and here a pic of the same model from Kamraj
regards
siggy
Whilst not a fan of over elaborate dials, or too much text, everyone likes different things (for which I'm glad) .. as for me I like divers & military inspired pieces, but I've no problem with admiring some 'busy' Breitlings or other .. as for size, big watches have been around for decades & will continue to be so. Fashion dictates, watch companies (in order to survive) keep up but (some) also have smaller sized offerings for those that require them ..
/vince ..
So. We're talking good ol' fashioned design, rather than "practical", based on the responses above. Your reaction to the Sinn also sugests that you want something less "tooly" and more subtle. Classic even, without dressy. Hmmm. Max Bill? JS Watch Co? Nomos?
M
Theres room in my life for a bit of both, but the older I get the more I swing towards simple designs....
Max Bill etc. are not necessarily the steel, waterproof, robust watch I like.So. We're talking good ol' fashioned design, rather than "practical", based on the responses above. Your reaction to the Sinn also sugests that you want something less "tooly" and more subtle. Classic even, without dressy. Hmmm. Max Bill? JS Watch Co? Nomos?
M
I don't necessarily want old fashioned, just a currently available mid range brand other than Rolex or Omega that's not trying so hard to be and look unique. It's why I mentioned the IWC 3536 earlier which was different without trying so hard but sadly replaced by something I have no interest in. Also I don't think that the Sinn above is the epitome of toolishness (looking at the dial is a bit like staring at a bar code). Legibility can be achieved without making such a statement.
I suppose what it actually boils down to is: I like the Omega Aqua Terra and quite like the Planet Ocean and I love the Rolex Explorer and Submariner. I like the look of quite a few discontinued models from the competing manufacturers but virtually no current models. Omega and Rolex's competitors have squeezed me out of being one of their potential customers by not making enough sensible looking watches. If I'm going to wear a watch everyday I don't want to get tired of it's arty look.
I understand where you're coming from. Sounds like the thought process I went through in 2007. I ended up with a Bremont ALT1-C, but there you are.Max Bill etc. are not necessarily the steel, waterproof, robust watch I like.So. We're talking good ol' fashioned design, rather than "practical", based on the responses above. Your reaction to the Sinn also sugests that you want something less "tooly" and more subtle. Classic even, without dressy. Hmmm. Max Bill? JS Watch Co? Nomos?
M
I don't necessarily want old fashioned, just a currently available mid range brand other than Rolex or Omega that's not trying so hard to be and look unique. It's why I mentioned the IWC 3536 earlier which was different without trying so hard but sadly replaced by something I have no interest in. Also I don't think that the Sinn above is the epitome of toolishness (looking at the dial is a bit like staring at a bar code). Legibility can be achieved without making such a statement.
I suppose what it actually boils down to is: I like the Omega Aqua Terra and quite like the Planet Ocean and I love the Rolex Explorer and Submariner. I like the look of quite a few discontinued models from the competing manufacturers but virtually no current models. Omega and Rolex's competitors have squeezed me out of being one of their potential customers by not making enough sensible looking watches. If I'm going to wear a watch everyday I don't want to get tired of it's arty look.
M
Much prefer no nonsense watches. This is one of my all time faves and definitely NOT boring. Unbeatable in so many ways. Won't this do? Looks fantastic with a nice brown leather or one of Eddie's aviators.
Pic borrowed from a fellow forum member (can't remember who - but a gorgeous pic of the '53)
That´s what happened, right after the 3536.
Bastards :evil:
In answer to your question, I do :D
Im sure this one isnt too fussy for you :)
Tells the time, has a date, is small enough for you at 39mm and in my opinion looks fantastic.
Buy a quality strap and a deployment buckle and bingo, watch for life.
Ouch! I love mine :)
Personally, I like watches with a bit of personality. The JLC doesn't look like every watch on the planet and stands out a little. As much as I love the Rolex GMT Ceramic, the GO Sport Evolution and the Omega Speedmaster and so on, they (sometimes through no fault of their own) look fairly run of the mill.
I'm lucky enough to also own a JLC MC Geographic and an IWC Vintage Da Vinci. Both have an eccentric and unusual design that I far prefer over more usual designs.
simon
I totally agree with Peterspendthrift on this. The New IWCs are huge and weigh a ton. Even Rolex are now going large. 36 mm is big enough for most of us and 38 mm certainly is. My latest watch Sinn 656 is as big as I will go. I like a smaller watch -it makes my wrist look bigger!
Helm Barrie
PS i am an Eterna fan too and have just posted one( kontiki 36 mm) of mine to someone in France. Not you is it Peter?
I am not really interested in a watch which is less than 42mm, 44+ is great for me, I bought a sinn 756 which is a stunning design but just seemed too small on my big wrists. A 756 around 45mm would be my perfect watch. Don't really give a toss if the purists look down their noses at big watches as 'fashion', I guess I am now and will always be a victim if that is the case.
How about the swiss railway watch. I think it was originated by Mondaine ( please let me know if I am wrong on that ,anyone) and subsequently reproduced in a number of sizes and formats. Design classic with a stand out individual style. No, ok one of my faves IWC Pilot Mk XII. JLC movement ( some think it a little fragile for a toolwatch- but I do not consider a toolwatch something you hit with a hammer! - a little care and all should be well ) 36mm approx dia case and classic clear dial. Sorted.
i agree wholeheartedly. until a couple of years ago, IWC and JLC were two brands that I thought were doing a good job of keeping to tradition but the bean counters at Richemont have finally gotten around to lowering these brands.
it wasn't that long ago when IWC was doing a simple uncluttered dial & legible hands all wrapped into a coherent and pleasing design and size:
Plain'ol practical boring looking watches for me every time.
Dave
Over the last few years the vast bulk of my collection has been, brushed of bead blast finished steel, or titanium. The SD, Speedmaster & GO Sport Evo are about as "bling" as it gets for me.
Andy
Wanted - Damasko DC57
I really don't know what the problem is! :D :D
Relax guys, patience is a virtue...
The law of all things says that what goes up must come down again. If you really think about it there have been more and more talks and threads about "how the contemporary watches are too big" and how people are "longing for less bulky pieces" and how "Rolex got it right" the first time around with their tool watches. Sooner or later fashion changes and when it does so will the case size´s and appearances go "backwards" a step or two onto the direction of less macho and blingy.
When a basic design becomes obsolete it is first given all kinds of CPR in order to lengthen it´s life cycle, hence the current fashion of all kinds of LE´s, PVD´s and you-name-what.
When sales hinder or stop completely the engine´s are put on reverse and the train starts moving again 180 degrees to the direction from where it came from:
The cycle of things to come
Ten years from here the average case size is circa 2-4 mm smaller than now and I am almost certain that you will see a lot more stealth and true class than aggression and bling. Good news is that if you dont want to wait ten + years just buy those 80´s and 90´s watches now when they are cheap and before they become collectable like the 70´s stuff is now.
Oh´and yeah, I agree: 38-40mm is much more wearable than anything bigger. In fact most of my contemporary collection is what could be considered as smaller sized watches.
[quote="I AM LATE!"]I really don't know what the problem is! :D :D
Nor me. That Aquatimer is stunning, as are most of the IWC range In my opinion.
I'm inclined to agree :) However, I think the OP wants to spend more :wink:Much prefer no nonsense watches. This is one of my all time faves and definitely NOT boring. Unbeatable in so many ways. Won't this do? Looks fantastic with a nice brown leather or one of Eddie's aviators.
[/img]
A man size watch, what the hell is that?
We men come in all shapes and sizes and a 38mm is best for me but on my brother-in-law it would look tiny, so horses for courses I suppose.
Have gone off chronographs (wont sell my speedy though) and im moving towards cleaner dials with simpler layouts.
I prefer watches to be interesting, rather than plain and boring, and as for practical, as long as I can at least read the time that's a good start :)
For me, some of the most interesting watches are Omegas from the '70s, and they are often far from plain or boring, for example (and they were often quite big too :wink: ):
Plain and practical :?: :?: Surely you mean clean and functional :o :o
If a watch design needs gimmicks to catch the eye then there must be something wrong with it.
There are plenty of choices across the spectrum. I go through dry spells with watch purchases because nothing catches my eye. What you find big/busy is just right for other people. Just don't look at them if they don't tickle your fancy.
I really don't know what the problem is! :D :D
both cracking items...love to have both.
:lol: Very True
I think this man tried, as well as wearing brown in town...
I don't think they are "all fashion" otherwise you could have pretty items that don't actually tell the time. :? :?I think this man tried, as well as wearing brown in town...
Thanks everyone - lots of food for thought. I also agree that the IWCs shown are beauties and very "clean" looking - but they don't seem to be current models and I still prefer the older 3536s. Loved the Ingenieur but see even that has been changed to something I would need a close look at before giving the thumbs up. Constant changes to their model line up must mean they have suffered bad sales for the older ones. A shame because if they made the same thing for long enough people might recognise it and develop a desire for it.
As regards the JLCs the one shown is the most plain one I have seen but does not look like an all activity, everyday watch and I can't think why it has three crowns. JLC just do nothing for me as they are arty rather than practical.
Plain? Yes! Boring? No!
- however some of the IWC's are very nice indeed!
Posting Permissions
