@ardichoke said:
I've heard high praise for Nato watch straps, but it looks like they all cover the back of the watch. Since the back of the Seiko 5 is clear, I'd rather not do that. Does anyone have recommendations for nylon watch straps that don't cover the back? I want to pick up one or two different color straps.
Nato's do cover the back. However they are very easy to take on and off. I have a bunch I use with different watches. I like the way they look and how I can easily match things. Since you have to take your watch off to show the back anyways you can just pull the nato strap away and make it visible.
Otherwise just a do a quick search to find watch straps. Measure the lug length or look it up. You'll likely need to also get a spring bar tool to replace the non-nato bands.
0
Mt_GoatHead Cheezy KnobPflugerville (north of Austin)Icrontian
edited January 2015
I have been watching this thread since the beginning and it has been growing on me as I do like nice time pieces. Recently I decided to get a new dress watch and this thread has inspired me to dig deeper for what I would like. It needs to be classic looking, different and be something that I connect to on sight.
While looking I came upon this. And while I realize that it is a knockoff of the original classic I just can't escape its attraction. They appear to be built from Russian parts and assembled in Germany with a clean classy look that the originals seem to be missing. So before I pull the trigger on one, I was wondering if anyone thinks this is a bad watch based on technical merit.
@Mt_Goat said:
I have been watching this thread since the beginning and it has been growing on me as I do like nice time pieces. Recently I decided to get a new dress watch and this thread has inspired me to dig deeper for what I would like. It needs to be classic looking, different and be something that I connect to on sight.
While looking I came upon this. And while I realize that it is a knockoff of the original classic I just can't escape its attraction. They appear to be built from Russian parts and assembled in Germany with a clean classy look that the originals seem to be missing. So before I pull the trigger on one, I was wondering if anyone thinks this is a bad watch based on technical merit.
That is just dead sexy. A little small by modern standards, 38mm if I read the description right. Would consider at 41-42mm. Most of the Valjoux(sp?) based chronys are a little big for me at 44-45mm, I had one and turned it over despite liking the appearance because it didn't fit me well.
All that said, the depth of the Russian watch may help it appear bigger on the wrist.
@ardichoke said:
My sister-in-law gave me a watch I had on my wish list for Christmas. It's not super-fancy, but it is a nice daily wearer (IMO). Fully mechanical, automatic wind, exposed workings on the back, face is a bit smaller than I realized, but I really like it.
I love that watch. Personally I don't go for anything too frilly or with a giant face. I like functional and unobtrusive. I'd definitely wear that daily.
@Cliff_Forster said:
I love that watch. Personally I don't go for anything too frilly or with a giant face. I like functional and unobtrusive. I'd definitely wear that daily.
Yeah. I have actually been wearing it daily. I've never managed to actually wear a watch daily for longer than a week or two at a time before. Now, if I start to leave the house without it on my wrist, I will actually stop and go put it on. I've come to think that the smaller, slimmer face is key to me actually wearing it daily. Unlike the larger Fossil that I have, it doesn't get in my way, doesn't snag my shirt cuffs and doesn't bug me when I bend my wrists.
I don't find the technology offensive. It's the hubris.
It is bankrupt of the je ne sais quoi that defines haute horology. It is garish and soulless, daring for luxury but ignorant of its existence as an effigy of the Dunning-Kruger effect.
I'll withold judgment on it till I see it on a wrist but I am not a fan of the design. Looks almost cartoonish granted all the android wear watches feel the same to me. Great drdsign has been the hallmark of apple products but I am not a fan of the iPhone 6 or this watch.
Also I think it's really over blown how much this will actually impact the watch market. It would really cut into the fashion watch market but really people buy those for how they look not sure if you want a watch to go with outfits a smart watch is the way to go. This is more likely something to supplement other watches.
My biggest issue with the watch itself is the sport watch version that isn't even water proof. Like swimming is a sport and you couldn't wear it during that.
I'll never have any smart watch not my thang. My emails aren't that important.
I like the idea, but I'm not wild about square/rectangular watches. Also it's of limited use to me right now because I wouldn't be able to wear it at work.
@Thrax said:
I don't find the technology offensive. It's the hubris.
It is bankrupt of the je ne sais quoi that defines haute horology. It is garish and soulless, daring for luxury but ignorant of its existence as an effigy of the Dunning-Kruger effect.
Hyperbolic language aside, this is what I'm talking about.
The internals of the Edition are no different than any other... edition (seriously, who thought that was a good name?). The only thing that sets it apart from every other Apple Watch is the gold case and the name.
If I put a Timex in an expensive case that doesn't make it a Breitling, no matter how much I charge for it.
First off, let me allow you to dismiss anything I say by admitting I'm an Apple fanboy (currently writing this on a Windows 7 gaming PC but whatever).
So $10k for a watch that is going to be obsolete in 5 years (optimistically) is ridiculous to me. Also, $10k for a watch is ridiculous to me, regardless of durability or appearance. I am not the target market. Or maybe I am. Here are the theories I've heard that kind of make sense to me:
Theory 1: it's a price anchor. If you look at a $10,000 price tag on a watch, a $350 price tag for essentially the same watch sounds like a bargain. Save 96.5% off a $10,000 watch? Yes please! If you're unfamiliar with the idea of price anchoring, please read up because it's a common way for marketers to manipulate consumers.
Theory 2: A $10,000 Rolex(? I don't know watch brands) doesn't tell time better than a $50 Casio. What it does do better is tells people "Screw you, I've got enough money that I can blow $10,000 on a watch. Yeah, it'll last for generations but it's still just a watch." It's a status thing. How much more status is it to have a watch that says "Screw you, I've got enough money that I can blow $10,000 on a watch every few years"?
Comments
Nato's do cover the back. However they are very easy to take on and off. I have a bunch I use with different watches. I like the way they look and how I can easily match things. Since you have to take your watch off to show the back anyways you can just pull the nato strap away and make it visible.
Otherwise just a do a quick search to find watch straps. Measure the lug length or look it up. You'll likely need to also get a spring bar tool to replace the non-nato bands.
I have been watching this thread since the beginning and it has been growing on me as I do like nice time pieces. Recently I decided to get a new dress watch and this thread has inspired me to dig deeper for what I would like. It needs to be classic looking, different and be something that I connect to on sight.
While looking I came upon this. And while I realize that it is a knockoff of the original classic I just can't escape its attraction. They appear to be built from Russian parts and assembled in Germany with a clean classy look that the originals seem to be missing. So before I pull the trigger on one, I was wondering if anyone thinks this is a bad watch based on technical merit.
ebay.com/itm/330762191296?
It's a great watch.
Thank you!
Now I can't wait to get it.
Pretty incredible video, if you've got 10 minutes. Watch a 2.5 million dollar watch being made:
Oh MB&F, you blow my mind.
Thread needs a 'boner' button.
http://geekologie.com/2008/11/450000-watch-features-real-moo.php
Here's a brand new watch. It's dirty on the inside, but it's ok - it's science dirt.
...and yes, that makes it cool.
SPACE DIRT
That is just dead sexy. A little small by modern standards, 38mm if I read the description right. Would consider at 41-42mm. Most of the Valjoux(sp?) based chronys are a little big for me at 44-45mm, I had one and turned it over despite liking the appearance because it didn't fit me well.
All that said, the depth of the Russian watch may help it appear bigger on the wrist.
My Christmas present....
I love that watch. Personally I don't go for anything too frilly or with a giant face. I like functional and unobtrusive. I'd definitely wear that daily.
An additional 50% on watches that are already well-priced. If any of these are your style, Android is a good company: http://www.android-usa.com/CLEARANCE-s/161.htm?searching=Y&sort=1&cat=161&show=400&page=1
Yeah. I have actually been wearing it daily. I've never managed to actually wear a watch daily for longer than a week or two at a time before. Now, if I start to leave the house without it on my wrist, I will actually stop and go put it on. I've come to think that the smaller, slimmer face is key to me actually wearing it daily. Unlike the larger Fossil that I have, it doesn't get in my way, doesn't snag my shirt cuffs and doesn't bug me when I bend my wrists.
You would post this right as I'm about to get my first monthly paycheck from my new job AND my last paid time off payout from my old job. Jerk.
Dude found a $35,000+ watch at Goodwill for $6
Only $10,000
For $10k, please give me a real watch and not some garbage bauble in a gold case.
http://www.theverge.com/2015/3/9/8176049/apple-watch-edition-vs-rolex-benjamin-clymer-interview
These Wearables are a disgrace to real watches
Dude, it's just another place to put a thing on your body.
My FB post on the matter:
"The idea of Apple joining "Haute Horology" with a $10k iPhone Micro in a gold case just made Breguet roll over in his grave."
I find it painfully ironic that people on a tech site are so butthurt that a piece of tech is finding its way to our wrists.
I don't find the technology offensive. It's the hubris.
It is bankrupt of the je ne sais quoi that defines haute horology. It is garish and soulless, daring for luxury but ignorant of its existence as an effigy of the Dunning-Kruger effect.
Alternatively the gold Pebble Time will only be 299$
I'll withold judgment on it till I see it on a wrist but I am not a fan of the design. Looks almost cartoonish granted all the android wear watches feel the same to me. Great drdsign has been the hallmark of apple products but I am not a fan of the iPhone 6 or this watch.
Also I think it's really over blown how much this will actually impact the watch market. It would really cut into the fashion watch market but really people buy those for how they look not sure if you want a watch to go with outfits a smart watch is the way to go. This is more likely something to supplement other watches.
My biggest issue with the watch itself is the sport watch version that isn't even water proof. Like swimming is a sport and you couldn't wear it during that.
I'll never have any smart watch not my thang. My emails aren't that important.
Back to watches I actually want I think this will be my next watch.
My player's handbook says otherwise.
I like the idea, but I'm not wild about square/rectangular watches. Also it's of limited use to me right now because I wouldn't be able to wear it at work.
Hyperbolic language aside, this is what I'm talking about.
The internals of the Edition are no different than any other... edition (seriously, who thought that was a good name?). The only thing that sets it apart from every other Apple Watch is the gold case and the name.
If I put a Timex in an expensive case that doesn't make it a Breitling, no matter how much I charge for it.
First off, let me allow you to dismiss anything I say by admitting I'm an Apple fanboy (currently writing this on a Windows 7 gaming PC but whatever).
So $10k for a watch that is going to be obsolete in 5 years (optimistically) is ridiculous to me. Also, $10k for a watch is ridiculous to me, regardless of durability or appearance. I am not the target market. Or maybe I am. Here are the theories I've heard that kind of make sense to me:
Theory 1: it's a price anchor. If you look at a $10,000 price tag on a watch, a $350 price tag for essentially the same watch sounds like a bargain. Save 96.5% off a $10,000 watch? Yes please! If you're unfamiliar with the idea of price anchoring, please read up because it's a common way for marketers to manipulate consumers.
Theory 2: A $10,000 Rolex(? I don't know watch brands) doesn't tell time better than a $50 Casio. What it does do better is tells people "Screw you, I've got enough money that I can blow $10,000 on a watch. Yeah, it'll last for generations but it's still just a watch." It's a status thing. How much more status is it to have a watch that says "Screw you, I've got enough money that I can blow $10,000 on a watch every few years"?