Watches

[Faust]

Every watch snob knows this. B&R won't do well in the secondary market if you consider a watch purchase an investment. Watch collectors don't even consider B&R to be a watch maker.

Cool looking watch but impossible to take seriously since the movement is bought off the shelf.

I am considering an heirloom above all else. Not that I am planning to die any time soon. Thank you for alerting me and making me all confused. Back to IWC, I suppose.

Kunk, I know what you mean, but by that reasoning I'd stick with a Casio :-)

[kunk75]

To the contrary I appreciate them aesthetically and would live a handsome one. My cousin is pathologically obsessed with odd and u iq ur movements and has an impressive collection.

[Pumpfish]

many IWCs have non IWC movements.

they say that they "customize" the movements.

hit them with a mallet to fit them in the cases.

[pregnantbob]

Every watch snob knows this. B&R won't do well in the secondary market if you consider a watch purchase an investment. Watch collectors don't even consider B&R to be a watch maker.

Cool looking watch but impossible to take seriously since the movement is bought off the shelf.

hmmm i see in your previous quote you've essentially just lifted verbatim the watch snobs opinion.

never understood the movement obsession. the time shows the same on a timex or panerai. they are just acceptable men's jewelry that happen to tell time

I agree with this so much, unless you're buying a watch with the explicit intent to impress watch snobs then it doesn't matter all that much. Just buy what you like.

I am considering an heirloom above all else. Not that I am planning to die any time soon. Thank you for alerting me and making me all confused. Back to IWC, I suppose.

Kunk, I know what you mean, but by that reasoning I'd stick with a Casio :-)

Casios make great watches, their higher end stuff are phenomenal.

I'm obviously going to be a bit bias since I have an IWC portuguese, but I did choose it after weeks of research and comparing against a lot of other watches.

many IWCs have non IWC movements.

they say that they "customize" the movements.

hit them with a mallet to fit them in the cases.

And many IWCs have in house movements, many watch companies use movement made by Swatch owned ETA but now use Sellita as Swatch is consolidating supply within their own company and reducing supply to outside watch makers.

ETA movements that IWC used were modified inhouse then it was modified by ETA to IWC specifications but now it's all moot since IWC no longer use ETA movements.

But like Kunk said, all this movement snobbery is just bizarre. There are very very few companies that use exclusively in house movement and as long as you like the look of the watch and the movement works to do what it's supposed to (tell time), it doesn't really matter all that much.

[byhand]

never understood the movement obsession. the time shows the same on a timex or panerai. they are just acceptable men's jewelry that happen to tell time

The movement is everything. The value of materials making up the band, case and bezel (steel, gold, platinum...) is secondary to the movement. All the man hours are in the movement. A fine watch will have hundreds of parts, and if these parts are hand finished, well, that distinguishes a mid-range watch from one that costs serious cash. Hand finishing the 100s of parts can amount to 1000s of man hours, and it's a highly specialized skill that can take decades to master. The best are very well paid.

Dismissing the movement ought to be anathema here. We discuss labels that are prized precisely because of fabric development and unique approaches to pattern making. It's all about unique and rarefied materials and an exquisite hand creating something wonderful. Watchmaking is all about the movement. Saying a simple machined movement is as good as a Vacheron master's touch is frustrating for me. Why not do all your shopping at Walmart and call it a day?

The Audemars Piguet openworked anniversary edition Royal Oak in platinum, limited to a run of 40, is my horological grail. I would shoot for an openworked Vacheron, but some of the rarer examples cost more than a nice house. I can't philosophically wrap my head around paying more for a watch than a house, not to mention that my wallet doesn't exactly cooperate with such impulses.

[jskidder1]

can we all just agree that watches are obsolete? any phone will tell you the time, and as far as wrist decorations go, watches are little more than a pissing contest between the haves and the haves nots.

[jskidder1]

unfortunately, nobody will understand this until rick's next collection is called sundial, and the runway show consists of a group of mayans performing a rain dance on the runway while pissing on a rolex.

[pregnantbob]

Saying a simple machined movement is as good as a Vacheron master's touch is frustrating for me..

I don't think anyone actually said that, but to be honest I feel like your hyperbole is missing the point.

Is a simple seiko movement as good as a VC automatic? YES, at times it's actually BETTER at telling time because that's what Kunk was referring to.

I don't understand if you're confusing movement with complication or deliberately ignoring the difference... but since you failed to mention any 'movements' by anyone beside popularly fanboyed watch makers I'll go with the latter.

It doesn't matter if a 300 movement is in a 4000 dollar watch, because the chances are that movement is great for telling time and the owner likes the aesthetics of the watch. Probably the two most important points.

But just flat out claiming cheaper movements are rubbish or not as good as others I think is just sheer snobbery and worst of all, an ignorant opinion.

[byhand]

Audermars, Vacheron and Patek, and others among the big boys, have used parts not made in-house for a few of their watches, but they aren't touching anything peddled by Swatch, and the parts are always modified. Nouvelle Lemania and Jeager-LeCoultre have produced base movements used by the most celebrated watchmaking houses.

Purists insist on in-house movements.

It doesn't matter if a 300 movement is in a 4000 dollar watch, because the chances are that movement is great for telling time and the owner likes the aesthetics of the watch. Probably the two most important points.

My distaste is borne from the notion the B&R doesn't give a shit about the movement and creates a product that belies their price point in every way.

Fanboyed watchmakers? If Vacheron and Audermars are fanboyed watchmakers in your circle, then you are moving in an esoteric set. It's not like I mentioned Rolex.

But just flat out claiming cheaper movements are rubbish or not as good as others I think is just sheer snobbery and worst of all, an ignorant opinion.

Buy a loupe and walk into a Vacheron shop. Take some time looking at openworked watches. You'll either have an epiphany or you won't. We all have to find interests to pass the time between birth and death. I like watches and appreciate the artistry of masters doing their thing. It's not snobbery as much as it is stunned admiration. I like obsessive detail, and watchmaking at its finest is all about obsessive detail. The hundreds of perfectly interlocking parts, obsessively tiny parts, working together to account for the movement of the planet makes me happy to be human. And the tiny rubies (sometimes 30+ rubies in one watch) used as bearings because of low friction creating a longer lasting and more accurate watch are almost magical when you see them sparkling among all the moving parts. Watches can be special if you are open to seeing them, and seeing them means seeing the movement.

[pregnantbob]

watches are little more than a pissing contest between the haves and the haves nots.

I like the irony here.

[jskidder1]

Purists insist on in-house movements.

define purists. because where i'm from, a purist only cares about telling time.

[pregnantbob]

Audermars, Vacheron and Patek, and others among the big boys, have used parts not made in-house for a few of their watches, but they aren't touching anything peddled by Swatch, and the parts are always modified.

Purists insist on in-house movements.

This whole "Purists insist on in-house movements" mentality is very recent and such a load of crock.

But I get what kind of enthusiast you are, good luck with those grails kid.

[Faust]

I must side with byhand here. If there is still a reason for buying a mechanical watch for a serious amount of money it is respect for traditional craftsmanship. Personally, I would feel duped if I was thinking that I am buying traditional Swiss craftsmanship and got something else instead.

Indeed his parallel with the clothes we buy is not unreasonable.

[pregnantbob]

I must side with byhand here. If there is still a reason for buying a mechanical watch for a serious amount of money it is respect for traditional craftsmanship. Personally, I would feel duped if I was thinking that I am buying traditional Swiss craftsmanship and got something else instead.

Indeed his parallel with the clothes we buy is not unreasonable.

...this is why I'm trying to clarify all the hyperbole...

The movement in a Bell and Ross IS SWISS CRAFTSMANSHIP....it's an ETA movement and that SWISS company has been making watches since 1856 and can trace the origins to 1793.

Now I personally don't care for B&R but the point I'm making is that the movement snobbery presented here is misguided and utterly ignorant.

[pregnantbob]

Audermars, Vacheron and Patek, and others among the big boys, have used parts not made in-house for a few of their watches, but they aren't touching anything peddled by Swatch, and the parts are always modified. Nouvelle Lemania and Jeager-LeCoultre have produced base movements used by the most celebrated watchmaking houses.

Purists insist on in-house movements.

It doesn't matter if a 300 movement is in a 4000 dollar watch, because the chances are that movement is great for telling time and the owner likes the aesthetics of the watch. Probably the two most important points.

My distaste is borne from the notion the B&R doesn't give a shit about the movement and creates a product that belies their price point in every way.

Fanboyed watchmakers? If Vacheron and Audermars are fanboyed watchmakers in your circle, then you are moving in an esoteric set. It's not like I mentioned Rolex.

But just flat out claiming cheaper movements are rubbish or not as good as others I think is just sheer snobbery and worst of all, an ignorant opinion.

Buy a loupe and walk into a Vacheron shop. Take some time looking at openworked watches. You'll either have an epiphany or you won't. We all have to find interests to pass the time between birth and death. I like watches and appreciate the artistry of masters doing their thing. It's not snobbery as much as it is stunned admiration. I like obsessive detail, and watchmaking at its finest is all about obsessive detail. The hundreds of perfectly interlocking parts, obsessively tiny parts, working together to account for the movement of the planet makes me happy to be human. And the tiny rubies (sometimes 30+ rubies in one watch) used as bearings because of low friction creating a longer lasting and more accurate watch are almost magical when you see them sparkling among all the moving parts. Watches can be special if you are open to seeing them, and seeing them means seeing the movement.

Right, i see you've edited your earlier posts...

I just feel like we're having two different conversations.

FYI I bought my IWC through an old business school buddy who works for Richemont Asia-Pacific and he guided me through the VC and JLC, both of whom are also under Richemont, before i settled on the IWC. I have been to watch making workshops for customers and understand the craftmanship firsthand.

I don't think I've disputed that the finer complications some watch makers have borderline on magic. Yes, actual freaking magic because that's how incredible the pieces are.

Yes the top houses like VC have great movements but they also start at $15000 so you'd think they better have a good movement... but how does that make the cheaper movements shit? As i've mentioned the so called shit movements with the specific example of the B&R tells the time just as well as any of the top notch houses.

If it were actual stunned admiration then you wouldn't be just calling cheaper movements shit, you'd actually appreciate their own place in the market and how accurate they actually are (again I'll point to the likes of Seiko and Japanese quartz in general).

I don't mind if you just like the more expensive and more prestigious watch houses, but just come out and bloody admit it. Don't hide it behind some thinly disguised snobbery because if it were just about admiration you would have mentioned all the aforementioned Japanese movement because they are by and large unique and stunning achievements in engineering themselves.

and look, you're perfectly entitled to your opinions, just not your own facts. I would be really interested to seeing the timepieces in your collection, just curious to see what the movements are.