Watches - another passion of ours, it seems...post your pics!
Jul 2, 2010 at 11:39 AM Post #4,726 of 14,396
One of my faves...
 

 
 
shane
 
Jul 2, 2010 at 11:43 AM Post #4,727 of 14,396
Another fave...
 

 
Jul 2, 2010 at 11:45 AM Post #4,728 of 14,396
And a workhorse...
 

 
Jul 2, 2010 at 4:45 PM Post #4,730 of 14,396
My Omega Electric Blue finally gets a brother to play with:






 
(Gah I hate this new forum software! Now I have to add each image individually instead of mass
generated by Photobucket. What a pain!)
 
Jul 2, 2010 at 7:05 PM Post #4,732 of 14,396
Rolex is used. I have yet to buy a new watch over $1000. The depreciation on a new timepiece is just too killer. And the value on used timpieces right now are too good to pass up.
 
Jul 2, 2010 at 10:03 PM Post #4,733 of 14,396


Rolex is used. I have yet to buy a new watch over $1000. The depreciation on a new timepiece is just too killer. And the value on used timpieces right now are too good to pass up.




I completely agree. You take a massive hit on new watches and there are some really excellent values used now, too. Also, the cost of a service on most new watches has skyrocketed recently. I still love my watches, but I haven't bought for awhile and think that my collecting is mostly done. I'm going to stick to collecting stuff with reasonable repair costs or that I can service myself.
 
Jul 2, 2010 at 10:22 PM Post #4,734 of 14,396

 
Quote:
I completely agree. You take a massive hit on new watches and there are some really excellent values used now, too. Also, the cost of a service on most new watches has skyrocketed recently. I still love my watches, but I haven't bought for awhile and think that my collecting is mostly done. I'm going to stick to collecting stuff with reasonable repair costs or that I can service myself.


Used is definitely the way to go with some watches - especially when the prior owner(s) take very good care of the timepieces. I also practically gawked when I saw what the typical costs that were quoted for servicing a Rolex were: especially considering Rolex recommends doing so once every couple of years (like my dad ever will). I much prefer going through the used market and vintage markets for watches these days.
 
Jul 3, 2010 at 1:54 PM Post #4,735 of 14,396
So... what are you wearing today?
 

 
Jul 4, 2010 at 5:06 PM Post #4,736 of 14,396
Happy 4th of July !
 
 

 
 
Jul 6, 2010 at 12:40 AM Post #4,738 of 14,396
I've changed my mind yet again.. Now I'm thinking of going for a Junkers G-38 Titanium watch.. It has an [size=x-small]ETA 2824-2 movement, which is supposedly pretty decent? [/size]
 
http://www.amazon.com/Junkers-Titanium-Swiss-Automatic-6272-2/dp/B003IPNRSG/ref=sr_1_9?ie=UTF8&s=watches&qid=1278390988&sr=1-9
 
I want to get the one that Long Island Watch advertises as having a solid titanium bracelet, but the Junkers' German website (translated using Google) says that the bracelet is stainless steel.. Not sure what should do. I have a metal allergy so I need either a titanium bracelet or a leather band. How easy is it to purchase a true titanium bracelet that will fit on this watch?
 
Jul 6, 2010 at 1:12 AM Post #4,739 of 14,396


Quote:
Is that Rolex Submariner more comfortable to wear than that Omega Seamaster ?


The ladies at Ben Bridge Jewelers let me try on both while I was there trying to pick one out for my dad. Between the old Rolex Submariner style (16610 family of movements) and the Seamaster, I had to hand it to the Seamaster personally. But between the new Rolex Submariner style (116610 family of movements) and the Seamaster, I think it really will come down to your preference in appearance and weight overall. They are both very comfortable on the original bracelet but I think the Rolex tends to feel a bit heavier on the wrist than the Seamaster. The difference between the two styles of Rolex Submariner really makes a difference through. The newer model uses the new clasp that just feels much better against the wrist than the older style clasp.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top