Breitling Or Rolex

[JonathanD]

I'm sure John D will be able to correct me on this but my father used to do a lot of work in Switzerland, the chaps over there always used to say that the watches with the best movements were Rolex, IWC, Patek and Cartier. Most of the other companies had movements made by AWS (I think?) so Tag, longines etc are all quite similar on the inside, just different outers!

Pretty much spot on, apart from Cartier. They use the generic Swiss ETA movements too (not AWS). Most Swiss watches like Brietling, Omega, Cartier, TAG, Longines and even Panerai use ETA movements. Only a few manufacturers truly have an in-house movement and they truly are top top end. Omega are trying hard though with their co-axial movement, but most of their models still carry the old ETAs.

 

[Wilderbeast]

Pretty much spot on, apart from Cartier. They use the generic Swiss ETA movements too (not AWS). Most Swiss watches like Brietling, Omega, Cartier, TAG, Longines and even Panerai use ETA movements. Only a few manufacturers truly have an in-house movement and they truly are top top end. Omega are trying hard though with their co-axial movement, but most of their models still carry the old ETAs.

That's interesting because the Cartier watches are usually a fair bit more expensive than the the other generic ETA movement watches. Do the manufacturers alter them at all? How do they account for the difference in price between the brands, is it literally just a name thing or our some of the exteriors better made than the others as well? I wonder what you'd make of my Fathers watch, he's got a Dunhill 14 years going strong (automatic movement, never serviced) but the Dunhills are way more expensive than they were, any reason for that?

Sorry for the bombardment of questions

 

[JonathanD]

Cartier are more a fashion/jewellery item than horologically minded. They do modify them slightly (very very slightly), as do Breitling and Omega. There are also different levels of ETA movement and they are excellent workhorses, but they are made in large numbers and cost is low with them. The cost of different watches will depend on the machining, R&D that has gone into it and whether any designers have been paid exhorbitant amounts to design them (Gucci, Cartier etc), amongst other things. Sometimes you do pay for the name on watches, but his is more the case with fashion brands rather than proper watch makers. The old Dunhills were excellent, but like all watch brands, they have gone up enormous amounts due to economic craziness, materials being much more expensive, and the low pound.

 

[Large Sack]

One other thing of note with Cartier (and others that may use generic movements) is that the largest part of the cost of manufacture is in the case and bracelet. The old Panther and Santos models, for example, have 18ct gold fixtures in the steel and gold bracelets and cases and not plate.

Even with the likes of Patek, Rolex, Blancpain, Audemars et al once you go above a price tag of around £3 - £5000 you will most likely only be paying for the bolted on bits.

Cheers
Sack

 

[FGYT]

It's a traditional clockwork movement and 99.9% accurate. A Ferrari or Aston Martin isn't exactly fuel efficient, but it gets you from A to B in style.

not quite the right comparison i think

getting you from A to B is a cars primary purpose taking more fuel than another still means it completes it

telling you the right time is a watches primary purpose (other wise its just bracelet)

would you be happy with the ferrarri if it broke down 2 miles before you got to your destination or take a Fiat Punto guaranteeing you got there


or for a bushcraft example would you be happy if your Heirloom Stu M knife was made with a slightly prettier (yes i know its theoretical) dama steel but in the non hardening version so would still look supurb with top craftsmanship but fail at its primary function of a knife and not hold an edge very well so not really cut maybe the odd cake making a Mora a much better knife as a knife jsut not pretty or expensive

was a running joke pointed out by lecturers on my engineering course that a £2 garage watch (do they still do them was 80's ) was more accurate a time piece than a Rolex
demonstraiting the importance of Form and function is not necessarily down to price or that some times function comes second to form

dont get me wrong i understand the reasons etc watches dont do it for me but vintage motor bikes do i know a modern bike is faster safer more fuel effecent and more comfy etc but hey you cant beat the roar of an old Norton or Triumph (Unit engine ) especially in a feather bed frame the feeling of it running well on twisty country roads always makes up for the leaky oil and the constant maintenance

ATB

Duncan

 

[jonajuna]

i'm a function over form man anyday of the week and to be honest, i find spending several hundred pounds upwards on a watch to be quite crass

proud daily wearer of a £50 Timex expedition chrono alarm that does everything i need it to do (ie tell the time accurately enough, stop watch, timer and wake me up... also think it looks ok too (if that is important with a watch?) btw, just checked it against a time server.... last synched the time about christmas time, it is currently 10 seconds out.... as i am not a member of MI5/6/SAS/SBS..... ten seconds/6 months is perfectly accurate enough for my mere mortal needs

proud driver of a 7yo mondeo 2l tdci estate that does everything i need it to do in a fairly fuel efficient manner and enough comfort to travel the length of the country if i should need to do so (as well as carry all mine and my family of fours luggage, do trips to the tip, and even converts to a camper car with the use of some futon mats...... it also runs in the wet... not many prancing horses and lambo owners can say that with confidence)

as for starting a thread with the disclaimer "not trying to show off" is akin to starting a conversation saying "no offence but....." its obvious what is coming next

of course, if the thread would've started, "hey guys, come look at my pretty new thing, sure its extravagant and i have no real need, but i like it and have worked hard and saved hard to get it..." fair enough, we are all entitled to spend our pennies on what ever we choose

 

[johnnythefox]

at the risk of stirring it up ray bought a rolex....

 

[JonathanD]

at the risk of stirring it up ray bought a rolex....

Submariner Date. On the advice of a splendid fellow.

 

[jonajuna]

ponders how many submariners actually own a submariner...................

 

[JonathanD]

ponders how many submariners actually own a submariner...................

Absolutely loads. They even used to be standard MOD issue some 40 years back.

 

[millie-mail]

Zenith rainbow cased el primero and elite.

Dave.

 

[jonajuna]

Absolutely loads. They even used to be standard MOD issue some 40 years back.

maybe the captain of the boat could afford the £4grand upwards, dont think many of the ratings would take the plunge

and soooo inaccurate as well, my smart phone gives me the time to an accuracy of 1/1000th of a second none of this one second pants




oo just looked up on this, for the sake in interest, cant find any reference that submariners have ever used it or were issued it, sure professional/military divers do/have done, i can see the need of a high quality tool with water resistant to 300metres for such people and compared to much of their kit, £4k must be a bargain. though there seems to be a consensus that in the mid 60's, it moved from being a tool to being a consumer item

the military version was also rather different to the high street model i see, unless you have a canvas strap on yours?

http://www.rolex-chat.com/submariner-historical-evolution.html

thanks for the pic, made use of that to find that indeed it was issued to the uk military....... well the SBS!!!!

http://www.bjsonline.com/watches/catalog/catalog.cgi?cf=6&browse=browse&section=vintage&make=rolex

 

[JonathanD]

I used to be an officer in the Submarine Service. Quite a few ratings and loads of officers used to get Submariners when they were promoted or completed a period of service.

The Submariner was standard issue to RN divers, Officers and Marines and the SBS in the 60's and 70's. My version is RM issue. It had oversize hands, military markings and a differently graduated bezel compared to the civvy version. The Sub is still a hard wearing tool, but it's looks have taken on certain elements more pointed towards looks than function. This has only happened in the last year and is a shame. Although, it is still a very robust and even more hard wearing tool than it was back then. The price, however, due to these innovations, has gone way way up.

 

[jonajuna]

ok, fair do's

still fail to see the point of them in the non military/oil rig diving world.... even among very experienced recreational divers, its an exceptional case if they go below 10 metres and are there any that go below 75?

my timex is rated to 100m (why, i dont know either, 2 metres will do me... )

do all you brietling/rolex owners wear these things in the woods then? or do you go "bushcrafting" whilst on trimex?????

think i'll stick to my cheap, cheerful and function that exceeds my needs, ford, timex and mora thanks

 

[JonathanD]

ok, fair do's

still fail to see the point of them in the non military/oil rig diving world.... even among very experienced recreational divers, its an exceptional case if they go below 10 metres and are there any that go below 75?

my timex is rated to 100m (why, i dont know either, 2 metres will do me... )

do all you brietling/rolex owners wear these things in the woods then? or do you go "bushcrafting" whilst on trimex?????

think i'll stick to my cheap, cheerful and function that exceeds my needs, ford, timex and mora thanks

I wear my sub all the time. Woods, mud etc. It is a watch that is made to last a lifetime of use. I like that being all sentimental and so on, and it's not something that can be applied to many brands, even high end ones. The reason other people buy them is simple, they look good, last and have a very high reputation. They also, amazingly, increase in value, even if worn and bashed around.

The way watch water resistancy is rated is misleading. Your 100m watch has been static tested to a 100m depth. You can create more than 100m of water pressure on the surface if you are swimming, jumping in and moving about quickly. Showers nowadays can create high pressures that can get into a 300m rated watch and over with the high temperatures they generate added into the equation. Therefore a 30m watch is really only mildly splashproof, 50m the same and 100m only suitable for surface swinmming. Rolex are one of the few brands that are static tested to a greater depth to ensure that a 300m rating is just that. Unfortunately, it is one of only three brands that have the technology to do this.

 

[jonajuna]

well that's alright then, all i do is surface swimming and i dont wear it in the shower as i take it off so it doesnt get all soapy and i can wash my wrist.

so my timex expedition is perfect for my needs and doesn't cost more than some people have to live on a year

win win

i see you wear born in 1970, so guess yours wasnt issued then? maybe officer types can afford them... us nursey types cant..... and my "professional watch" bought as a gift for finishing my 3 year full time uni course whilst also working to feed myself, by my then girlfriend was this one

nowadays its £15 quid in argos and it didnt even need batteries! ally kit eh?

 

[Laurentius]

Neither, I have a cheap Lorus, trouble is the other day I checked it against the beeps and it was four seconds fast, what a disaster.

 

[johnnythefox]

Absolutely loads. They even used to be standard MOD issue some 40 years back.

stunning,best not tell them how much its worth its the only rolex i would like to own.
its hard to explain to people who dont it,get much like why i ride a motorbike if i have to explain you wont understand.

typed while i wear my Omega SM300 nos watchco,which when i wear it i never need to adjust day by day it balances up.

this was a issued watch then followed by a CWC quartz diver which i have one.

 

[JonathanD]

I got my military issue one from my dad. I bought mine in 1996 after I left the military. Some people spend money on branded clothes, cars, cushions, computers, books, stamps, complicated mobile phones or holidays. Some on a watch. We are all different. Can't say I would spend the money they are asking for the new Sub now, but I respect what they are and what goes in to building them (takes a year). I used to work for Rolex and then was made redundant so have little loyalty to the company. They are one of the few companies that really don't have flashy ads or push their product vigorously. They rely on reputation more than anything and are an old fashioned company that does everything in-house and I respect them for holding to such values and keeping their brand integrity intact throughout.

 

[JonathanD]

stunning,best not tell them how much its worth its the only rolex i would like to own.
its hard to explain to people who dont it,get much like why i ride a motorbike if i have to explain you wont understand.

typed while i wear my Omega SM300 nos watchco,which when i wear it i never need to adjust day by day it balances up.

this was a issued watch then followed by a CWC quartz diver which i have one.

I have a Comex Sub too, early one with hand made release valve

I also have the CWC and it is a cracking watch. Omega also, although very briefly, supplied Seamasters to the RN.

Watches can be a very personal thing to some people, and I find it is those that don't wear jewellery that are more inclined to be this way. Each to their own. I don't get why people want to wear stones and metal on their bodies that have no function and cost an absolute bomb.