lets talk watches

[ericdw]

leather on a diver looks dumb imo

[Happy Hooligan]

Leather on a diver is okay sometimes to me. I think the rolex bracelet is a great timeless design. But I see you're point.

It's like seeing a lamborghini in traffic.

[Statham_Race]

Yeah it's my watch. A friend took the photo. The leather is aging nicely already; developing a patina.

I realize a lot of watch fans dislike leather on a diver. But I don't dive. I bought a watch that I liked the look of and that I knew would last. I was after something that looks good at the office and with a tshirt and jeans and I decided a Sub with a tan band worked for me.

Also, if you want to talk heritage of the Sub, you cant ignore the Bond movies, like it or not. And Connery wore a Sub with a black croc band.

[the Repeater]

The type of leather and scale match the squareness of the lugs and the utility.

It's no longer truly dive ready, but I don't think it's any more out of place than with work clothes or a suit!

A good look IMO, especially for everyday.

[dismalfuture]

lol, it's not even that the Sub is on a leather band, it's that the guy said he wanted to get something not as 'trendy/GQ' as an IWC - and then got a Sub and put it on a faddish strap within days of receiving it. I don't know if there's a watch anymore trendy or faddish right now than a Sub on a strap....

[Statham_Race]

I've not seen a single Sub on a NATO or leather band in my city. Three guys in my office alone own the same IWC. Perhaps it's different where you live.

[denimdestroyedmylife]

Leather on a diver is okay sometimes to me. I think the rolex bracelet is a great timeless design. But I see you're point.

It's like seeing a lamborghini in traffic.

^ this is an excellent post

I realize a lot of watch fans dislike leather on a diver. But I don't dive. I bought a watch that I liked the look of and that I knew would last. I was after something that looks good at the office and with a tshirt and jeans and I decided a Sub with a tan band worked for me.

i am very jealous that you have that watch. personally, i'd never put a diver on leather though; causes too much cognitive dissonance for me to relax about it. i would stick to the connery aesthetic.

I've not seen a single Sub on a NATO or leather band in my city. Three guys in my office alone own the same IWC. Perhaps it's different where you live.

i've never seen an IWC in the wild. it would be interesting to map out watch wearing data. anyone?

i had a few close calls this week. passed on a stowa MO, some early JLC handwinding mark XI-esque piece, and some austere Patek that popped up on the boards and eBay estate sales. i need to just hold off for a year and see what watches still hold my attention.

[DaBestSpoona]

I see quite a few IWCs in Tokyo, especially around Akasaka/Aoyama

In Manhattan, its mostly rolexes, Pateks. I work in financial, I rarely see IWCs, I see tons of ugly ass hublots or similarly ugly ones.

[Statham_Race]

To complete the picture, I live in Singapore. And I wasn't joking about three guys in my office wearing IWC's. They are very attractive watches but too prevalent. I see more of them than Subs, for sure.

[denimdestroyedmylife]

singapore and manhattan are very watch savvy places (in my mind)

the only person who has decent watch taste in my life is my boss

he's got a speedmaster, omega constellation (or somesuch), some kind of corum, and some ultra skeletonized joint

he's always back and forth between east coast usa and switzerland

so i guess that accounts for his wis-dom

[dunkin deeznuts]

on my old commute from carroll gardens to midtown i saw lots of panerais and rollies, mostly mid age white dudes....

most of my "richer" friends own IWCs

werd

[denimdestroyedmylife]

i do see panerais now and again

[ericdw]

I'm pretty sure a memo went out about 3 years ago that if you work in NYC and make over 100k, you need to buy a PAM.

[DJ_Flame]

Most old to mid age dudes in Singapore have either Rollies, Omgeas, TAG or Seiko, else its IWCs for the younger crowd, especially for those who have "made it".

Amongst my richer friends, its always either Panerais or IWCs, or using dad's old rolex. So I guess dude has a point.

Anyways envy you for working in an office that allows you to afford IWCs and Subs.

I would have bought a Portuguese on that salary, but that's personal preference.

But also there's tons of guys rocking the made in china $100 IWCs. Given the cost of living in Singapore, rocking a 20k watch and taking the train seems sketch.

[Happy Hooligan]

It's odd IWC's are so popular today, as when I was into them in the late 90's it seemed that nobody even heard of them. Personally I think that late 90's was their best design look. I don't really like the why most of them look today.

[M4TM]

I've always liked the look of IWCs but could never justify the prices they were charging considering the generic movements they use...

[funkdoobi]

I recently bought my first expensive watch.

I chose a Rolex Submariner (no date). Admittedly common but not as faddish/GQ as an IWC (in my opinion) and more versatile.

I removed the metal bracelet on day 1 and had a khaki nato strap while I waited for a custom leather band:

i had a hate/hate reaction to this. fucking grotesque band. fucking. just. FUCKING. my god.

anyhow, i'm thinking about getting a mont blanc XL chronograph. kinda funny they call it XL when it's only 38mm. You'd thing it'd be like 48 with a name like XL. wondering if the 38 would be too small? so used to the chunkiness of my breitling and the Bell & Ross 03 I had previously. hmmmmmm.

[dismalfuture]

But also there's tons of guys rocking the made in china $100 IWCs. Given the cost of living in Singapore, rocking a 20k watch and taking the train seems sketch.

pretty common in Asia though, especially Tokyo - you see mad people wearing expensive watches and taking the train or doing plebe stuff. I took language school and the 4 Japanese girls sitting next to me all day were literally penniless and had every center budgeted for the next 3 months, but each one of them had a $2-5K watch on their wrist.

[Phrost3]

i mostly notice rolex subs and date/just in nyc along with panerais and omegas. i want to see a glashutte original or a lange & sohne in the flesh.

personally, i'm not a fan of the strap trend. seems like a hassle when you wash your hands with a piece of leather or nylon on your wrist.

[the Repeater]

The Sub is classic, so with or without the bracelet, it's low-pro cool now as it will be years from now.

Also the strap is a thick, oily, edge-finished leather and not as prone to damage as dress leather bands and much more comfortable than the dive bracelet. Loving that this watch is controversial... so strange!

I've never seen an IWC on a person I respected. This may be purely coincidental, but I think the price to payoff or any sort of styling pales to many other marques. I like their pilot's a lot, admittedly.

[Statham_Race]

People disliking the look of the tan strap on a Sub I was prepared for. Some of the deal breakers being discussed are crazy though - a guy who wouldn't have a leather band because it makes washing his hands tricky? For real? Anyway the band is pretty robust, well finished and only around 100 US - maybe a little more. If I wear it out after 6 months, it's no great concern. I'm not going diving in it or swimming if I can avoid it but I'm not precious about it getting a splash or two.

I happen to think the tan looks good - obviously. The metal band seems boring to me and a little middle aged (and please remember this time, it's just my opinion). A NATO is too casual (but not faddish in Singapore - not everyone lives in a fashion blog and no one in my city has one). Leather seemed a good look for a watch that I wear to work with a suit 5 days a week but want to slip on with a T and shorts or jeans on the weekend.

[denimdestroyedmylife]

IWC mark XI would be my top choice from the brand (though i'd prefer a JLC mark XI):

[passivefist]

I recently bought my first expensive watch.

I chose a Rolex Submariner (no date). Admittedly common but not as faddish/GQ as an IWC (in my opinion) and more versatile.

I removed the metal bracelet on day 1 and had a khaki nato strap while I waited for a custom leather band:

just so you know, Rolex watches are mass produced while IWC watches are hand crafted. That's all I have to say.

here is my iwc pilot chrono... pulled the trigger on one right before the price increased two weeks ago. even though its a valjoux 7750 movement... the timekeeping is extremely accurate.

[patrick_b]

just so you know, Rolex watches are mass produced while IWC watches are hand crafted. That's all I have to say.

Please note that I don't hope to change your mind with this post. Rather, I hope to point out the inaccuracies in the post for someone else who comes across the information. This way they may make an educated decision when comparing IWC to Rolex.

Mass produced vs. handcrafted is a sweeping and over-simplified generalization. Trying to argue one brand as better, mass produced or more handcrafted than the other is, uninformed [at best] and more than a bit misguided.

Both brands offer high quality products with models at various price points and significantly different amounts of hand crafting. Just because Rolex makes more models in a given year doesn't mean they are less handcrafted. Comparing an IWC with a Valjoux/ETA movement to a 100% in-house Rolex movement isn't even close to apples to apples.

It may be entertaining to hear your justification for the above statement...but it will also be laughably inaccurate. Just be happy that you like your IWC, its movement, its accuracy and even its aesthetics. The 'mine's more handcrafted than yours' sounds schoolyard foolish..or more likely is what a wildly uneducated IWC salesperson says to a customer who may be considering a Rolex.

Note, I love the IWC FliegerChrono, it's a great piece of engineering with a fantastic history. It even includes a tremendous amount of handcrafting. I've owned the IWC Ref. 3706 and found that it kept very accurate time and received many unsolicited compliments. It's far less common than a Rolex Sub, that's for sure

I also wear Rolex (and Omega among others). Rolex's in-house caliber 3135 found in current generation sports models (Sub, SD, GMT) is a robust, well designed and amazingly accurate movement. And it contains as much...gasp...handcrafting as your IWC!

Again, both manufacturers provide a great product that could appeal to very different buyers for different reasons. When choosing a Sub or a FliegerChrono, more handcrafting in one over the other is much less a factor than simple personal preference...in an educated consumer.

Enjoy your Pilot's Chronograph..it sure is a beauty. That's all I have to say.

[passivefist]

Please note that I don't hope to change your mind with this post. Rather, I hope to point out the inaccuracies in the post for someone else who comes across the information. This way they may make an educated decision when comparing IWC to Rolex.

Mass produced vs. handcrafted is a sweeping and over-simplified generalization. Trying to argue one brand as better, mass produced or more handcrafted than the other is, uninformed [at best] and more than a bit misguided.

Both brands offer high quality products with models at various price points and significantly different amounts of hand crafting. Just because Rolex makes more models in a given year doesn't mean they are less handcrafted. Comparing an IWC with a Valjoux/ETA movement to a 100% in-house Rolex movement isn't even close to apples to apples.

It may be entertaining to hear your justification for the above statement...but it will also be laughably inaccurate. Just be happy that you like your IWC, its movement, its accuracy and even its aesthetics. The 'mine's more handcrafted than yours' sounds schoolyard foolish..or more likely is what a wildly uneducated IWC salesperson says to a customer who may be considering a Rolex.

Note, I love the IWC FliegerChrono, it's a great piece of engineering with a fantastic history. It even includes a tremendous amount of handcrafting. I've owned the IWC Ref. 3706 and found that it kept very accurate time and received many unsolicited compliments. It's far less common than a Rolex Sub, that's for sure

I also wear Rolex (and Omega among others). Rolex's in-house caliber 3135 found in current generation sports models (Sub, SD, GMT) is a robust, well designed and amazingly accurate movement. And it contains as much...gasp...handcrafting as your IWC!

Again, both manufacturers provide a great product that could appeal to very different buyers for different reasons. When choosing a Sub or a FliegerChrono, more handcrafting in one over the other is much less a factor than simple personal preference...in an educated consumer.

Enjoy your Pilot's Chronograph..it sure is a beauty. That's all I have to say.

Oh don't get me wrong... I am in no way knocking the brand itself. Rolex has solidified itself in history as one of the most respected brands. What I was trying to say is that because the watch is mass produced, it loses its rarity and its history of craftsmanship. I also own a rolex so ill be a hypocrite for knocking rolex. The guy implied that IWC was faddish which out of most people I've encountered, they had no idea what an IWC was, merely knowing more "popular" brands in the likes of rolex and omega. IMO, most people wear rolex and omega to show they have money, others purchase such as IWC, Zenith or A. Lange and Sohne for its quality and history.

[arlee]

People disliking the look of the tan strap on a Sub I was prepared for. Some of the deal breakers being discussed are crazy though - a guy who wouldn't have a leather band because it makes washing his hands tricky? For real? Anyway the band is pretty robust, well finished and only around 100 US - maybe a little more. If I wear it out after 6 months, it's no great concern. I'm not going diving in it or swimming if I can avoid it but I'm not precious about it getting a splash or two.

I happen to think the tan looks good - obviously. The metal band seems boring to me and a little middle aged (and please remember this time, it's just my opinion). A NATO is too casual (but not faddish in Singapore - not everyone lives in a fashion blog and no one in my city has one). Leather seemed a good look for a watch that I wear to work with a suit 5 days a week but want to slip on with a T and shorts or jeans on the weekend.

Uhm how about putting a quality rubber or composite band on it? since it is a diver's watch

and really a sub not as faddish/GQish as a IWC! think its the other way around. you probably don;t see much subs in singapore because your co workers probably knows whats up and are wearing other respected watch companies

[Switch]

If done right divers on leather can look very cool imo:

im on the look out for the same band for a patina sub as below....

[Switch]

...first I need to find a good fat font bezel for my 76 1680, nice patina developing on a v clean face and immaculate silver date wheel - bezel is a replacement though....

[dismalfuture]

I think both of those watches would look light years better on their stock bracelets, and that Sinn looks particularly horrible. I like nice leather craft as much as the next dude (10) but the leather bands are just fad-beasting lately.

A diving watch should get either a bracelet, a rubber band, or a nylon strap, preferably a padded one. Leather is not sensical there.

Those rough leather bands go better with pre-war/wartime fliegers, etc.

[patrick_b]

...first I need to find a good fat font bezel for my 76 1680, nice patina developing on a v clean face and immaculate silver date wheel - bezel is a replacement though....

It just doesn't get much better than those acrylic crystal subs like your 1680. That's drop dead gorgeous. The hr markers on your example have the perfect patina.

Nice job capturing the lug holes in some of the images as well. It was sad that Rolex did away with the lug holes on a tool watch with such great history.

I had a K Serial SD that I sold off a few yrs ago. I miss it dearly. It was one of [if not the] last years with lug holes. I bought that year (rather than a brand new one) because it still had those lug holes.

The only thing I can find solace in is the fact that it went to a good home , but the buyer knows to call me if he ever decides to sell it. I want first dibs!!

Sadly my days of mechanical watch collecting are over. As I mentioned in an earlier post, once we bought a home, had two kids and later became a single income family, it became virtually impossible to justify watch purchases to my wife .

I pretty much threw in the towel when she got good enough at telling the difference between a 1978 GMT II and one from 2008! In addition, once she stopped working to stay home with our kids, she started intercepting UPS/Fedex packages.

Anyway...great example of a 1680. IMO...it's the perfect watch. Just out of curiousity, do you still swim with it?