Jump to content

RTM Boy

Gallery Member
  • Posts

    2,653
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1
  • Feedback

    100%

RTM Boy last won the day on August 21 2019

RTM Boy had the most liked content!

Recent Profile Visitors

4,001 profile views

RTM Boy's Achievements

Experienced

Experienced (11/15)

  • First Post
  • Collaborator
  • Posting Machine Rare
  • Week One Done
  • One Month Later

Recent Badges

2.2k

Reputation

  1. Breitling or Tudor, eh? Hold on, there's an apocalypse - why would anyone care what time it is? Gold watches might be a substitute currency though I suppose... OK, a Breitling Premier B09 Chrono in 18k Gold. No date - post-apocalypse dates wouldn't matter
  2. What I cannot bring myself to buy are watches I can't afford, which are most watches Can't say there is anything I would dismiss, assuming I could afford it. I can't afford Rolex, Omega, even TAGs, so no point (re)visiting stereotypical owner personas...even for a laugh. Have to disagree on Pulsar by the way @JayDeep - makes some very nice watches, like my faithful beater I suppose I might be put off anything that would be so valuable that you'd be afraid to wear it because either; a. You fear damaging it in a way that would knock several £thousands off the value, or b. It might attract the wrong kind of attention from nefarious individuals The whole association thing might sway me to choose one watch over another I suppose eg money no object I'd have a VC over a Rolex any day (money no object also means not caring about a. or b. because you'd have a posse of security with you and you could just buy another one if you wreck it. In the cheap seats where I park my bum fashion brands eg Timberland, Tommy H, Zeppelin, etc., are a total no-no for me. I mean, why would you??? The only VFM watch brand I don't bond with is Seiko. I'm not knocking Seiko per se, I've owned many over the years, they're fine, but just can't bond with them or their tediously unregulated movements. I've really tried to like them, but they're just not for me, despite numerous attempts to like a variety of models. Otherwise, my thinking regarding CW is a bit like @Bonzodog. I've never owned one and I like many of their designs, seemingly well made and good value (esp with discounts), but the brand name/logo just puts me off enough not to take the plunge. Never say never, but... I know, not rational.
  3. That’s a bit of a bummer @antjrice (I think ‘bummer’ should be brought back into common use ) hopefully you’ve just been unlucky and that you get it back quicker than they forecast. Have heard anecdotally of some issues with Tudors, although it’s impossible to know how widespread, or otherwise, these are. Could be just a profile thing…
  4. Even if your eyesight is still reasonably good (I'm hanging in there ), the modern fashion for very highly polished steel hands means they can 'disappear' completely at certain angles. In fact, I find dark dials even worse than light ones for this. Yes, I know that's one of GS brand cues, but I can't help feeling it's more about embellishment for the sake of higher prices, rather than improving the actual ownership experience. Many a watch is ruined by being blinged up IMHO, I admit I'm a tool watch fan preferring brushed finishes, but even so... High polish steel is just too reflective. Good legibility depends on high contrast and/or very low specular (ie defuse) reflection; eg white hands on a matt black dial, or black hands on a matt white dial (sunray and other reflective dial finishes don't help). Watch makers know full well about this - one reason why they put anti-reflective coatings on sapphire crystals to lessen multi reflections. Brushed, bead blasted or otherwise matt steel hands are generally far easier to read, which might be one mod option @Roy, although purists will be horrified I know. @Boxbrowniesuggested gold hands, so you could perhaps switch so something like the SBGA401 instead (one of the more affordable gold hand ones at £4,400 RRP); In the end the thing is no-one wants to be annoyed by the watch they are wearing, no matter how well made or top-notch it is...
  5. Beater day today, with lume from last night...
  6. Ball do have their own style and have great build quality. Their style of numerals are part of its brand signature. Great watches.
  7. The dial looks to have bit of fumé going on too. Very nice. Congratulations, wear in good health.
  8. My favourite watch cost me £60, isn't a diver, has been discontinued, and as you can see has been carefully looked after , so no, probably not.
  9. Yeah it looks like the whole combo of divers-divers-divers and retro-retro-retro fashion chasing buyers with the minimum of original design or thought (both cost £££). It's happening with high-end chronos too IMO with reissue after reissue. I'm assuming there is some evidence () that this is what sells, and so this is what manufacturers make, but at this rate the choice we will be left with are Subs, Sub clones, pseudo-Subs, mid-centrury-style lookalike divers and expensive extra-thick chrono reissues, Seikos that look like both, and Bauhaus-inspired/flieger(1930s) German stuff. If copying the past is the only thing to do, it makes me wonder if there is going to be any style of watch that represents the third decade of the 21st century? Any reissue of a 2021 watch would simply be of a 20th century watch. The Sinn U50 is the only diver I can think of off the top of my head that actually has its own contemporary style. HELLOOOOOOOO AND WELCOME...
  10. Fishmongers sell fish - we all know that - and as you say there's nothing wrong with a generic mid-century-style diver with a slightly more interesting dial than usual. To be fair, compare it to a not dissimilar Rado Captain Cook 37mm at 6 times the price, the Beaufort seems good VFM, if that's the style what you're looking for.
  11. Certainly nice looking and seems good value with a Swiss STP 1-11 4Hz regulated movement. The market is being swamped with divers atm and quite a few look similar, but 'Just One More Watch' on YT has just reviewed it;
  12. Free with the post above... Actually, not necessarily. Averaged out over the year the daylight hours in Thailand are very similar to the that of the UK (the latter has less in the winter but more in the summer) with only a handful of sunrise/sunset hours difference over 12 months. And mean annual sunshine hours in London is 1,633 hours pa, Hat Yai in Thailand is 1,568 hours pa, Bangkok is 2,623 pa. So, it depends where you are.
×
×
  • Create New...