Jump to content


Gallery Member
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Feedback


Everything posted by Caller.

  1. Yup, I wrote this 3 years ago, not sure if anything has changed: Henry London, on the other hand, are incredibly secretive about who they are on their website, which I guess would betray their Birmingham origins? I don't know why, as on their parent company website, they boast of owning various brands. For example, they don't even provide an address for returns or repairs, you have to email customer services to get that, but they do provide a phone number and that number belongs to the Peers Hardy Group from Birmingham, who own or produce watches for various watch fashion brands - Radley, Cluse, Paul Hewitt, Orla Kiely, Lola Rose, Halcyon Days (Suppliers to Royalty), LK Bennett, Jigsaw, Precision radio controlled, Kahuna, Disney kids and Tikkers and of course, Henry London - phew! Most of which, thankfully, I have never heard of! On the Henry London website, which tells you nothing about who they really are, they claim two designers found a 1960's vintage watch at Portobello Road market in West London, which was inscribed on the back with, 'Henry 1965' and that this was the starting point of the brand. What a load of bull! Mind you, I no more believe this than I do Christopher Wards three men in a boat origins or the story of how Bremont was so named. Henry London has nothing to do with London, but rather is the brain child of a marketing agency or in-house team used by the Peers Hardy Group. a large and well established Birmingham based company. http://www.peershardy.com/our-brands/ So the moral of this little tale? Quite simply that 'London' sells as both brands are doing very well, both here in the UK and abroad. Even some members of the CW forum, not from the UK, complained about 'London' being removed from CW dials after the merger with the Swiss movement maker. And Bremont still use London on the dial - which whilst technically correct - belies the fact they are based in Henley, something they are very open about. And sadly this shows that not only Chinese Companies producing British themed watches are pulling the wool over peoples eyes.
  2. AT for me. The lugs on the Spirit are too long for me. Tudor is a brand that passes me by and I don't care for that particular Hamilton.
  3. Here's a pic if one of their LE's on my 7.25 inch wrist. It was a great fit and a very comfortable wear. One of the best orange dials I have ever seen, IMHO. I should have bought it as the discounted price was very keen. It just seemed unnecessary to be on a square dialed case.
  4. Everything looks good. Until you notice the 12. It just doesn't belong. It's all a bit strange really. But you have already reconciled to that. So that's good as well. Personally, I can't get past the name.
  5. I never used to like them either. But when out in Oz in 92 it was a bit too hot to run without some head cover, so I bought England's version from the Cricket World Cup then happening. That changed my mind a bit. I have never been a habitual wearer of them, but as and when needed. Here, the Bremont cap accompanies two hats, one with a small brim and the other a wide one, in my truck, wherever I go. You need a hat here if in the sun for any period of time.
  6. In this instance, I find the Tissot the more attractive of the two watches. I like the cross hairs, but the date window jars a little. I think Tissot would have done better without the date, or offer a version without it. I don't know why there is a reference to one looking like the other. The only common factor is the green dial. The case back is great as well.
  7. Never had one. Still have the mug though! I still like the idea of a pin and a decent baseball cap would be good as well. Just copy Bremont's!
  8. Thought there might be some interest in this new book and it's review, from the former curator of times keeping at Greenwich, featured in the Sunday Times: From Roman sundials to atomic time, this study argues that clocks are instruments of control Symbol of order: Greenwich’s Shepherd Gate Clock, 1914 One sleepy Thursday afternoon in February 1894, two astronomers at Greenwich Park’s Royal Observatory were working late when they heard a “sharp and clear detonation, followed by a noise like a shell going through the air”. They ran outside to find smoke rising on the path below. As they came closer, they saw a man kneeling by the railings, his head bowed. Only when they lifted him upright did they realise he was horribly injured, his left hand blown clean off, his intestines smeared over the path. He died half an hour later, without saying a word. The man’s name was Martial Bourdin. A French anarchist, he had been carrying a homemade chemical bomb, intended for the observatory. Only moments from his target, he must have tripped and fallen, triggering the bomb beneath him. But why did he do it? And why the observatory? The answers, explains David Rooney, formerly Greenwich’s curator of timekeeping, are easy to guess. Bourdin’s target was almost certainly a large white clock, positioned close to the line that marks Greenwich’s prime meridian. Ten years earlier western governments had agreed that “all the people of Earth should march to the beat of one clock”. This was the clock: a symbol of order and government, capitalism and modernity, the “powerful, living embodiment of all that anarchists like Bourdin despised”. What are clocks, really? That question hangs over Rooney’s book and as his 12 short chapters whizz past the answer becomes obvious. “Clocks,” he says, “are us.” They are kings and emperors, parents and teachers, mill owners and factory managers, maritime navigators and colonial officials. In particular, he thinks clocks have always represented political power, which is why he kicks off his narrative in 263BC, with the Roman capture of a Carthaginian sundial at the start of the First Punic War. Mounted on a column in the Forum, the sundial showed that “Rome was on top” and the crowds cheered with joy. The sheen soon wore off, though. Within a few years Roman writers were complaining that the city was full of sundials, imposing temporal order where once there had been freedom. One writer even urged his readers to take up crowbars and topple the “hateful” devices from their columns. It was too late, though. Sundials — and clocks — had arrived to stay. It’s to Rooney’s credit that although he clearly knows a colossal amount about clocks, he wears his learning very lightly. A chapter on clocks and faith, for example, begins with a lovely vignette of an elaborate water-driven castle clock designed by the pioneering scientist Ismail al-Jazari in Diyar Bakr in 1206. For Muslims and Christians alike, Rooney points out, time, and therefore clocks, was associated with divine order. Then we are on to the 17th-century chemist Robert Boyle, who famously wrote that the universe was “like a rare clock”, so “skilfully contrived” that its designer could set it running and then step back to watch the little figures doing their thing. To watch-wearing English Protestants, says Rooney, keeping time carried enormous importance: as one theologian put it, by wasting time “you are guilty of robbing God himself”. The obvious criticism of Rooney’s book is that it is just too short. His discussion of clocks and faith, for example, is barely 20 pages long, whisking us from medieval Mesopotamia and Cromwellian England to Mecca’s colossal new Royal Clock Tower without a pause for breath. A later chapter, Markets, opens with the clock at the world’s first stock exchange in Amsterdam, tears through a quick history of clocks and high finance, and ends with the atomic clocks used for modern transactions, so accurate they can timestamp a million times a second. The details are fascinating, but it is disconcerting to travel centuries in just a few sentences. Yet underlying this breakneck dash is a serious thesis. Clocks, Rooney says, are really instruments of control. He gives the example of the time ball installed by the British at the Cape of Good Hope observatory in 1833, a tool to allow passing mariners to set their instruments. They were not doing it out of charity: this was a crucial point in the maritime network holding Britain’s empire together. Tellingly, the observatory depended on slave labour: when work on it began, the builders advertised for “thirty strong Slave Boys by the month” to do the heavy lifting. And by the early 20th century Britain had constructed a web of some 200 coastal time signals around the world, with balls, discs, guns and flags in “India, Singapore, Africa, Australasia, Canada, Malta, Gibraltar, Mauritius and the West Indies” — each a physical reminder of western colonial hegemony. Rooney ends by taking us into the far future, in the year 6970 in what was once Osaka. Here, at the beginning of 1971, the engineers of Matsushita and Seiko buried a plutonium timekeeper, designed to last for 50 centuries. Inside the capsule the president of Matsushita wrote a note to his successors, hoping that “something of our civilisation will survive the ravages of time”. Rooney is less sanguine, shuddering at the thought of the “clocks orbiting Earth on global navigation satellites operated by the American, Chinese and Russian militaries”, and warning that unless we all try to “leave the world a little better than when we came into it”, we are doomed to extinction. This, though, strikes me as an unnecessarily pious, even Bourdinish note on which to end. After all, clocks aren’t only instruments of control, and to most of us they don’t really represent power and oppression. They are miracles of care and craftsmanship, testament to the ingenuity and imagination of the human spirit. Clocks are us, as Rooney argues. But surely we’re not all bad, are we? About Time: A History of Civilization in Twelve Clocks by David RooneyViking £16.99 pp324 About Time by David Rooney, review — how clocks came to run the world | Culture | The Sunday Times (thetimes.co.uk)
  9. One special watch. I have more than I need already. Omega, Bremont or a Chopard Mille Miglia LE. There's a few I am partial too, apart from the one I already own and one has been on the wrist). If needed, I would add a bit to top up the 6k.
  10. Thanks! I got mine in 2014, so predates the Sewills. And it wasn't a new model when I bought it.
  11. Design is fine, not stand out, the movement isn't a winner at this price point. Myota and Seiko are perfectly acceptable, proven and reliable and for me, the watch is too small. You need to add a 42 or 43mm option as well.
  12. Not the models Freddie is asking about.
  13. I can only suggest you keep an eye on ebay. They have been sold there before.
  14. I have 4 - 2 bronze and 2 brass. I'm a bit picky about them. They came to popularity via microbrands, mainly from the far east and then got picked up by everyone. I don't like the big brands using the material where all they do is take an established model and make one in bronze. They have the wherewithal and ability to design an all new model for the material but rarely, if ever do. The best designs in my opinion, are from the microbrands, not the big boys. Anyone here's mine, all old pics and the Ancon has now been polished. I'll get some up to date pic sorted.
  15. They already do in a divers watch. Most of my autos are far more accurate than the +/- 20 seconds. With the exception of my Seiko 5, one of the new models, which thinking about it, I might see if it can be improved. I have 6 COSC's and they are all staggeringly accurate once up and running.
  16. @Bobby123 You could start here: Longines Men's Spirit 42mm Auto Chronograph in Blue - Watch Discussion Forum - The Watch Forum
  17. It's a perfectly decent, pleasant looking divers watch. But there are so many out there. But my big bug bear, which is a very personal thing, is this 'British design - Swiss made' thing, which nearly every new start up in the UK seems to come out with. It was original when CW did it years ago, but it's a tag line that is well past it's sell by date. Say 'all British made' and I'm in. Buy the best movement from wherever for the job in hand and I'm in (bar Chinese). But some opaque reference to 'Swiss made' and I'm out.
  18. Don't like any shown above bar Magrette, which is a well established and highly regarded microbrand of several years standing. And I own one. And actually, coming from NZ and no longer being in the EU does make a difference, as they were sold via an EU dealer. That now has no bearing for UK customers, unless he drops his prices for the UK accordingly.
  19. 'Master chronometer' - that's a bit Omega-ish, isn't it? I'll stick with my DSOTM. All the Johnny come lately's are just following in it's stream.
  20. I don't care for either of them. Sorry
  21. Thanks for sharing Mike, I really enjoyed that. I was stunned by the divers. Big, bold and wonderful. I'd love a light mother of pearl dial with the blue bezel. Very impressive. It's one of those brands you see year after year in the Wrist Watch Annual but never look at too closely, I have 2019's to hand and see the all blue diver was a limited run of 75 watches.
  22. I doubt anyone here has much experience of servicing such a watch. Can't you check on the web to find out about the movement? I can't see why it would need to be anything fancy, but if it is in-house, I guess access to parts might be an issue? How about checking with a watch repairer for an opinion. It's a lovely looking watch!
  23. Very good write up Honour @Always"watching" and very nice looking watches. Look forward to seeing those in the flesh when new Covid restrictions here allow.
  24. I have seen that definition of microbrands before, but I'm not sure that's how the majority of watch nuts see a microbrand. @JayDeep You might not see CW in a store as they only sell online, but the US is clearly a good market for the company. Same for Bremont, who have a boutique in New York. I quite like, such brands, but I think a better name is 'niche'. I have several such 'niche' watches.
  • Create New...