What watch is this?
Discussion
I was in a meeting the other day and the MD of the company I was abusing seemed to making a massive point of 'LOOK AT THE WATCH ON MY WRIST'... in as much as he has the sleeves of his shirt rolled up on one arm, and only had one arm on the table.
Now I am no watch buff but it looked terrible to me.
The watch was huge and black with orange numbers.
Very much like one posted on another thread
What was it and should I have been impressed by this mass of black hanging on his wrist?
Now I am no watch buff but it looked terrible to me.
The watch was huge and black with orange numbers.
Very much like one posted on another thread
What was it and should I have been impressed by this mass of black hanging on his wrist?
They'd be interesting, I like the 'technical' or 'aircraft dial' look, if it weren't for the huge size. Mind you, I don't know if it'd look in proportion even at the size of the BRS. Definitely a statement, just not mine.
I think the Hydromax is good though, shame the Demineur is a quartz as it's a great simple design.
I think the Hydromax is good though, shame the Demineur is a quartz as it's a great simple design.
I know there are a few fans on here but I tried a BR-01-92 about a year ago and was just completely underwhelmed. Yes, it's big and won't fit under a shirt cuff (which may explain the OP's comment on how it was being worn unless of course the sleeve was pulled up over the elbow!).
Once over the initial impact of the large size, I personally just did not 'feel' anything for it. Like most things, I think you tend to 'connect' with stuff or you don't.
Once over the initial impact of the large size, I personally just did not 'feel' anything for it. Like most things, I think you tend to 'connect' with stuff or you don't.
The BR 03 is a little smaller, and it fits even my averagely-sized wrist reasonably. I quite like the 03-92 phantom for its relative stealth looks.
However, sitting there in a watch shop with one on my wrist, I couldn't really see the value there, disussed, I subsequently discovered, in a recent article:
And it's true. Looking at it dispassionately, the basic B&R is arguably a worse watch (technically) than, say, a Damasko DA36, yet is about four times more expensive.
However, sitting there in a watch shop with one on my wrist, I couldn't really see the value there, disussed, I subsequently discovered, in a recent article:
A 'watch snob' article said:
On to the Bell & Ross: They are good-looking watches and I know many people like them. However, they do something that is almost inexcusable in the eyes of the Watch Snob. Bell & Ross is a prime example of a company that is selling nothing more than a cool-looking case and a dynamite marketing plan. Every single one of its watches use nothing more than a stock, off-the-shelf ETA automatic movement, the same movement you can buy yourself for around $300. Yet, the price of the average Bell & Ross hovers around $4,500.
You tell me: Are you OK paying that much money knowing how much the movement costs and that it’s not even its own? Hell, even its $163,000 Tourbillon Phantom watch uses a movement bought from somebody else.
Watches are as much a craft as they are an accessory, and while I don’t find the looks of the Bell & Ross line to be tacky like your father, I do find everything else about them to be distasteful and utterly offensive. A watch is about the entire package, not just its appearance. Any large watch company not making its own movement is not making a watch at all; they’re just playing dress-up.
From hereYou tell me: Are you OK paying that much money knowing how much the movement costs and that it’s not even its own? Hell, even its $163,000 Tourbillon Phantom watch uses a movement bought from somebody else.
Watches are as much a craft as they are an accessory, and while I don’t find the looks of the Bell & Ross line to be tacky like your father, I do find everything else about them to be distasteful and utterly offensive. A watch is about the entire package, not just its appearance. Any large watch company not making its own movement is not making a watch at all; they’re just playing dress-up.
And it's true. Looking at it dispassionately, the basic B&R is arguably a worse watch (technically) than, say, a Damasko DA36, yet is about four times more expensive.
mft said:
And it's true. Looking at it dispassionately, the basic B&R is arguably a worse watch (technically) than, say, a Damasko DA36, yet is about four times more expensive.
An even more extreme example is that a Seiko 5, costing no more than 50 quid, is almost certainly a better watch and has an in-house manufacture movement.And has a day and date!
ETA: Looking at the Phantom, and knowing what it costs, the fact that the screw-heads aren't aligned is making my teeth itch.
Edited by CommanderJameson on Sunday 14th March 07:44
Gassing Station | Watches | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff