New Bell & Ross - sorry, Christopher Ward

[Mattt]

[al1991]

Christopher Ward watches leave me cold.

That one is no better.

[Ikemi]

That is a horrible case design ... Not liking that at all!

[CardShark]

Hands and face Ok (if a little Sinn like) but, as above, the case deserves a

[carter711]

I quite like the case

[Sunglasses Ron]

I like it too

[Stuart]

Whenever I've handled a CW I've been really impressed by the build quality etc, but I just find them to be so derivative that I couldn't buy one.

[Ikemi]

It would probably look better if the case sides were straight (rather than slightly curved), the screws were larger (or not there) and the crown had protective shoulders either side ... It's trying to be beefy, but the dial is too big and as a result, the proportions look odd. All IMHO, of course

[Xtriple129]

Just bought my first CW watch (a C3 stainless chrono) and I'm dead impressed with the watch, the box it comes in, the letter from CW and the customer service. The watch looks classy and understated and ten teimes better than it does on the website images.

However, the one originally posted does absolutely nothing for me... now the C60 GMT.....

[Mr Beastmaster]

Have to say I like it. In fact I find it more appealing than a Bell and Ross but then I must fess up to being a big Chris Ward fan having a few in my collection and yes as has been said they always look so much better in the flesh than in the web pictures!

Also to dismiss the brand as being derivative is a bit harsh. If the remit is to do an aviation style watch it's going to be a toughie to not draw parallels from something done before and the same thing with Dive watches really, where most people who have entered this field have something that is reminiscent of a Rolex Sub.

[GC8]

al1991 said:

Christopher Ward watches leave me cold.

That one is no better.

I thought I stood alone there.

[NJH]

I really don't like anything about it, really none of it quite works. Its like a B&R trying to be a Sinn trying not to be either trying far too hard to look like every other watch without actually copying any of them. It is an epic design fail. In one word gash.

[rog007]

For long-sighted PHers, looks perfect...

[Adam B]

Hmmm does nothing for me, are they much cheaper than the watches they ape?

[Mattt]

They used to be amazing value for money - quality movements, good guarantees, well assembled and had a 'feel of quality' about them.

They still have all of the above, but the prices have doubled in the last couple of years.

[DS3R]

Adam B said:

Hmmm does nothing for me, are they much cheaper than the watches they ape?

The Bell & Ross 01 this bears a "striking" similarity to starts about £2400 I think.

I would be surprised if this was priced at 10% of that, and then I'd still call it overpriced.

[Mattt]

£350 non-chrono (quartz)
£400 chrono (auto)

Their other recent launch was the 'Trident' - guess the inspiration?



£415

[DS3R]

Mattt said:

£350 non-chrono (quartz)
£400 chrono (auto)

Veering wildly off topic and just out of interest, what sort of time keeping & lifespan does a £400 auto watch have?

I held an auto Rotary on Saturday (£179 I think, some sort of skeletal dress watch), the weight felt really very rough and notchy when swinging- horribly noticeable on the wrist, but subject to their servicing it every three years (£75 a pop!) they gave the mechanism a lifetime guarantee....

[Mattt]

CW gives a 5 year guarantee, but the movement should last a lot longer given correct treatment and servicing - they are decent movements at the end of the day.

[sjg]

Mattt said:

£350 non-chrono (quartz)
£400 chrono (auto)

Other way around - it's a £350 quartz chrono, and a £400 non-chrono with a ETA 2824-2 or Sellita SW200-1 automatic movement.