Just wow....

[andy tims]

Check out the GF GMT

http://novelty.greubelforsey.com/default.html

If my lottery numbers do ever come up with a big win, I'd be very tempted to buy a GF or a Urwerk just for the engineering brilliance.

[andy_s]

I was looking at that the other day too Andy - GF also came first in this years chronometry competition, although I seem to have lost the link

Ah - here you go - http://news.watchprosite.com/?show=nblog.post&...

Edited by andy_s on Sunday 6th November 08:41

[Debaser]

Love the globe!

[Carparticus]

But the nearest I'll get, without flogging the house, is the Seiko Earth Watch for somewhat less ..

[P7ULG]

At first glance I did think "wow" and liked the minature globe.

But do you not think sometimes these manufacturers are producing outrageous designs just for the sake of being outrageous and not because they are cutting edge.Yes to those in the know the engineering will probably be very impressive but to the majority of people it will look like something that came out of a lucky bag.

[Carparticus]

P7ULG said:

At first glance I did think "wow" and liked the minature globe.

But do you not think sometimes these manufacturers are producing outrageous designs just for the sake of being outrageous and not because they are cutting edge.Yes to those in the know the engineering will probably be very impressive but to the majority of people it will look like something that came out of a lucky bag.

What amazes me is that some banker type will walk into Marcus in London, and blow his £500,000 bonus on one.

Edited by Carparticus on Monday 7th November 12:39

[CardShark]

andy tims said:

GF or a Urwerk

Which one then, if it had to be just the one?

As much as I love the sci-fi look of Urwerks I think I'd still go with a GF. I think...

Yes, it's £xxxk and yes, think of what else you could do with such money.... but just look at it....

[CardShark]

andy_s said:

I was looking at that the other day too Andy - GF also came first in this years chronometry competition, although I seem to have lost the link

Ah - here you go - http://news.watchprosite.com/?show=nblog.post&...

Edited by andy_s on Sunday 6th November 08:41

I'd be interested in knowing the details of the tests, how tough it is to achieve what appears to be a very high score and, above all, exactly how accurate the watch timepiece is....

[andy_s]

CardShark said:

I'd be interested in knowing the details of the tests, how tough it is to achieve what appears to be a very high score and, above all, exactly how accurate the watch timepiece is....

915 out of 1000...

I think there's three tests, one by an independent, one by COSC (but more involved than the standard COSC test) and a second by COSC after being hit (in a posh way) and magnetised (by a posh magnet) - or some such thing anyway. I think Chopard or someone similar came second this year with about 700/1000; I'd have to read up on it again for anything more detailed.

[andy tims]

CardShark said:

andy tims said:

GF or a Urwerk

Which one then, if it had to be just the one?

Probably this one

[andy_s]

Pic of posh hammer:



http://www.chronometrie2011.ch/

[andy_s]

...and have to say I swithered but an Invention Piece No. 1 for me too please.

[LukeBird]

Not for me I'm afraid.
I really don't think any of those manufacturers do anything I would genuinely be interested in buying.

[Stuart]

andy tims said:

Probably this one

I do love these but, and this isn't just a GF thing I realise, but the depth of the case needed to allow for the Tourbillon cage makes it look odd to my eye. I'd prefer the illusion of slimness that you get with the depth hidden behind the face.

[andy_s]

Sure?

[Debaser]

andy_s said:

Sure?

I don't see the point in having a tourbillon you can't see. If I had one I'd want to watch it working.

[Stuart]

Debaser said:

I don't see the point in having a tourbillon you can't see. If I had one I'd want to watch it working.

Horses for courses, but the one on the left for me. That I'd know it were working would be enough for me.

[andy_s]

Debaser said:

I don't see the point in having a tourbillon you can't see. If I had one I'd want to watch it working.

I know what you mean though.

Better pics and the write up here - http://ahci.watchprosite.com/?show=forumpost&f...

[CardShark]

Debaser said:

andy_s said:

Sure?

I don't see the point in having a tourbillon you can't see. If I had one I'd want to watch it working.

Same here, and I'm all for the fully exposed look of the GFs showing the full depth of the case, love the three dimensionality and the feeling that you're truly looking inside each piece.

Not that I'd kick the model on the left out for farting

[Debaser]

Don't get me wrong, I love the one on the left. But I think tourbillons are so incredible it's a shame to not be able to see it. So when I win the lottery I'll be tracking down something bonkers like the Invention Piece 2.