[ rss / options / help ]
post ]
[ b / iq / g / zoo ] [ e / news / lab ] [ v / nom / pol / eco / emo / 101 / shed ]
[ art / A / beat / boo / com / fat / job / lit / map / mph / poof / £$€¥ / spo / uhu / uni / x / y ] [ * | sfw | o ]
logo
dandy

Return ] Entire Thread ] Last 50 posts ]

Posting mode: Reply
Reply ]
Subject   (reply to 3918)
Message
File  []
close
422370d1302899359-looking-22mm-rubber-strap-pvd-bu.jpg
391839183918
>> No. 3918 Anonymous
25th June 2012
Monday 8:34 pm
3918 spacer
I'm about to buy this watch.
Seiko SNDA65, £195.
My mate reckons is ridiculous to spend 200 squid on a watch.

what do you chaps think?
do you wear a watch?
if so, what watch?
how much would you spend on a watch?
Expand all images.
>> No. 3919 Anonymous
25th June 2012
Monday 8:37 pm
3919 spacer
£200 for a watch that isn't even digital? Are they having a laugh? You can get one for a tenner from Argos:

http://www.argos.co.uk/static/Product/partNumber/2533393/Trail/searchtext%3ECASIO+WATCH.htm
>> No. 3920 Anonymous
25th June 2012
Monday 8:51 pm
3920 spacer
I can appreciate good watches, but in my opinion that doesn't look worth more than £100.
>> No. 3921 Anonymous
25th June 2012
Monday 8:52 pm
3921 spacer
A £200 watch is really worth £200.
Let's not be coy, an expensive watch is a status symbol and nothing more, you can try to delude yourself by believing in the marketing "oh amazing quality, watch for life, master craftsmen, sophisticated features" but we all know that's wank.
Anyway, if you want the watch, get the watch.
>> No. 3922 Anonymous
25th June 2012
Monday 9:09 pm
3922 spacer

citizen watch.png
392239223922
>>3921
Exactly, but a lot of expensive watches are completely plain and look like something from Argos.

This one is a similar style, similar price, but in my opinion just stands out as being a bit more special.
>> No. 3923 Anonymous
25th June 2012
Monday 9:11 pm
3923 spacer

rolex-submariner-21365585[1].jpg
392339233923
and does this watch look worth £4000?
welcome to the wonderful world of watches.

£200 is actually considered an extremely good price for that watch.
>> No. 3924 Anonymous
25th June 2012
Monday 9:18 pm
3924 spacer
>watches
I love how there is literally so little between them that the depth you could drop it in the sea is a factor to be considered and advertised. It's like competing on skirts as being 100% lion proof or something.
>> No. 3927 Anonymous
25th June 2012
Monday 9:26 pm
3927 spacer
To be fair, a watch that you absolutely don't have to give a fuck about when swimming, showering, jetwashing your hands, stopping a jet of petrol pissing out of an engine, whatever muppetry you like, is a permanent pleasure. Likewise, never needing a battery, glowing for a decade or two, and generally getting on with telling the time, is something I don't regret paying for. The juxtaposition of clockwork and radioactivity is a bonus.
These aren't really /poof/ reasons, but I can certainly see why someone would spend a few hundred quid if they could spare it. Same for £4000 - just don't expect anyone except yourself to notice or care.
>> No. 3928 Anonymous
25th June 2012
Monday 9:30 pm
3928 spacer

5336569456_74d58ca133_z[1].jpg
392839283928
>>3922
I was actually considering the citizen nighthawk, pic related. It's about the same price but you get a full on slide rule, solar powered and dual timezone features, but it's just a bit too flash for my tastes and the face is a bit cluttered. I also read that they don't sit so well on NATO straps (i hate metal bracelets and leather straps).
I prefer something modest and understated -something i can wear every day of the week in any situation, Which is why I was getting the SNDA65. I think I will get good use from the chronograph.
>> No. 3929 Anonymous
25th June 2012
Monday 9:33 pm
3929 spacer
I have an Omega that cost just over a grand. I love it, and my hair is thicker and my penis longer since buying it. It's so nice I hardly ever wear it, and have a Burgmeister I bought on Amazon for every day use. But that's besides the point.

It's not for me to say if it's worth the money for you, though. Can you afford it? If you buy the watch and then the next day your boiler explodes will you still have money to pay for it? It depends what your cash situation is like.

My Omega was bought with my entire disposable income for a month's pay, so I'd say that's about the price I'd pay for a watch. Even on minimum wage that's probably about right, so if you want it, get it.
>> No. 3932 Anonymous
25th June 2012
Monday 9:48 pm
3932 spacer
>Can you afford it? If you buy the watch and then the next day your boiler explodes will you still have money to pay for it?
thats not funny
but yes.

even if it does explode, i'll be far too preoccupied with my shiny new chronograph to care. Who needs a boiler when you can time how long it takes your cat to do a shit to within 1/20th of a second.
>> No. 3933 Anonymous
25th June 2012
Monday 9:51 pm
3933 spacer
>>3921
I agree and I'll add that as far as status symbols go, watches should be quite far down your priority list. Pay more attention to your clothes, how you carry yourself, car, mobile phone, etc.

Just out of interest, did anyone say anything to make you want a watch?
>> No. 3934 Anonymous
25th June 2012
Monday 9:53 pm
3934 spacer
>>3933
Probably various permutations of "You're late!"
>> No. 3936 Anonymous
25th June 2012
Monday 10:02 pm
3936 spacer
>>39347
Fine,

Just out of interest, did anyone say anything to make you want an expensive watch?
>> No. 3937 Anonymous
25th June 2012
Monday 10:16 pm
3937 spacer
>>3933

not that i'm aware of. Maybe somebody said something that has influenced me subconsciously.
You are making me feel dirty.

I have a bit of cash floating around. I wanted to treat myself to something nice. I don't like spending money so I thought a watch was at least slightly justifiable, to ease the guilt of spending money on something that I don't really require. All this talk of status symbol and sending a message about my wealth is putting me right off. Is that what people really think when they see you wearing a decent watch? I was worried that was the case, which is why I was drawn to a more modest style of watch. I'm quite a modest and reserved fellow, the intention of buying a watch certainly wasn't to get knee deep in clunge and impress people. Maybe it was and i'm just lying to myself.
fuck knows.
>> No. 3938 Anonymous
25th June 2012
Monday 10:27 pm
3938 spacer
>>3937
>Is that what people really think when they see you wearing a decent watch?
Not really. If you spend a grand or more on a watch people will think you're a cunt, unless they're cunts too. Otherwise having a nice watch is just one of the little things people notice which adds to first impressions, but the style is 100 times more important than the price.
>> No. 3939 Anonymous
25th June 2012
Monday 10:37 pm
3939 spacer
As far as I'm concerned, phones and cars are transient. They require continued payment, new models are regularly released and you exchange them up or down depending on your circumstances.

A watch? A watch is a one off payment. A good watch, if you go for a classic design, will last you the better part of your time on earth. A faithful companion, like a dog that makes sure you're never late and doesn't get hair over everything. It will be a status symbol for as long as you want it to be.

I personally wouldn't go for that particular watch, but I think there's something to be said about blowing your cash on a watch rather than, say, insurance for some loud vehicle or another piece of tech cluttering up your life. I'd much rather buy a nice looking bit of attire than a new laptop or a games console every nth year. This is how I justify my general /poof/tery, and it leads me to be shocked when people tell me how much they've spent on their new television. The reverse happens when they ask me how much my coat costs.

Read into that what you will.
>> No. 3940 Anonymous
26th June 2012
Tuesday 12:35 am
3940 spacer

DSC01481.jpg
394039403940
I can only agree with what people are saying about flash watches. Especially since most people would just check their phones anyway.
I was treated at Christmas by my now-ex to a nice wind-up Rotary watch, I think she paid about the same as OP is going to for it. I have to wind it every day but I don't really mind. I only wear it every now and then, though.

Sage because I'm sad she left me.
>> No. 3941 Anonymous
26th June 2012
Tuesday 1:34 am
3941 spacer
>>3940

More than I got out of my ex, m9.
>> No. 3945 Anonymous
26th June 2012
Tuesday 6:18 pm
3945 spacer
>>3940
Why did she leave you?
>> No. 3946 Anonymous
27th June 2012
Wednesday 3:08 pm
3946 spacer
>>3945
She had lots of reasons but nothing that couldn't have been sorted if she'd just grown up and talked to me. She won't talk to her parents either.
>> No. 3950 Anonymous
30th June 2012
Saturday 1:23 pm
3950 spacer
I wear a watch that I got from my grandfather who got his from his father. It's a Hermes, but I think it is a fake.
>> No. 3951 Anonymous
1st July 2012
Sunday 5:19 pm
3951 spacer

736211772411-2T.gif
395139513951
I rather like the look of these watches. Something about the plain, minimal styling reminds me of Apple products. Question is, would wearing one make me as pretentious as a twat in Starbucks with his Macbook?

http://www.phosphorwatches.com/World-Time-Curved-E-Ink-Watch-Black-Leather-p/736211772411.htm
>> No. 3952 Anonymous
1st July 2012
Sunday 5:43 pm
3952 spacer
>>3951

Hm. If anything a big, digital display with all of those different settings doesn't strike me as minimal. It actually looks like quite a techie thing to strap to your wrist.

But that's just me, and I'm rather traditional in my tastes. I suppose compared to other digital watches with buttons and rubbery lumps everywhere, it isn't half-bad looking.
>> No. 3953 Anonymous
1st July 2012
Sunday 5:59 pm
3953 spacer

P_6504_black_storm_pro_zoom.jpg
395339533953
Traser black storm watch. £210 when I got it. It's got fancy glowy shit in it, a little radiation symbol and a timer bezel. I find analog watches easier to read at a glance than digital.

If it lasts 10years then I have paid a £21 annual subscription to know what time it is at all times. Then I can just get a new battery and it's all hunky dory.

I do however avoid the "how much did your watch cost" question like the plague rather than admit I spent £200 on something I could of got for £5 to do the same job.
>> No. 3954 Anonymous
1st July 2012
Sunday 6:31 pm
3954 spacer
>>3953 Then I can just get a new battery and it's all hunky dory.

Tritium does not work that way.
8 years in, and mine's still usefully bright, though. It's also completely unscratched (on the transparent bit, anyway), which for a clumsy git like me, completely unheard of. I used to get through 2 plastic watches a year. This may, eventually, be cheaper. It's certainly nicer. Also no faffing about with changing batteries and hoping the damn thing is still waterproof.
>> No. 3956 Anonymous
1st July 2012
Sunday 6:49 pm
3956 spacer
>>3954
I meant a new battery for the watch, not the tritium >:(.
The tritium will fade over time, and even if it went completely I'd still be left with a well made non-glowy watch. It's a special edition which came with a lithium cell instead of the usual cell that should last about 10 years.

The half life of tritium is 12.3yrs, but I'm not sure if the fade is caused by the decay of the tritium or the phosphors wearing out. (It's not the tritium that glows, the radiation from the tritium reacts with the phosphors powder that coats the inside of the glass vials to glow.)
>> No. 3957 Anonymous
3rd July 2012
Tuesday 3:15 pm
3957 spacer
I understand that you might want a modern, interesting-looking watch, but if it sacrifices your ability to read the time, i.e. the very purpose of wearing a watch in the first place, then it becomes pretentious. This means no dots or bars or binary or anything like that that you have to mentally calculate before you know what the time is. If it takes more than a glance to tell the time from your watch, you're a twat.
>> No. 3958 Anonymous
3rd July 2012
Tuesday 9:35 pm
3958 spacer
>>3957

I think you meant to say:

>If I can't read time with it, you're a twat.

Because there's no difference between a watch with hands and a binary watch.
>> No. 3959 Anonymous
3rd July 2012
Tuesday 11:50 pm
3959 spacer
>>3958
Lol I knew by including binary in that list I'd step on the toes of some ultranerd. What Linux distro do you use?
>> No. 3960 Anonymous
4th July 2012
Wednesday 3:57 am
3960 spacer
>>3959

Crunchbang. But that's not the point. All you have to do is learn how to use the watch and all of a sudden there is no special "mental calculation" that someone with a hands watch wouldn't be doing.
>> No. 4028 Anonymous
8th August 2012
Wednesday 11:52 am
4028 spacer
>>3951
I might like Braun watches. Yes, them made watches and some of them are digital.

I guess most of you guys are poor people jealous of wealthy people who can afford themselves good watches. You call people with nice watches "twats" and "cunts". Funny. I am here for the first time and I am surprised a little bit.

I've bought myself simple quartz Tissot watches for about 240$ because those will be not the last watches of mine and as I am going to buy better watches anyway (automatic n stuff) these watches are meant to be simple for everyday use.
>> No. 4029 Anonymous
8th August 2012
Wednesday 11:53 am
4029 spacer
>>4028
*you
**they
>> No. 4030 Anonymous
8th August 2012
Wednesday 11:54 am
4030 spacer
>>4028
You're not doing a lot to disprove the theory, yanklad.
>> No. 4031 Anonymous
8th August 2012
Wednesday 11:58 am
4031 spacer
>>4030
I am not a yank. One can tell it seeing how shitty my English is.

And I am not disproving any theories here.
>> No. 4033 Anonymous
8th August 2012
Wednesday 3:16 pm
4033 spacer
I have a good Far-East pirate copy of a Tag Heuer Professional, a real version of which would set me back about £1000. I love wearing it, feels great on my wrist, the clasp design and the watchface and everything about it is perfect.

Am I a particularly foolish and pretentious cunt for liking a bootleg version of a posey watch?
>> No. 4034 Anonymous
8th August 2012
Wednesday 3:22 pm
4034 spacer
>>4033

Perhaps it's just me, but I'd think of you as more of a wanker if you spent the £1000. Then again, I do wear a Timex with a nylon strap.
>> No. 4035 Anonymous
9th August 2012
Thursday 4:51 am
4035 spacer
I guess I'm the cunt of the thread, because I wear a Cartier Roadster. I am under no illusions about it being materially worth the money, I just really like it and when I look at it, it makes me happy.

If it will make you £200 worth of happy, OP, it's worth £200.
>> No. 4076 Anonymous
16th September 2012
Sunday 9:46 pm
4076 spacer

IMG_202.jpg
407640764076
Finally got it, and for only £140.
Is a bit bigger than I was expecting but I'm pleased as punch.
Got some ZULU/NATO straps ordered.
>> No. 4077 Anonymous
16th September 2012
Sunday 9:51 pm
4077 spacer

casio-watch-50m-alarm-chrono-blk-2669-p.jpg
407740774077
Best watch on the market, don't let anyone tell you otherwise.
>> No. 4078 Anonymous
16th September 2012
Sunday 10:05 pm
4078 spacer
I would buy a watch if I could find one that is almost indestructible.
>> No. 4079 Anonymous
16th September 2012
Sunday 10:25 pm
4079 spacer
>>4078
Isn't that one of the key marketing points of g-shock watches?
>> No. 4080 Anonymous
16th September 2012
Sunday 10:45 pm
4080 spacer
>>4079
Yes but they splatter their logo all over the face of the watch. It is not stylish and discreet while being indestructible.
>> No. 4081 Anonymous
16th September 2012
Sunday 10:56 pm
4081 spacer
>>4080

Sounds like you just need a decent military watch. Most are hardwearing due to the nature of, er, the military.
>> No. 4082 Anonymous
17th September 2012
Monday 12:12 am
4082 spacer

timex-military-classic-wrist[1].jpg
408240824082
>>4080
Take a look at the Timex expedition range. Cheap and solid. They sell them on bases in Afghan, or so i've heard.
Have a look at the Expedition Military Classic (Pic related) and the Expedition Military Chronograph.
Nite watches are good, their MX10 watch is issued to the SAS for use in the field. Has it's own NATO issue number.
There is also Traser, as someone further up the thread mentioned.
If you want digital there is the Suunto Core.
>> No. 4083 Anonymous
17th September 2012
Monday 12:20 am
4083 spacer
>>4082
Wow. That looks fantastic mate. I can't stand digital watches. I will check them out, I hope they aren't too dear.
>> No. 4121 Anonymous
5th October 2012
Friday 4:37 am
4121 spacer
I'm considering a Nite MX-10 very heavily. About tritium - once it runs out, is that it? Or can I sent it off somewhere to have new tubes installed? If its going to last even half a decade it's going to be worth it, really, but I'd like to know.

Perhaps in ten years they'll have figured out how to reionize my watch.
>> No. 4122 Anonymous
5th October 2012
Friday 9:34 am
4122 spacer
>>4082
Looks nice, but I gotta' have me a bezel.
>> No. 4167 Anonymous
21st November 2012
Wednesday 12:14 pm
4167 spacer
My current watch is >>4077.
Amazingly I've got lots of compliments on it from people who don't realize it's been around forever and costs under a tenner.
>> No. 4591 Anonymous
3rd November 2013
Sunday 1:38 am
4591 spacer

Citizen-Mens-BM8475-26E-Eco-Drive-Stainless-Steel-.jpg
459145914591
OP Here.
Have had the Seiko on my wrist almost everyday since I received it, well over a year ago. It's been a dutiful servant. As an everyday/work watch I couldn't have asked for more. It's held up pretty well too, only a few minor scratches and blemishes on the pvd coating and the crystal is scratched up a bit, but this is only noticeable on close inspection, and entirely understandable given what a clumsy cunt I am.
That being said, for a while now I've been longing for something a bit more dandy for the weekends and evenings out so I've ordered the watch in the picture. Citizen BM8475-26E.
I think I now have full blown watch AIDS.
I only ordered it yesterday and I've already been eyeing up other watches tonight.
>> No. 4592 Anonymous
3rd November 2013
Sunday 2:05 am
4592 spacer
There's no difference between a £5 watch and a £5000 watch. 8.30 is 8.30. Time is a constant based on meridian. Unless you affect it with gravitational fields.
>> No. 4593 Anonymous
3rd November 2013
Sunday 2:23 am
4593 spacer
If you want an accurate watch then spend a pound or two on a digital quartz one. Any more and it's jewellery and novelty, especially mechanical ones. The sky is the limit if you want something that tickles your fancy as an accessory. Just know what you are getting and why, it's your money.
>> No. 4594 Anonymous
3rd November 2013
Sunday 7:12 am
4594 spacer
>>4591
Don't stop until you have a watch for every day of the week.

I don't like the first one you got; it looks like a novelty compass on a cheap canvas strap.
>> No. 4595 Anonymous
3rd November 2013
Sunday 7:45 am
4595 spacer

91uo1UQAkxL._SL1500_.jpg
459545954595
I'm inordinately fond of the Timex Weekender. It goes with anything from jeans and a t-shirt to a suit, looks really elegant but costs just £30. It takes NATO standard straps, so you can have a few different colours of strap for a couple of quid each.
>> No. 4596 Anonymous
3rd November 2013
Sunday 1:09 pm
4596 spacer
>>4592
Time is an illusion, Arthur.
>> No. 4597 Anonymous
3rd November 2013
Sunday 2:54 pm
4597 spacer

Cartier-Roadster-S-steel1[1].jpg
459745974597
>>4035
It blows my mind to think that someone would pay £4.5k for this thing.

Aside from anything else, walking around with four and a half grand just hanging there on my wrist seems like an obviously bad idea.
>> No. 4598 Anonymous
3rd November 2013
Sunday 6:23 pm
4598 spacer
>>4597
I think a lot of expensive watches are pretty wank to be honest. I've never seen a Rolex I like the look of, for instance.
>> No. 4599 Anonymous
3rd November 2013
Sunday 6:25 pm
4599 spacer
>>4598
All watches are wank, especially expensive ones. They're anachronistic. Their time is over.
>> No. 4600 Anonymous
3rd November 2013
Sunday 6:40 pm
4600 spacer

galaxygearlead-619.jpg
460046004600
for the sort of money op is looking at spending I'd choose one of these beauties.
>> No. 4601 Anonymous
3rd November 2013
Sunday 6:59 pm
4601 spacer
>>4598
I wasn't really making a point about that particular watch, it's more that spending that kind of money on a watch and then risking carrying it with you everywhere you go just strikes me as weird. I don't understand the appeal.

>Their time is over.
Baddum-tsh
>> No. 4602 Anonymous
3rd November 2013
Sunday 7:11 pm
4602 spacer
>>4599

I disagree. To me a watch does have great practical value. I know many people just use their phone. It's hard to pinpoint exactly, but there's something much nicer in having something physical and single purpose rather than yet another digital screen. No rooting around in your pocket, no unlock mechanism, it's simply there and attached at all times.

It's not just about that, though, it's also about continuity, aesthetics and culture. You could argue many features of the modern business suit are anachronistic, but we still wear it because it communicates something to us visually.
>> No. 4603 Anonymous
3rd November 2013
Sunday 7:20 pm
4603 spacer
>>4602
Suits are pretty ridiculous. Who the fuck thought up the idea of the tie? How did he convince all the other guys that it was a good idea? It baffles me.
>> No. 4604 Anonymous
3rd November 2013
Sunday 7:21 pm
4604 spacer
>>4602
I'm forever running for my train home from work. First-world problem, since it's because of my flexi-time. I can't keep whipping my phone out of my pocket to check how close I'm cutting it. That checking my watch is as simple as looking down is a definite advantage over the phone. That, and you're unlikely to drop a wrist watch.

I say "running", being a fat cunt it's more like fast-waddling.
>> No. 4605 Anonymous
3rd November 2013
Sunday 7:24 pm
4605 spacer
>>4604
Don't worry. Your phone will soon be attached to your face.
>> No. 4606 Anonymous
3rd November 2013
Sunday 8:21 pm
4606 spacer

bellross1[1].jpg
460646064606
I really like the aesthetics of watches.
>> No. 4607 Anonymous
3rd November 2013
Sunday 8:42 pm
4607 spacer
>>4603

Boring answer is that it is an evolution of styles and designs. A gradual thing. If you look through the history it makes more sense as you see the changes and have them explained and described.
>> No. 4608 Anonymous
3rd November 2013
Sunday 11:45 pm
4608 spacer

got-pebble-watch.jpg
460846084608
>>4600
I think the Samsung watch is ridiculous. 10 hours battery life? What's the fucking point?

I think that of the recent "smart" watches announced, the Pebble has the most mileage. Same screen as the Kindle (i.e. very good in sunlight) and almost a week in battery life.
>> No. 4609 Anonymous
3rd November 2013
Sunday 11:53 pm
4609 spacer
10 hours?

Almost a week?

That's really shitty battery life. Fuck that. I've had watches tick along happily for years on a battery. If I wanted one that I had to attend to like that all the time I'd get a wind up one.
>> No. 4610 Anonymous
4th November 2013
Monday 12:05 am
4610 spacer
>>4608
>10 hours battery life
What kind of R&D department honestly thinks this is an ok battery life for a watch? I would've assumed that was a joke, but a search tells me it isn't. Bizarre.
>> No. 4611 Anonymous
4th November 2013
Monday 12:20 am
4611 spacer
>>4610

Imagine the humiliation of mid-day or mid-meeting battery swaps and then asking everyone what the right time was when you had to reset it all. Wonderful.
>> No. 4612 Anonymous
4th November 2013
Monday 6:42 am
4612 spacer
>>4611

Well, it's a watch designed to be linked to your smartphone, so it will set itself from that. And I'm assuming the idea is you charge it each night just like a phone.

It's still extremely inconvenient, but if you want a watch that you can read your texts on you should probably expect to charge it up quite often.
>> No. 4613 Anonymous
4th November 2013
Monday 7:16 am
4613 spacer
Would a solar powered smartwatch work?
>> No. 4614 Anonymous
4th November 2013
Monday 9:16 am
4614 spacer
>>4613

Not unless you live in the Sahara and spend all day outdoors. There's just not enough available surface area.
>> No. 4615 Anonymous
4th November 2013
Monday 12:13 pm
4615 spacer
>>4595

I bought myself one a few weeks ago. The design is great, but the mechanism is just too loud. I have to put it in a drawer if I don't want the incessant tick-tick-ticking keeping me awake at night.
>> No. 4616 Anonymous
4th November 2013
Monday 10:59 pm
4616 spacer

Casio Mens Gold Digital Watch(1).jpg
461646164616
This watch really tickles my fancy, you can find it for 40 quid on any high street jewler. Not bad.
>> No. 4617 Anonymous
4th November 2013
Monday 11:07 pm
4617 spacer
>>4616

Tacky as fuck, it looks like it came out of one of those plastic egg vending machines.
>> No. 4618 Anonymous
4th November 2013
Monday 11:18 pm
4618 spacer
>>4617

Scrooge.

I quite like it, m8. Rock on.

Return ] Entire Thread ] Last 50 posts ]
whiteline

Delete Post []
Password