I agree about the hands. Given that this is a larger watch than the originals on which it's based, the hands and markers appear a little too thin for my liking. Still, it's a nice looking watch.I do prefer this over Rolex' redesigned Cellini. Bit of a nit, but I wish the hands were thicker and the logo applied rather than printed. But a very nice piece, indeed.
Second this. When you look at the prestigious, truly high end manually wound dress watches they all have two things in common that this piece does differently: first, they are no date and second, they are under 40mm.It's so close to what I would want in a dress watch.
But it seems big, and IMO, a manual movement should not have a date complication.
This would be perfect for wearing on special occasions, which isn't too often for me. It'll have run down between the times I put it on. I'd have to reset the date each time, and because it's got the quick timezone change instead of a quickset date, it's more of a hassle.
I put the Tresor in the "Least favorite watch from a favorite brand" thread for these reasons. It's not that it's a bad watch all over -- it isn't, it's beautiful -- it's just that it got so close to perfection and then they threw in a couple bad design choices (too big for a classic style, date function).
It's like that Seinfeld episode where a girl he dated seemed perfect until she laughed.