WatchUSeek Watch Forums banner
1 - 20 of 45 Posts

Registered
Joined
206 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
This happens to me more and more often, the more I get into watches: I love the overall aesthetics and design of a watch, but one or two little details just keep bugging me.

An example: I own (and love) a Rolex OP39 - it looks glorious, both as a daily wearer and with a tuxedo. It wears lightly, and I get lost in many of its details. But the hands, to my eyes, are stubby fingers which were cut short of where they should have ended.

Or the Seamaster 300: a thoroughly beautiful watch (I'm wearing it right now), but I kind of dislike the hour markers and the clunky hours hand. (I get fixated on hands)

Often, I can make my peace with these annoyances (as with the OP39 - I hardly notice those short, ungainly hands anymore 馃檮馃榿). But sometimes, they get worse and become deal breakers. I flipped a Globemaster (again: beautiful watch overall!) because of this (and the terrible bracelet).

The weird thing is: I don't even think changing these details would improve the watch overall. In fact, I understand the design choices, but this macro perspective still doesn't help me ignore the micro grievances. It is neurotic, I know.

What is your experience? Do you look at the details of a watch as obsessively, or are satisfied with a great overall design?
 

Registered
Joined
7,579 Posts
I'm not remotely obsessive or pernickety. I appreciate details but I don't need therapy for it. Never saw the hands on a Rolex Oyster Perpetual being too short, either, and after a good look, I still don't. It does sound to me a bit like your self-diagnosed obsession - the language you use, grievance, annoyance, neurotic, dislike, bugging - is harming your enjoyment and appreciation.
 

Registered
Joined
505 Posts
I look at the watch as a whole and decide if I like it that way or not. Then I highlight the details which I like and appreciate the watch even more for it. Obviously if there is something that kills the overall design, I won't buy it - for example short and slim hands on let's say Sinn 556 is something I wouldn't get over with. But that's just mine subjetive taste.

I have a question based on your opening post: Aren't you just searching for an excuse in order to buy new watches, which might have less "imperfections" then those you already own? :)
 

Banned
Joined
83 Posts
I can relate. I always find small details in a watch or particular brand that bugs me. I try to find these details on watch before purchase to save me the trouble of selling it later. Maybe being obsessive over details and having a more defined preference can be a useful. I found it a useful deterrence against excessive watch buying. I make sure to do enough research on them til I find a detail that I can't get over. This continues until a "perfect" one comes along so to speak. I am trying my best to instead judge these time pieces by how they make me feel these days.
 

Premium Member
Joined
1,356 Posts
Well, one detail that gets me: the hour hand on some Tudor models, which I find extremely ugly. The watch is very nice, the dial looks gorgeous... and then you have that hour hand: too short, ending with a straight cut and with un ungainly square towards the end! See example below:

15351717
 

Registered
Joined
505 Posts
Everytime I see picture of Pelagos it reminds me of those toys when I was a kid called "Beyblade". The plastic dial/hands/indices is very similar to one model of "Beyblade" I owned. It looks like a plastic toy if I look only at the dial. :geek:
 

Premium Member
Joined
1,168 Posts
Absolutely. Watches are designed and made by humans though, and as such will never be 100% perfect. I love my SMP300 but the bezel is far from being the most user friendly - I love the skeleton hands, but they seem to be a really dividing feature. One of the submariners most distinctive features is the Mercedes hour hand though, and I just don鈥榯 like it. I鈥檇 learn to live with it though, given the opportunity!
 

Registered
Joined
2,606 Posts
A wise man said - the perfect girl, and watch, is not the one you have.
Happy hunting for the perfect watch (its easier than the girl) ;)
 

Registered
Joined
2,965 Posts
A wise man said - the perfect girl, and watch, is not the one you have.
Happy hunting for the perfect watch (its easier than the girl) ;)
Another wise man said, "If you can't be with the one you love, love the one you're with."
 

Registered
Joined
2,606 Posts
Another wise man said, "If you can't be with the one you love, love the one you're with."
That was an enlightened wise man, not a materialistic wise man :)
 

Registered
Joined
1,595 Posts
I can relate for sure, but my response is much different. For me to want to keep a watch I need to either be indifferent to or like various features of a watch. The most recent example of this is the TH Monza I traded in earlier in the week. I like the overall style of the watch. The combination of a titanium case and leather strap made it a very light and comfortable watch. I liked the whole retro automotive chronograph theme. But there were two items I just couldn't come to terms with. The dial had a shine to it that just struck me as super cheap. The pins (not sure the technical name) that the hands are affixed to looked cheap as well. After a while, when I' wear the watch, that's all I'd see. I started wearing it less---and really, only wore because I felt I should. I replaced with the Tudor in my sig and I'm much happier. It nails the details much better than the TH. I have only had it a couple of days so it remains to be seen if something negative about the watch will catch my eye. Before I purchased it, I was a little concerned about the thickness, but so far so good. I will likely sell the Seiko in my sig because it's much larger than anything else I own and no longer to my liking. As my knock-around watch, it's just too big. I need something smaller.
 

Registered
Joined
527 Posts
I had a Christopher Ward Trident C65 Automatic. I loved the case shape (the style and detail is really impressive) and how comfortably it wore. I really loved the blue color of the dial and bezel. And how great it looked and wore on leather and the bracelet. It fit great and I think it looked great.

But I was a little annoyed by the CW logo at 9 o'clock, questioned the black date wheel on a blue dial (better than white, but it would have been MUCH better color matched to the dial's blue) and didn't think the faux patina markers would "age" well if that look falls out of style. I even photoshopped a picture of the watch to fix all of those things.

Then the Tudor Black Bay 58 Navy Blue came out and basically fixed, improved upon or removed every one of those issues in a blue diver. I now own the blue BB58 and not the CW.
 

Registered
Joined
7,579 Posts
I had a Christopher Ward Trident C65 Automatic. I loved the case shape (the style and detail is really impressive) and how comfortably it wore. I really loved the blue color of the dial and bezel. And how great it looked and wore on leather and the bracelet. It fit great and I think it looked great.

But I was a little annoyed by the CW logo at 9 o'clock, questioned the black date wheel on a blue dial (better than white, but it would have been MUCH better color matched to the dial's blue) and didn't think the faux patina markers would "age" well if that look falls out of style. I even photoshopped a picture of the watch to fix all of those things.

Then the Tudor Black Bay 58 Navy Blue came out and basically fixed, improved upon or removed every one of those issues in a blue diver. I now own the blue BB58 and not the CW.
Cost of doing this was...?
 

Registered
Joined
1,600 Posts
This is why I steer clear of Kickstarter/most microbrands. Tudor, Rolex and Swatch group etc. watches employ actual designers. A lot of the newer brands are designed by enthusiasts or are homages to actual designs. To me, designs that have withstood the test of time are excellent designs. That's why lots of homages use mercedes hands and other cues from Rolex. Clearly microbrands are not my thing, but that's just me. This is just my opinion and not meant to dis something others enjoy.
 

Registered
Joined
117 Posts
I'm wearing my OP 114300 as I type this and I never thought not even one time that the hands were too stubby. On the other hand I've looked at my watch many times and have thought that this watch would be perfect if only those hands weren't so skinny.

It's interesting that we both have issues with the hands on the OP, but they're different issues.

I think we both can agree that the OP39 is perfectly proportioned.
 
1 - 20 of 45 Posts
Top