WatchUSeek Watch Forums banner
21 - 40 of 45 Posts

Registered
Joined
3,798 Posts
"Details" and "watch" aren't separate entities. If I "like" the watch but can't stand the ends, then I don't like the watch.

There's so many watches to choose from (even within my admittedly extremely restrictive preferences), that you don't need to settle for something in which details as important as hands don't tickle your fancy.
 

Registered
Joined
206 Posts
Discussion Starter · #22 ·
Absolutely
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.
That is funny, I think their width is spot on. But yes, I agree, it is overall perfectly proportioned. A timeless classic for a reason.
 

Registered
Joined
1,224 Posts
"Details" and "watch" aren't separate entities. If I "like" the watch but can't stand the ends, then I don't like the watch.

There's so many watches to choose from (even within my admittedly extremely restrictive preferences), that you don't need to settle for something in which details as important as hands don't tickle your fancy.
Agreed. I see what the OP is trying to say too - that sometimes we'll like a watch but there are some minor nitpickings that prevent it from being 100%. That's fair.

But back to your point, yes - watches are such small, often unnoticed accessories that the details ARE the watch for many. There are rabid enthusiasts that will rave over part of a Rolex dial using red vs. gilt vs. white printing. A co-branded "Tiffany dial" means a world of difference, etc, etc.
 

Registered
Joined
640 Posts
So far I haven't run into that issue, but I bought a watch with a "negative display" and I found that I don't care for it because it's almost impossible to see in dim light without activating the watch's own light, and that's not good, imo.
 

Registered
Joined
598 Posts
The whole is the sum of it's parts.....
I totally agree with this but I also understand OP's point. I find that a date window @ 3:00 ruins a lot of watches for me. Putting it at 6:00 is so much more symmetrical that is seems like THE most obvious thing ever.

All that said, I still wear my Sumo.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Registered
Joined
206 Posts
Discussion Starter · #27 ·
"Details" and "watch" aren't separate entities. If I "like" the watch but can't stand the ends, then I don't like the watch.

There's so many watches to choose from (even within my admittedly extremely restrictive preferences), that you don't need to settle for something in which details as important as hands don't tickle your fancy.
Now this a disagree with. Sure, there is a ridiculous abundance of choice, but I have yet to find a perfect watch. Many come close, sure, but mine hit that mark so far.
 

Registered
Joined
646 Posts
What's funny is that I've found that a lot of what I think might be a deal breaker initially (helium escape valve on Omegas, cyclops on Rolexes) I end up not noticing after time goes by. But then new details that I never noticed pop out that I can't unsee.

Anything that I look at often and over a long time I'm going to nitpick. It's just sort of the way that I am. Watches are no different. There's no watch that I won't have one or two things I'd change on it.
 

Registered
Joined
1,758 Posts
Well it gets really complicated when you are a one-watch guy like me and looking for ultimate perfection:
For me snowflake, Mercedes and skeleton hands are as hideous as helium valves and Tudor blue, I don鈥榯 need to know on the dial that a watch is 鈥瀞uperlative鈥 and don鈥榯 like the rehaut to become brand advertising, why does a date window have to spoil perfect numeral symmetry, why was the California dial invented, and chronos are too busy in the first place. Anything beyond 40mm is ridiculous on my wrist, why is the AT hour hand so short and cut off, do Nomas want to brag having the longest lugs on the planet, who started with PCLs and why does the 36mm OP need double indices. And so on...
Still, I actually found the perfect watch, well almost: why does the Trilogy Seamaster not have shorter and lyre lugs and why isn鈥榯 the dial really black (I know the reasons but despite the historic reasons those two changes would make it absolutely perfect for me - I am allowed to dream, right?)
 

Registered
Joined
3,180 Posts
But the hands, to my eyes, are stubby fingers which were cut short of where they should have ended.
The minute hand in particular looks too short, I agree. Never noticed it before. I know there were complaints when Rolex apparently used the same hand set from the 36mm Explorer on the initial 39mm version. Perhaps Rolex did the same with the OP? Regardless, I prefer a minute hand that hits the marks, and this one doesn't. Would I still wear the watch if given the chance? Better believe it.
 

Registered
Joined
25 Posts
I get OCD a lot to be honest with you. Some things I learn to live with, some get under the skin and the watch goes on selling block. Misaligned bezels and indices are huge for me. There are some designs I don't like for sure but I am yet to buy a watch with design details I don't like. I study details very carefully. I have developed a point system to check all things to make sure I am happy. There are some watches that are hugely popular I will never wear because of small design details or lack of them. I don't like when there is too much space on the dial. While some call a dial clean, I just feel a huge vacuum in there. haha. Short minute or second hand would drive me crazy too. Previous gen El primero sub dials. Can't handle them.

When you get everything right and happy though it's a very nice feeling. Just look at your watch every day and enjoy the perceived perfection :)
 

Registered
Joined
7,579 Posts
The minute hand in particular looks too short, I agree. Never noticed it before. I know there were complaints when Rolex apparently used the same hand set from the 36mm Explorer on the initial 39mm version. Perhaps Rolex did the same with the OP? Regardless, I prefer a minute hand that hits the marks, and this one doesn't. Would I still wear the watch if given the chance? Better believe it.
They didn't - the lume was different. As for the OP39.... it's an opinion - not shared by everyone - that the hands are too short, and it's obviously not the case that they used the hands from the earlier OP36. The hands of both reach the outer edges of the markers.
 

Registered
Joined
206 Posts
Discussion Starter · #35 ·
Well it gets really complicated when you are a one-watch guy like me and looking for ultimate perfection:
For me snowflake, Mercedes and skeleton hands are as hideous as helium valves and Tudor blue, I don't need to know on the dial that a watch is 鈥瀞uperlative" and don't like the rehaut to become brand advertising, why does a date window have to spoil perfect numeral symmetry, why was the California dial invented, and chronos are too busy in the first place. Anything beyond 40mm is ridiculous on my wrist, why is the AT hour hand so short and cut off, do Nomas want to brag having the longest lugs on the planet, who started with PCLs and why does the 36mm OP need double indices. And so on...
Still, I actually found the perfect watch, well almost: why does the Trilogy Seamaster not have shorter and lyre lugs and why isn't the dial really black (I know the reasons but despite the historic reasons those two changes would make it absolutely perfect for me - I am allowed to dream, right?)
You make me sound positively relaxed - I only agree with about 70% of these pet peeves! But I absolutely get the Trilogy Seamaster, that is a beautiful watch. And both size and bezel are better than on the SM300. So good for you!
 

Registered
Joined
1,758 Posts
Thank you, yes, the Trilogy LE is lovely. I didn鈥榯 like it at all at first but that changed completely when I tried it on. I knew then that this was the one.

And to make you feel even better: I didn鈥榯 even mention in my first post that other complete no-goes include Roman numerals, jubilee bracelets, two-tone, square or rectangular cases, date windows at 4:30, date loupes etc....
 

Registered
Joined
982 Posts
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).
I don't see a problem here, as long as it's not financially killing you - you seem to be able to resolve each particular situation just fine.
 

Registered
Joined
493 Posts
Same here. I鈥檝e been in the hobby around 15 years and, at this stage, even the smallest thing can ruin a watch for me. Sometimes it鈥檚 a design balance thing, sometimes it鈥檚 a font, hands are a big thing, as is the execution of the date. It鈥檚 all good though鈥鈥檇 end up with waaaay too many watches otherwise!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Registered
Breitling SO Pro, M1, Blackbird, Cockpit big date, Omega SMP Chrono LE, Omega 2254, Hamilton, etc
Joined
340 Posts
I have this problem too. There are watches I've wanted for a long time, and then one day I see a web pic while browsing, and see something I never noticed before. Like radial flip of the numbers on chronograph sub-dials, for eg. Weird, huh?
 
21 - 40 of 45 Posts
Top