WatchUSeek Watch Forums banner

1 - 20 of 26 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2 Posts
Discussion Starter #1 (Edited)
Hi guys,

I have to make a decision real soon here. I am a 29 year old watch noob, kind of a sporty guy (never wears suits etc mostly t-shirt and jeans), and I am deciding between two watches and would like to hear peoples input on anything like looks, mechanics, heritage, resale value, easy to sell, popularity or whatever! Or just tell me which one to get!

The two options are the Hublot Luna Rosa (Luxury Watches in Stockholml) vs the IWC Aquatimer Jacques Costeau (http://watch-happening.blogspot.com/2010/06/new-watch-iwc-aquatimer-chronograph.html#!/2010/06/new-watch-iwc-aquatimer-chronograph.html).

Which one should I get if price is secondary?! Help appreciated!

Jonathan
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
136 Posts
Just from a pure looks standpoint, I'd go with the IWC all day long. Personally I'm just not into that "industrial" look that a lot of high end watches are going for.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,199 Posts
IWC.
It will also wear better even if the H has more scratch resistance...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,323 Posts
Between the two, definitely the IWC. However if price is secondary then lots of options are available... such as the IWC Deep Two.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
626 Posts
I am sure the IWC movement is a 7750, a very common movement that can be found in watches costing 1/4 of this watch. I'd think the Hublot movement is not an in-house movement. Possibly a different layout of the 7750 layout. I'm sure you can find that out.

The design of the watch itself is clearly more outstanding on the Hublot. I'd also much rather call that a design classic based on its design roots than the IWC. Many of the Hublots are very garish and brash. This one is extraordinary but not garish, except for the printing Luna Rossa on the dial.

The case work is also clearly more elaborate on the Hublot. But the PVD coating might wear over time. They usually do. You then would have to take the coating off completely and either give it a re-polish or re-coat it. That will run around $800-1000.

IWC clearly has the better reputation compared to Hublot. If that's important, go with the IWC. If you actually want to use it for diving or are just a lume freak (it has awesome lume) get the IWC. If you want the more special watch, get the Hublot.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2 Posts
Discussion Starter #9 (Edited)
Thanks so much guys, even more advice would be appreciated. A bit surprised I must admit at how everyone is leaning towards the IWC so far, did not expect things to as onesided as they have been so far to be honest. I mean, does the Hublot have such a bad reputation compared to the IWC?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,838 Posts
Based on looks and personal preference I'd go with the aquatimer. Many see the aquatimer as the lower end IWC because of the high price tag and ETA movement. Others see HuBlot as a trumped up fashion watch with a massive price tag. In the end IWC is still a respected watchmaker with a ton of history to boot, in my opinion HuBlot has nothing on IWC.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
40 Posts
I already have the Cousteau so I'd go for the hublot....but that's just me...ymmv


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,210 Posts
Ive owned a Big Bang and a IWC Aquatimer chrono - the hublot was much nicer in hand IMO, it was more expensive and harder to move than the IWC. IWC has more history, although that is a newer design for IWC. If you would like to keep the watch, and you like the look of the Hublot you can't go wrong. However if your looking for an investiment then go for the IWC, there are a lot of IWC lovers out there, myself included.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Watchalex

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,767 Posts
IWC all the way.

To me, it's a question between a classy brand and a rather over the top and vulgar one.

Bob
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,623 Posts
Jonathan,

First off, its your watch. Get the one that makes you smile when you look at it.

What you may be hearing here is both an aesthetic preference and a horological brand preference for IWC. Both chronographs that you are considering use simalar movements based on a ETA 7750 calibre. IWC is an old established Swiss watch brand now part of Richemont. Hublot is a relatively new Swiss company now owned by LVMH. Hublot is not favored by many because it is new, and they are expensive for what you get horologically. The company was founded in the 1980s and is now run by famous watch executive JC Biver who relaunched Blancpain. They are a very fashion focused brand using combinations of unusual case materials. That being said, some folks love them. IWC makes a range of refined "mens watches" using both in-house and commodity movements (like the ETA in the one that you are considering). They refine the commodity movements and regulate the watches that they sell very well, so don't let this put you off. The ETA is a robust, workhouse that has been around since the mid-1970s.

Some other "sporty" chronographs in a similar price range to these two ($7-$12k) to consider that might be considered finer watches by watch nuts are:
  • Blancpain Leman Flyback Chonograph & Big Date (Swatch Group)
  • Glashutte Original Sport Evolution Chronograph (Swatch Group)
  • Jaeger-LeCoultre Master Compressor Chronograph 2 (Richemont)
  • Omega Seamaster Planet Ocean Chronograph 9300 (Swatch Group)
  • Rolex Daytona Cosmograph
  • Zenith El Primero Stratos Flyback (LVMH)
These watches may or may not be aesthetically to your liking, but all have in-house chronograph movements, are made by Swiss or German brands that have excellent reputations and are priced in the range of watches that you are considering. The GO does not use an integrated chronograph movement but a chronograph module atop of a GO in-house caliber. All of the rest use excellent integrated, in-house chronograph movements.

But, honestly, you should get the watch that you like. Between the two that you are considering, I prefer the IWC; but what I think doesn't really matter when it's your watch.

Good Luck,

Bob

Thanks so much guys, even more advice would be appreciated. A bit surprised I must admit at how everyone is leaning towards the IWC so far, did not expect things to as onesided as they have been so far to be honest. I mean, does the Hublot have such a bad reputation compared to the IWC?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,396 Posts
Thanks so much guys, even more advice would be appreciated. A bit surprised I must admit at how everyone is leaning towards the IWC so far, did not expect things to as onesided as they have been so far to be honest. I mean, does the Hublot have such a bad reputation compared to the IWC?
You are asking this question in a watch forum so most of the people here are going to pick IWC since it has a more respected name amongst collectors ;-)

Hublot puts relatively simple watch movements into their models. Relatively meaning given their very high price point - almost every other watchmaker uses an in-house movement if they're charging $10k+ for a watch. Combined with their gaudy watch designs - your choice is one of the few big bangs not slathered in gold - it becomes easy to group Hublot into the high end fashion/jewelry watch segment with the likes of Van Cleef & Arpels or Harry Winston.

Case in point....Hublot is the ONLY brand I know of that took a look at the Rolex Cosmograph Daytona "Leopard" (our "ugliest watch ever" frontrunner) and said "Hey let's make a homage of that!!!"
bigbangleopard.jpg
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
259 Posts
You should get what you like. You will be wearing it.
for me its not even the question, IWC on my wrist.

Sent from my T-Mobile G2 using Tapatalk
 
1 - 20 of 26 Posts
Top