ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX
25 August 2012, 10:35 PM | #31 | |
Banned
Join Date: Aug 2011
Real Name: Mickey®
Location: Atlanta, GA
Watch: Swiss Made
Posts: 5,801
|
Quote:
|
|
25 August 2012, 11:14 PM | #32 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: US
Watch: Sub
Posts: 3,175
|
Quote:
__________________
侘 寂 -- wabi-sabi -- acceptance of transience and imperfection by finding beauty in that which is imperfect, impermanent, and incomplete Commissioner of WEIRD POLICE , Badge # ecsub44 |
|
25 August 2012, 11:27 PM | #33 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Sea Level
Watch: Varies
Posts: 6,877
|
I don't own any vintage watches but I really enjoyed reading this thread. Thanks guys!!!!
Love the photos in this forum!!
__________________
Instagram @z32turbo |
26 August 2012, 05:59 AM | #34 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Aug 2009
Real Name: Mark
Location: New Jersey
Watch: 6590 BB
Posts: 146
|
Thanks.
|
26 August 2012, 01:13 PM | #35 |
Member
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: USA
Watch: Ranger
Posts: 315
|
the Omega 30t2 movement won Swiss chronographic competitions with "only" 17 jewels. my Omegas with this movement keep time as well as any modern movement. likewise for my vintage Rolex watches. I'm not worried about total accuracy since my life won't change if I'm 10 seconds late. I have a 75 year old Bubble Back that keeps near chronographic time. I wonder if any of the modern movements will do the same 75 years from now.
vintage = quality, history, mystique, vastly better styling. modern = build as cheaply as possible, bling, image, ostentation for narcissists. I'm sorry if I have offended any modern Rolex owners. |
26 August 2012, 10:32 PM | #36 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Earth
Watch: Air-King 5500
Posts: 2,620
|
Quote:
|
|
29 August 2012, 12:31 AM | #37 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 14,298
|
Here are 2 reasons I prefer vintage:
|
29 August 2012, 01:29 AM | #38 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Boston
Posts: 3,177
|
Exactly because of those engineering advancements/improvements is why I prefer vintage Rolex. New Rolex will never develop character, charm, patina, etc. They're making them bulletproof, which is great for a new watch, but new watches in 30 years will look pretty much how they do today - the paint won't turn from black to brown, the lume won't turn an eggshell or yellowish color.
Of course modern Rolex are beautiful machines, and I'd be happy owning one, but much prefer vintage. After all, it is just a hunk of steel on your wrist and you really just look at the dial/hands - so that is where the charm comes to me.
__________________
"Oh, you give a f****' aspirin a headache, pal!" |
29 August 2012, 02:35 AM | #39 |
Banned
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: USA
Watch: of course
Posts: 8,429
|
Some great comments guys
|
29 August 2012, 06:14 AM | #40 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2009
Real Name: Jose
Location: Here
Watch: SEA-DWELLER
Posts: 2,232
|
|
29 August 2012, 06:19 AM | #41 | |
Banned
Join Date: Feb 2010
Real Name: Nick H.
Location: Amherst, NY
Watch: me flip
Posts: 1,901
|
Quote:
|
|
31 August 2012, 04:32 PM | #42 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Seal Beach, calif
Posts: 183
|
Hi I have a 1979 Gold GMT with a jubilee hidden clasp band.....black bezel and dial. I get many compliments,it seems to have smoother lines than my new Sub TT
|
31 August 2012, 04:42 PM | #43 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jul 2008
Real Name: Chris
Location: usa
Watch: Rolex
Posts: 6,962
|
Quote:
I'm not a vintage guy, but apprieciate it for the points mentioned by others here. I wonder how many more years have to go by before my 14060 (non M), seadweller, or 16610LV would be considered vintage. |
|
31 August 2012, 06:52 PM | #44 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Sweden
Watch: 1680
Posts: 188
|
Well according to me, the vintage subs look better then the new ones!
And if you going to look at it every day this matter as much or more then the specification of the caliber! You can see it as a very important functional requirement from engineering perspective! |
31 August 2012, 06:52 PM | #45 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Sweden
Watch: 1680
Posts: 188
|
Double post.......
|
31 August 2012, 07:17 PM | #46 |
Banned
Join Date: Apr 2011
Real Name: Mario
Location: USA / NZ
Watch: All sorts
Posts: 799
|
From a Mechanic's point of view..
the good old hand made craftsman ship is hard to beat, nothing against the new, I like it too, but the old shapes and simplicity and accuracy is unbetable. Time has proofed that these movements just keep going and going even without services. |
31 August 2012, 07:31 PM | #47 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Hong Kong
Watch: All of them
Posts: 2,789
|
My 1984 GMT has kept better time than any of my modern Rolex that I have owned. So they must have done something right.
And as you see Rolex marketing over the decades has changed. It used to be outdoors, exploring, rugged...... Now it's sipping wine watching opera, equestrian or tennis. Different market... It's purely emotional.....lot logical
__________________
I used to be indecisive, now I'm not sure |
31 August 2012, 08:00 PM | #48 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Here and there
Posts: 12,485
|
i like the old ones the best, have more character, but i also take the liberty to apply some modern day engineering. vintage meets modern, or vice versa. best of both worlds.
__________________
Fine Quality is Long Remembered After the Pain of Spending Money is Forgotten |
31 August 2012, 11:00 PM | #49 |
Banned
Join Date: May 2008
Location: USA
Posts: 167
|
Great question, not offended at all.
I think it boils down to aesthetics and history and character for most of us. Most vintage Rolex lovers love the tool watch era in general because the watches were expensive but actually made for a professional purpose back then. Today they are wonderful jewelry. It's a different purpose they're made for, and Rolex had to adapt to survive in the quartz and now cell phone era. They are luxury items today as well as being jewelry. From an engineering standpoint consider this: although sapphire crystals confer superior scratch and water resistance...they are actually more susceptible to catastrophic failure (breaking) than the old acrylic (plastic) crystals. Is this REALLY an improvement? It is more for aesthetic reasons I think today, but I submit the 70s era Subs and Sea Dwellers had plenty of water resistance for actual real-world use for both recreational and professional divers. The later sapphire crystals scratched less, (which yes, some divers had asked for to prevent their $200 dive watches from getting too beat up looking !) but now your "tool watch" might have its crystal shatter if dropped on the tile floor of your bathroom. But I digress. I think the reason most of us really love them today is their (perceived) soul and character. They just look cool. |
1 September 2012, 12:52 AM | #50 |
Banned
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Ann Arbor MI
Watch: Rolex Ref 16600
Posts: 3,908
|
I can understand why you would do that. However, I really wish that Rolex had continued to use the Oyster pattern on these new clasps.
|
1 September 2012, 02:08 AM | #51 |
Member
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Manchester, MA
Watch: Datejust 16013
Posts: 25
|
I couldn't agree more. Most quartz watches are more accurate, efficient, and require almost no maintenance save for a cheap battery change every 3-5 years. Mechanical watch technology is pretty much obsolete from a purely functional and efficiency standpoint. Intricately crafted automatic timepieces are about artistry, craftsmanship, and tradition. My 32 year old Datejust keeps excellent time and looks like new and I always make a point to tell people who compliment my watch that it is that old. They seem to appreciate it even more and it is a real testiment to it's quality. I wear mechanical watches and vintage watches for the same reason I don't have vinyl siding on my house. There are definately more efficient options but to me nothing compares to quality workmanship.
|
10 September 2012, 12:14 AM | #52 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Earth
Watch: Air-King 5500
Posts: 2,620
|
Rolex or not, vintage watches are just so much cooler than their modern counterparts. You can't just walk into an ad and buy a piece of history, you have to hunt for it.
|
10 September 2012, 01:17 AM | #53 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Boston
Posts: 3,177
|
__________________
"Oh, you give a f****' aspirin a headache, pal!" |
10 September 2012, 01:58 AM | #54 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2012
Real Name: Henry
Location: NM, USA
Watch: 6694; 6424
Posts: 115
|
I just joined this forum specifically because I like vintage. I shave with straight razors made many decades before I was born, some of which I restored and honed myself. Why? Soul, history, energy.
All my views on this have been expressed by previous posters, but I want history, memories, and to have things that remind me of the goals and ideals I had when I was young. |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|
*Banners
Of The Month*
This space is provided to horological resources.