AP is disappointing in this respect...

[jschmidtdmd]

^ I'll second these comments.

One of my AP's went bad sitting in the safe.

I don't wear mechanical watches for athletics, I don't care if they are RM, AP, Rolex, etc. In my opinion they are ALL cumbersome for these activities, and what's the point really?

The most activity my watches see are the pool and beach.

JPS

[Defiancekofb]

Personally I don't understand this thread. You obviously are not buying into the reliability aspects or lack there of, using an AP for sporting situations. I have played golf, tennis, jogged, swim with my Rolexes, and I plan on doing it with my 15400 as well. Personally I use my watches to wear them, if something happens down the line, then I deal with it. When we buy watches in this price range, you can't really complain if it breaks down. You deal with it. It's like those people that buy or lease a Ferrari just to drive it 30 MPH down the highway on the weekends only. Buy what you like, wear what you like and if the problems present itself down the road, deal with it. If you can afford to buy an RM, Patek, AP, you can afford to repair it if it breaks down.

My thoughts exactly. All Mechanical watches will eventually have issues, if you want to avoid it. Get a digital or Quartz watch.

[improviz]

Originally Posted by brmeyers

I know that about quartz... Not disagreeing with you, simply saying I would never wear a quartz. That is why I said what I did and why I pointed out Serena was wearing a quartz for exactly the reasons you stated. Personally, I am not impressed with a quartz being durable compared to an automatic because of how it is made and it being battery operated.

Not to mention, I don't want an electrical impulse over my heart meridian.. But that is another topic for another day and a reason why I do not wear battery powered watches.

Yes, I have had others suggest the Diver, and I am also going to check out the Jarno Trulli and Qatar. All great suggestions. Thanks
p.s. perhaps you are right about naming this thread, it could have been phrased in a more positive light

Just for the record, I wasn't trying to steer you towards a quartz, just pointing out that their reliability and robustness is far, far superior to the little mechanical machines we covet.

Good luck with whatever you end up getting, enjoy!

[anothernewphone]

Originally Posted by HL65

Better yet here you go: https://www.audemarspiguet.com/en/explore/golf

Great info - these aren't super-delicate, dainty pieces!

It's also funny that they haven't updated Danny Willett's accomplishments recently.

[conkers]

I have probably played 100 plus rounds of golf wearing ROOs - never had an issue. One of my older ROOs has seen more action than Ron Jeremy so I think they are pretty resilient, leaving aside the scratching issue.

I think AP have big plans for the ROO over the next 1-2 years, so I think there will be some further options. I can't be more specific but I had breakfast with the CEO a few weeks back, and I am very excited for the future of AP.

I play golf with all my RMs, including my tourbillon and never had a problem. However I would never take any valuable watch into water irrespective of any water proof rating.

[brmeyers]

Hey I don't see why more people wouldn't want to wear a watch with athletics?
I like to wear my watches everywhere... Having an automatic luxury watch that can handle anything,
has been something very appealing to me. One watch to rule them all (all conditions).

Perhaps I am a strange breed wanting to do so, so be it...

Personally, I don't think this thread is pointless for myself and others seeking a durable watch to be able to do all these things.
Actually I have gleaned a lot of valuable and helpful info

[brmeyers]

Originally Posted by conkers

I have probably played 100 plus rounds of golf wearing ROOs - never had an issue. One of my older ROOs has seen more action than Ron Jeremy so I think they are pretty resilient, leaving aside the scratching issue.

I think AP have big plans for the ROO over the next 1-2 years, so I think there will be some further options. I can't be more specific but I had breakfast with the CEO a few weeks back, and I am very excited for the future of AP.

I play golf with all my RMs, including my tourbillon and never had a problem. However I would never take any valuable watch into water irrespective of any water proof rating.

Thanks Roger, great info from someone who is speaking from experience

[anothernewphone]

Originally Posted by brmeyers

Hey I don't see why more people wouldn't want to wear a watch with athletics?

I don't get it either! I never want to be without a nice watch. I'll never wear a Casio, and I'll never go without a watch. Finding something to fit all of your needs is not crazy!

[willski]

Originally Posted by conkers

I have probably played 100 plus rounds of golf wearing ROOs - never had an issue. One of my older ROOs has seen more action than Ron Jeremy so I think they are pretty resilient, leaving aside the scratching issue.



I think AP have big plans for the ROO over the next 1-2 years, so I think there will be some further options. I can't be more specific but I had breakfast with the CEO a few weeks back, and I am very excited for the future of AP.



I play golf with all my RMs, including my tourbillon and never had a problem. However I would never take any valuable watch into water irrespective of any water proof rating.

Ooh I'm curious and hopeful to see what new movement they bring out!




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[masyv6]

Originally Posted by anothernewphone

Just because they work for "headquarters" doesn't make them an expert, nor the authority. I've had "experts" tell me to make sure my Daytona's pushers stay screwed down, it's not safe to keep them open when washing your hands, etc. Obviously, that's very false.

"I wouldn't swim with a Planet Ocean on, the pressure you generate when your wrist hits the water isn't safe for the watch." This one is a classic.

"You shouldn't wear your watch in the shower, the steam is bad for the seals." I could go on and on.

That Planet Ocean advice is beyond silly.

[sechsgang]

Honestly I feel your pain as far as not having many ceramic or alternatively resistant material on the sub 44 watches. I sold my 44 ceramic with grey dial because it was too big and basically gave up on the sport models after. I still like the diver, but I know that thing will end up marked up like my old ROO did. Some are life but man does it bother me more on these sharp bezels than different styles from other companies. Qatar would be cool though...

[Koi6715]

Irrespective of the materials is it not more that the movement is not designed for aggressive arm movements such as golf/ tennis
Anyway I'm with most get out there and wear your watch I swim with mine while on holiday
But no gym and don't play golf in mine,
THe Ginza would be great for you
Forged carbon ceramic and 42mm

[DECR]

A more resistant ROO that "oficially" withstands a golf or tennis swing seems like a good idea to me. More so now that AP sponsors tennis and golf players.

[anothernewphone]

Originally Posted by masyv6

That Planet Ocean advice is beyond silly.

That one is direct from the watchmaker at the Omega boutique! A real "smile and nod" moment.

[GB-man]

Ceramic diver should meet your needs fine.

I share your desire for more ceramics in the 42mm range. I also would like AP to treat the screws in the ceramic bezels so that they are a darker shade. This would better replicate the subtly beauty of WG on SS, as in the original RO. I was not fond of the look when I had my 15707ce.

[masyv6]

Originally Posted by anothernewphone

That one is direct from the watchmaker at the Omega boutique! A real "smile and nod" moment.

If by "smile and nod", you mean "smile and nod and immediately turn on your heels and laugh your way out of the boutique" then I agree

[derekstlmo]

I wear my watches playing tennis, boating offshore fishing, I like wearing nice watches not gshocks

[improviz]

Originally Posted by derekstlmo

I wear my watches playing tennis, boating offshore fishing, I like wearing nice watches not gshocks

Wow. Post some pics of those bad boys and let's see how they hold up to it!

[Amiricanmade]

Originally Posted by brmeyers

Hey everyone,

I really want or I should say "wanted" to get an AP sports watch,
but doing research they really do not make many or any durable
and scratch resistant watches anymore especially in 42 or smaller (not including discontinued models).
They discontinued the ceramic divers, discontinued forged carbon and currently
all you can get is steel or rose gold in the 42 or less size (according to guy at the AP boutique).

the forged carbon is in no way shape or form durable, it's probably the least durable watch as you can't polish out scratches and it easily cracks.

[masterserg]

Originally Posted by Amiricanmade

the forged carbon is in no way shape or form durable, it's probably the least durable watch as you can't polish out scratches and it easily cracks.

Speaking from personal experience?

[beachbum]

Originally Posted by masterserg

Speaking from personal experience?

X2! Easily cracks??? If this were the case why would AP be using FC in new higher end pieces? Just curious.

[brmeyers]

Originally Posted by derekstlmo

I wear my watches playing tennis, boating offshore fishing, I like wearing nice watches not gshocks

I 100% agree!
I think we are in the minority here, but it's nice to see others who also want
a top end (non-quartz) watch for ALL occasions

[improviz]

Well, there's also the reality of the situation, which is why most of us don't, namely:

1. Potential damage to case: generally speaking, people (including me) buy jewelry because it looks nice, and therefore, it makes sense to keep it looking nice; therefore, keeping it away from activities which would not subject a finely finished piece of jewelry to potential dings/scratches/crystal breakage seems to me to be a lot more sensible than shelling out thousands on something and then banging it up and ruining its appearance;

2. Potential damage to movement: it is clearly a fact, easily researched in a few minutes on the www, that mechanical movements are far more susceptable to damage from shock than quartz movements. Shock protection can help alleviate it, but certainly doesn't eliminate it as there's a limit to how much effective shock protection you can design into a one-inch square case, so why risk thousands of dollars of damage to a watch for no good reason? It's like taking a Ferrari off-roading: you can do it, but why would you? You can let kids carve their names into a Steinway and do their school projects on it, but why would you? Similarly, why take a finely finished top tier luxury watch and beat the crap out of it? To look good when 99% of people out there don't notice watches anyway? No thanks and no need.

[Koi6715]

Originally Posted by Amiricanmade

the forged carbon is in no way shape or form durable, it's probably the least durable watch as you can't polish out scratches and it easily cracks.

Are you a owner of a Forged Carbon AP??

As this bull s**t pops up now again

4 yrs my forged carbon if I put a brand new strap and a sticker on the back I could sell as brand new, not a mark on it

And like mentioned before AP using the Forged carbon on top end watches
The new Schumi !!!!

[Islatate]

Originally Posted by Koi6715

Are you a owner of a Forged Carbon AP??

As this bull s**t pops up now again

4 yrs my forged carbon if I put a brand new strap and a sticker on the back I could sell as brand new, not a mark on it

And like mentioned before AP using the Forged carbon on top end watches
The new Schumi !!!!

My exact thought!

I've owned the FC Diver and FC Bumblebee in the past, and currently own the FC Jarno Trulli and CE Diver. I have never had an issue with chipping/cracking, and I don't even baby my time pieces. I don't wear my watches to play tennis or when I go downhill skiing just because I feel like I can perform better in sports when I don't have anything on my wrist to "weigh me down".

There isn't a bigger fan out there of AP's FC and CE watches. I love their durability and very high cool factor.

[masterserg]

Originally Posted by Koi6715

Are you a owner of a Forged Carbon AP??

As this bull s**t pops up now again

4 yrs my forged carbon if I put a brand new strap and a sticker on the back I could sell as brand new, not a mark on it

And like mentioned before AP using the Forged carbon on top end watches
The new Schumi !!!!

Originally Posted by Islatate

My exact thought!

I've owned the FC Diver and FC Bumblebee, and I currently own the FC Jarno Trulli and CE Diver, and I have never had an issue with chipping and

Same with my FC 44. Looks brand new.

It really irritates me when people spits out uninformed opinions as facts.

[brmeyers]

Originally Posted by improviz

Well, there's also the reality of the situation, which is why most of us don't, namely:

1. Potential damage to case: generally speaking, people (including me) buy jewelry because it looks nice, and therefore, it makes sense to keep it looking nice; therefore, keeping it away from activities which would not subject a finely finished piece of jewelry to potential dings/scratches/crystal breakage seems to me to be a lot more sensible than shelling out thousands on something and then banging it up and ruining its appearance;

2. Potential damage to movement: it is clearly a fact, easily researched in a few minutes on the www, that mechanical movements are far more susceptable to damage from shock than quartz movements. Shock protection can help alleviate it, but certainly doesn't eliminate it as there's a limit to how much effective shock protection you can design into a one-inch square case, so why risk thousands of dollars of damage to a watch for no good reason? It's like taking a Ferrari off-roading: you can do it, but why would you? You can let kids carve their names into a Steinway and do their school projects on it, but why would you? Similarly, why take a finely finished top tier luxury watch and beat the crap out of it? To look good when 99% of people out there don't notice watches anyway? No thanks and no need.

Well maybe that's your reality, which is ok.
But there are people like myself that want to enjoy nice watches in all occasions, so get over it.
And I am not looking for a finely finished piece of jewelry here, the sports watch I am looking at
are more robust than precious PM watches, which OF COURSE I would not take to sports.

I drive my 911 hard because it is meant to be driven hard.
I understand some people buy a 911 and hardly ever really push it to the limit.
Fine, but these cars are meant to be driven hard.
Your ferarri analogy doesn't hold up here because I am not taking the watch into the wilderness, or playing mud football with it.
Ferraris are meant to be driven hard and can handle it. The sports I am playing are more analogous to driving hard than offroading.
But even so, I would want a luxurious SUV for off-roading versus a beater suv. Some luxury SUVs like the Mercedes G-class can handle off-roading superbly.

Certain automatic watches are also designed to handle being pushed to the limits.
I would not wear my Patek to the tennis courts, but I am searching for a watch that can handle these different sports I enjoy.

And mind you, I am not beating up my watch at the gym or tennis or golf.
It's mainly just g-forces, not so much direct blows.

And your comment about 99% of the people not noticing watches applies to any circumstance.
I wear nice watches because I enjoy them, it's not just about showing off and hoping others will see it.
Although I have met many people with complimenting their watch and talking about it with them. So maybe I am the 1%,
but I am always looking at peoples wrists.

I would never wear a quartz watch for many reasons, one of which is they give off unhealthy electrical impulses on key meridians and the other is.. well, they are quartz.
I am not sure why you keep trying to convince me quartz watches are more durable then automatics for the most part. I know that and have known that.
But I think I have made it abundantly clear that I do not want a quartz watch for any situation.

[improviz]

Originally Posted by brmeyers

Well maybe that's your reality, which is ok.
But there are people like myself that what to enjoy nice watches in all occasions, so get over it.

There you go with the attitude again. To paraphrase you, this is a forum for expressing opinions, we are not here to pat each other on the back, I'm just expressing an opinion and keeping it real. So, if you don't like it, I suggest you stop expressing opinions about other people's opinions and if that doesn't work, do what you suggested above.

Originally Posted by brmeyers

And I am not looking for a finely finished piece of jewelry here, the sports watch I am looking at
are more robust than precious PM watches, which OF COURSE I would not take to sports.

Remember that if you shatter a crystal or bang it up and foot the repair bill.

Originally Posted by brmeyers

I drive my 911 hard because it is meant to be driven hard.
I understand some people buy a 911 and hardly ever really push it to the limit.
Fine, but these cars are meant to be driven hard.
Your ferarri analogy doesn't hold up here because I am not taking the watch into the wilderness, or playing mud football with it.
Ferraris are meant to be driven hard and can handle it. The sports I am playing are more analogous to driving hard than offroading.

No, because the analogy was about physical damage to the watch. So unless the sports you are playing are such that it's physically impossible for the watch to be damaged in any way, the analogy is accurate, and I doubt you've fretted this much over shuffleboard.

Originally Posted by brmeyers

But even so, I would want a luxurious SUV for off-roading versus a beater suv. Some luxury SUVs like the Mercedes G-class can handle off-roading superbly.

Yes, but they suck on-road, it rides like a pogo stick...but I digress.

Originally Posted by brmeyers

Certain automatic watches are also designed to handle being pushed to the limits.
I would not wear my Patek to the tennis courts, but I am searching for a watch that can handle these different sports I enjoy.

And my input is that mechanicals, by their very nature, do NOT handle shocks well. If you think otherwise, you are arguing against reality. A shock protection mechanism does not eliminate the underlying delicate nature of the movement itself. Yes, it's better than nothing. No, it's not going to be nearly as impervious to shock as a G-Shock or something similar, and what bugs me is you seem to think this comes from poor design rather than the intrinsically fragile nature of the movements themselves.

Originally Posted by brmeyers

And mind you, I am not beating up my watch at the gym or tennis or golf.
It's mainly just g-forces, not so much direct blows.

Well, plenty of people play with them and don't ruin them, and in the time we've spent arguing about it you could've gotten one and tried it out by now...sheesh.

Originally Posted by brmeyers

And your comment about 99% of the people not noticing watches applies to any circumstance.
I wear nice watches because I enjoy them, it's not just about showing off and hoping others will see it.
Although I have met many people with complimenting their watch and talking about it with them. So maybe I am the 1%,
but I am always looking at peoples wrists.

Of course you are in that 1%, along with everyone else here. More common is a guy asking me one time if my TT Sub was a Gucci, and that was one of the handful of times any non-WIS has ever noticed one.

Originally Posted by brmeyers

I would never wear a quartz watch for many reasons, one of which is they give off unhealthy electrical impulses on key meridians and the other is.. well, they are quartz.

The electrical impulses emitted by a quartz are completely insignificant compared to the computer/tablet/phone you use to compose these posts and in all likelihood carry around with you and converse on. So if you're worried about electrical signals, you're exposed to an infinitely higher dose from these gizmos over the course of a day than a quartz watch would subject you to over a lifetime.

Originally Posted by brmeyers

I am not sure why you keep trying to convince me quartz watches are more durable then automatics for the most part. I know that and have known that.
But I think I have made it abundantly clear that I do not want a quartz watch for any situation.

I could care less if you want a quartz watch, I don't either and this has nothing to do with trying to downsell you to a quartz watch, that is most definitely not my intent. What's annoying me is that you keep acting as though an automatic movement can be as shock-resistant as a quartz. If you know it can't, then what are you complaining about, and why are you complaining that people like to protect their nice watches from harm? Mechanicals are more fragile, so get over it as you put it.

[brmeyers]

^^ My attitude was responding to your attitude, read your penultimate post...
I let the issue go with you, but YOU brought all this up again...

And remember, as the OP of this thread, where is your helpful advice to give me suggestions about what I am looking for?

I am not responding to you anymore... It's pointless.

You are on my ignore list, so keep in mind I cannot see your posts anymore.

[derekstlmo]

100% agree with you brmeyers I'm not worrying about some rocks chips on my bumper so I leave my car in the garage or my nice luggage getting scuffed up I buy these items to use