The things that kill a watch for you

[seffrican]

We all have our own particular tastes, so when we see a watch pictured here on the forum or elsewhere, the way we react to different elements is naturally varied. There are elements we like, elements we don't like but can live with if there's enough we like about the rest of the watch, and then there are things that completely kill the watch for us no matter how much we like the rest of it.

So, when you look at a watch (or a bracelet or strap, for that matter), what are the things that you simply cannot live with?

I'll kick off with one of mine: chrono pushers that stick out much further than the crown. They look ugly to my eye, and they make no mechanical sense, since no reasonable chrono, whether mechanical or quartz, needs the pushers to have 5mm of travel to activate.

It would also be interesting to hear what people feel strong dislike for, but can nevertheless *just* live with under certain circumstances. (That would be red seconds hands on otherwise monochrome watches for me.)

[Papa Hotel]

Every bit as bad as massive chrono pushers are the dinky little ones. Had a few Seiko chronos with this style of pusher before I worked out I couldn't live with them.

I was also going to say I cannot buy a diver if there is no bracelet available for it but I'm happily wearing my Steinhart bronze right now without a bracelet so I guess it only holds true for SS watches.

Watches with an odd strap/bracelet fitment as favoured by Swatch and Oris. If I can't stick any old strap I want on then I'm not buying it.

This thread would be better renamed "Pointless and inconsequential things that destroy a watch for you when a normal person wouldn't care."

[kaiserphoenix]

Ridiculous size like 46mm over

[gbn13]

I won't consider a chrono if it has its sub dials at 6, 9 and 12. It just looks wrong to me and with plenty out there with sub dials at my preferred 3, 6 and 9, or 3/9 or 6/12 I don't see the need to compromise on this.

Neil

[Der Amf]

Watches that shouldn't have date windows but do
Watches that should have date windows but don't
Dials that are too cluttered
Dials that are empty and dull
Watches with no presence
Watches that think their presence counts for something
Watches that come on a bracelet
The straps that watches come on
Pointlessly expensive watches
Watches made on the cheap
Boring hands
Supposedly interesting hands

[vortgern]

Absence of date

Date anywhere other than the 3 o'clock position

Day and date wheels not lining up

Second hands or chrono hands not hitting markers

Long straight lugs (over about 47mm)

Poor finish between lugs (any modern steel Rolex) or strange 'steps' on the case edge between lugs (Citizen BN0000-04H and SARB035) which make the watch look odd on any aftermarket strap

Excessive rotor noise

Too thick cases (e.g. SARB035 on strap)

One lug or crown guard visibly thinner than others (I have seen this on many second hand polished Omegas and Rolexes, but also surprisingly on some brand new stickered up Rolexes in ADs)

Dress watches over 36mm

[simoscribbler]

Big watches with tiny date windows half way in from the bezel. AKA huge watch, tiny movement syndrome...

[ViperStripes]

cyclops for the date, spoil's an otherwise good looking watch.

[DB9yeti]

Expensive watches with humble movements, such as the twelve grand gold Portofino I looked at in Harrods yesterday with a 7750 in it.

Oversized watches with ill-fitting movements; the Montblanc Perpetual Calendar is the worst 'high-end' piece I have seen with this condition and they should know better. I will be telling them on Friday :)

James Bond watches. I have had the Blue 'Skyfall' AT and the 42mm PO and found myself humming Bond themes when wearing them. Off they went.

Gigantic watches; it's even sadder when they are actually in proportion. I see a picture of a Breitling, think ' that looks nice' and then see it's 46mm in diameter. Absurd.

[OldHooky]

PCLs top the list for me - anything else is, just about, excusable - that's how much I dislike them.

[sweets]

I have made a mental note that I will never buy a watch with any of the following:

• Multi-date windows (I know what numbers preceed and succeed the one I am looking at)
• Compass bezels (UTTERLY pointless, and very fussy to look at)
• Screwed pushers (why have a chrono at all if it takes you 10 seconds to be ready to time something)
• Tachymetres on non-chrono watches
• Lugs that do not receive normal straps

Dave

[stelmo01]

In no particular order:

- Vintage re-issues with date windows that weren't in the original
- Watches over 42mm
- Illegible dials

[stefmcd]

Busy dials

Over 42mm

[krusty]

Short seconds and minute hands.

K.

[Gren]

Cheap cases, that just don't feel as if they are made of solid metal. A prime example is the Seiko Alpinist = Yuck !

[MrGrumpy]

[IMG]
Watches with an odd strap/bracelet fitment as favoured by Swatch and Oris. If I can't stick any old strap I want on then I'm not buying it.

Me too!!! Horrible straps and absurdly narrow bracelets on big watches are an irritation, but at least with standard fitments this can be fixed! Also watches that have odd lug sizes like 23mm.....no thanks!
In general, the thing that puts me off watches is ones that try to be 'elegant' or minimalist, or just try too hard to be stylish. I want just the right amount of shameless vulgarity (but not too much obviously)!!

[Hammond]

Cheap looking date wheels (Zenith Captain). Hard to describe but when you see it, you know. Also date wheels that sit back from the dial.

Stubby GMT hands - Seamaster 300 GMT and Alpina Alpiner 4 GMT. The Omega is better here because it brings in the 24 hour ring but the Alpiner is an abomination in this regard (clearly it's a render but if real it would also suffer from far-back-date-wheel-itis.

[snowman]

Three things really bug me to varying degrees

Watches with a lady's dial in a man size case (You know the one's I mean )

Two tone Gold/Silver bracelets and all gold on anything but a dress watch.

Cutaway numbers (I like arabic digits on a dial, but if you need to cut them out, leave them off!)

Oh, and Submariner clones... the world has enough!!!!!!

M.

[seffrican]

[IMG]
This thread would be better renamed "Pointless and inconsequential things that destroy a watch for you when a normal person wouldn't care."

They aren't all inconsequential. Oversized chrono pushers tend to dig into the wrist. But it was, admittedly, a question about tastes.

Those red hands in your pic are an examplar of what I mentioned. Couldn't live with them.

James Bond watches. I have had the Blue 'Skyfall' AT and the 42mm PO and found myself humming Bond themes when wearing them. Off they went.

Watch with built-in earworms. I hadn't thought of that.

[seikopath]

Revealed day/date window

[beechcustom]

Biggest issue for me is comedy case sizes. 40mm max for me and then only on a diver with moveable bezel.

Very close second is where you have a big disparity between case size and bracelet width. The bracelets on the new super cased Rolex models such as the SubC appear so thin compared to the bloated lugs they looks dainty and dare I say femenine.

[Sunnie]

Graduated bezels that suggest they should rotate and function, but which don't. The equivalent of decorative pocket flaps (i.e. with no pocket beneath) on a cheap suit.

[Kingstepper]

Graduated bezels that suggest they should rotate and function, but which don't. The equivalent of decorative pocket flaps (i.e. with no pocket beneath) on a cheap suit.

Or slotted 'screws' on an AP?

[endo]

Although not really a design flaw as such,
but i'd go with the unnecessary hype train/touting/over inflation of prices of what are "off the shelf" watches.


Design wise, there's few things that i'll strongly dislike as there's always an exception to the rule where it just works, but if i have to pick anything

-cases that don't really have a defined shape

-tiny tiny subdials lost in the sea of a massive dial. (needs a bigger movement)

-tiny display back, that emphasizes an undersized movement

Large watches, are fine with me as long as there's a reason, ie it's a mega complication or its fitted with a turn of the century ships super chronometer. (I probably wouldn't wear them, but at least the size would make sense)

[Optimum]

Lumpy, bumpy bezels - I'm looking at you Breitling.

[CardShark]

22mm parallel bracelets.
Small movement syndrome cases.
Anything that has been styled and designed with fashion clearly being the leading steer.

[mylofitz]

Integrated bracelets. No fan of manual helium valves despite owning a 2254.

[magirus]

California dials.

[Mark lowman]

Shiny bracelets on dive watches. It's meant to be pretending to be a tool watch so brushed only please.
Poor lume , if it's going to have it do it properly thinking of Longine

[Croftrock]

I have to go against the obvious grain here and say any watch under 41mm. I am 6'5" and also pretty wide. So I despair at the beauty and range of watches I could enjoy at 40mm and under but I feel normal watches look too dainty on me. I'm trying to train my eye by wearing increasingly smaller watches but every time I try a sub my wife says I transform it into a boys watch.

I think 40 is borderline ok but still makes me self conscious. I feel more comfortable 42-46. A 46, I feel looks a better fit on me than a 40 which is absolutely not a "fashion" choice, just proportions.

I mostly wear 44s and I fully admit I may have just got used to seeing that size. But I always check the size and if it's 40 or less unfortunately it kills a watch for me, as per the thread title!


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Miocene]

Poor crown design (Tudor Black Bay, I'm looking at you)
Un-necessary bulk
The use of multiple colours - don't try and use 5 colours when you can't get 2 right
Strange bracelet / strap fixings - I have a couple of swatch with these and would never buy anything with similar again
Unaligned screw heads - if I were to be able to spend £10k on a watch you can bl**dy well align the screw heads

[MrGrumpy]

22mm parallel bracelets.

No! I like those!
Another aggravation - watches with fake rotating bezels ie ones that look as if they are supposed to rotate but don't (probably seen on the sort of cheap watch that I buy but most on this forum don't).

[CardShark]

Shiny bracelets on dive watches. It's meant to be pretending to be a tool watch so brushed only please.

Forgot to add that to my original list. Tool watches should be practical, not shiny shiny.

[WatchIng]

4:30 dates - urgh!!! - rules out a lot of watches I would otherwise seriously consider. [I know, lots of people like this.]

[charliehowards]

watches with a 'vintage' or 'heritage' aesthetic that is then ruined by a contemporary date feature or something similiar

[bigbaddes]

almost all of the above - but mainly cut digits

[Tinker]

Oversized watches with ill-fitting movements; the Montblanc Perpetual Calendar is the worst 'high-end' piece I have seen with this condition and they should know better. I will be telling them on Friday :)

[Tinker]

almost all of the above - but mainly cut digits

I love 'em ...

[smithdj10]

Ridiculous size like 46mm over

Yes

[jchlu]

I have many no-nos amongst those already mentioned, but others that immediately rule out an instagram like, let alone a purchase include:

Power reserve indicators
Roman numerals
Skeleton dials

Johnny.

[Saint-Just]

Subdials lost close to the centre because the case is oversized for the calibre

High end not round watches with a round calibre in them: I want a calibre de forme, that fits the case.

The RdM on GS SD.It is ugly, it ruins the symmetry of the dial, it has no real point both horologically (it's hardly a significant complication) and practically ( automatic)

[tertius]

Contrasting date wheels in a completely plain dial, almost always a black dial with a black text on white background date wheel.

Cyclops.

Both absolutely fatal to a watch for me.

[seffrican]

I have to go against the obvious grain here and say any watch under 41mm. I am 6'5" and also pretty wide. So I despair at the beauty and range of watches I could enjoy at 40mm and under but I feel normal watches look too dainty on me. I'm trying to train my eye by wearing increasingly smaller watches but every time I try a sub my wife says I transform it into a boys watch.

I think 40 is borderline ok but still makes me self conscious. I feel more comfortable 42-46. A 46, I feel looks a better fit on me than a 40 which is absolutely not a "fashion" choice, just proportions.

I mostly wear 44s and I fully admit I may have just got used to seeing that size. But I always check the size and if it's 40 or less unfortunately it kills a watch for me, as per the thread title!

While I'm not built on your scale, you are not alone. I find that the watches I pick to wear most often are 42mm and 44mm, the 40mm and smaller ones tend to languish in the box.

To everyone else, just to clarify my original question a little further: I understand there are things that people don't like (and that they vary widely) but I'm thinking of things that will kill your interest in a watch that is otherwise completely to your liking. For me, the Seiko posted in #2 above is a classic example. I like the overall look at a first glance, but at second glance I see the red hands and beyond that don't take another look at any of the other details, because at that point, I'm out.

[Geralt]

Here's a few...

Hands too short
Crown too small
Arabics (if any) too big
24 hour numerals
Minute numerals
Cut off numbers
Date magnifier
Mismatching date wheel colour
Crown guards other than on diver's
Display case backs
Past/future date window
Any kind of calendar other than single date

[Parny1983]

It has to be anniversary watches. Those ones for World Cups / Olympics etc

[Rolthai32]

NATO,s
Chronographs
And a few other bits and bobs
Apple watches

[Kingstepper]

Hours/minutes on a 'subdial' like many A.Lange and Sohne (among others).

[kungfugerbil]

It's been said before, but integrated bracelets / proprietary strap fittings can do one.

I dislike intently anything with overly smooth, 'organic' lines - I call them 'turd watches'.

This is a turd watch with integrated bracelet - I would throw this on the floor and beat it with a sturdy branch rather than afford it wrist time:

[howie77]

Hm, reminds me of my Deal-breakers thread.
I wonder how opinions may have changed since then.

Anyway, to contribute;

Display backs - please, who needs them. Forgivable ONLY on a Unitas or other decorated hand winder.
'Applique' logo and/or indices - tacky.
Over size cases - yes that's you, 40mm+
Straight lugs that stick out like wings - who's that supposed to fit, Mr 2D Wrist?
Bulbous case backs - just make the damn case deeper if you need to accommodate a rotor.
Day displays - you want a calendar? Buy a bloody digital.
Dubious hand sets - weedy spindly sticks or stumpy phallic things.
Any kind of exotic animal skin strap - nauseating.
3ATM - pointless.

That's about it.

[klunk]

Lumpy, bumpy bezels - I'm looking at you Breitling.

Exactly (word for word) what I was going to post