Reply With Quote
Mmmmhhh... Don't mind some CWL, but, that is pretty ugly!
Not sure about the direction of this brand but I know there's a few followers on here. The new World Timer has been announced:
http://www.christopherward.co.uk/men...aign=h1-040913
Seems like a decent complication for £1500.
Last edited by W44NNE; 5th September 2013 at 09:11.
Mmmmhhh... Don't mind some CWL, but, that is pretty ugly!
Rather interesting. The red dot indicators might be fun...
I think it looks good personally. First CW I like tbh.
I can't be sure but does it look like India has been squeezed a little on the map - perhaps because of an inconvenient time zone? Maybe it's just me...
In the Sotadic Zone, apparently.
I think it's due to the map projection they used but I agree it does look a bit odd.Originally Posted by Carlton-Browne
Personally I think it's minging, but fair play for trying new stuff. Did I miss the price? I bet it's up there with GMTs from other brands that would get a look in first. I don't actually get who the watch is for - world travellers tend to know what the earth looks like on a map...
Sorry, forgot to add it's approx £1500 so not too bad for the complication?
Eek. Brave pricing. I was looking the other day at a jolly nice Longines world GMT effort brand new (discounted) at less than 1200 quid so Ch.RW.A.rD will have their work cut out.
Unless I'm being daft, is the 'complication' not just a revolving disk with blobs of paint on?
Yes, saw this advertised in the Easyjet in-flight magazine - whole page advert. Says it all?
Looks are subjective, as with all watches, but the movement seems interesting although folks are still trying to work out exactly how it will function. There's a bit of info in the interview with the watchmaker/modifier below;
http://www.christopherward.co.uk/wor...aign=b4-040913
However, I don't buy watches solely for movements so I won't be purchasing, but plenty of people seem to be placing pre-orders.
Re the pricing thing, CW seem to have no trouble knocking out the single pusher chrono at £2.5k, and the jump hour complication watches at £2k, so I can see this one selling well also.
Despite all the CW detractors on here (and I agree with a lot of what is said by the way), they do seem to be building a rather successful business!
What do comparable 2893 based GMT's sell for from other brands?
I thought it looked quite pretty, especially the lego-style dimples on the facehave to admit the ETA mod seems quite interesting ...
Well, the Sinn 856 UTC is £1410, and I know which one I'd rather have.
Something about it, not helped by the blue , makes it look cheap and like one of those five pound watches you can buy from a funfair.
Well Chris ward sells the C9 GMT with a 2893 for £599 so it's not a particularly rare or expensive movement. The longines I was looking at the other day for £1200 was ETA powered, but I don't know which GmT movement it was. Hamilton uses it in watches that are well-sub-grand (considerably so in some cases). Glycine too.
£300 for a Steinhart, £3,000 for a Breitling
I'm not sure I totally understand how this watch works. It looks like it should display local and GMT, but then why is the GMT time 0910 and the London time 2010?
I'm not trying to justify the CW C900 WT over any other Worldtimer watch, but was genuinely interested in what is out there and for what price.
Personally, I'd take the Sinn over this as well, I just don't like 'dressy' complicated watches, but there are plenty of folks who do.
Also, none of the UTC/GMT watches mentioned are 'Worldtimers' are they? Adding in the modifications and the cities etc, and it must add to the cost?
Again, I don't like it, but I think it's only fair to compare the watch with like for like watches...
And the Speedbird III GMT will be less than half that.
Eddie
Whole chunks of my life come under the heading "it seemed like a good idea at the time".
Join the club! There are a few people over on the CW forum confused about the detail as well!
It looks like you can adjust the airport code that moves a red dot beneath the relevant airport, and then independently adjust the second time zone hand with the crown in another position, but that's just guessing!
How they expect people to pre-order when they haven't actually explained how it functions is not only bizarre, but also a missed opportunity.
Horrid. 300 quids worth IMHO. If it was £10 I still wouldn't want it. Or any other piece of their over priced tat.
White hands against a white world map. The ergonomist in me is screaming silently...
I bet you've got a secret collection of CW haven't you Tim?
Looks awful and ETA 2893 automatic movement for £1600 for a small non mid range player is absolutely crazy imho - I hope they sell out.
It's just a matter of time...
Which would be (and actually is, well one of the first 100) my choice.
First CW I have liked, and the Janke connection means it may well appreciate...
However - I am not sure I would wear it, despite a slight fascination with the complication. Snobbery? Probably, yes.
Looking forward to seeing one though :)
Damn, I was hoping to be the first to say that. Unreadable and so fails in its primary function, though the overall design is interesting.
Yes its a shame because at least they are trying to do something a little out of the ordinary and should perhaps be applauded for that. Rolex do something similar I think with the Skydweller and charge a mint, at least this watch appears reasonably priced in comparison. Unfortunately though with the World Time the execution seems poor even though the intent is interesting.
According to the article they have another 2 watches planned. I do hope they make something a bit smaller though I do congratulate them on doing something a bit different.
Just on the whole world time thing, didn't Orient have a few world time watches where you spun the dial/bezel to the correct time zone? Seem to remember a few of them on eBay.
Last edited by robert75; 5th September 2013 at 15:50.
there's a review of it on worn and wound if anyone is remotely interested !!
http://wornandwound.com/2013/09/03/i...00-worldtimer/
Cool watch I love the look and have always wanted a decent world timer with an automatic movement (although I've had digital and atomic world timers). The world time selector is neat too.
Reading the other posts I get the impression that you can get a world timer cheaper ... Links please
This looks remarkably similar to the citizen calibre 6000 world timer I have which cost approx one tenth the price of the CW.
I have no idea how my citizen works either if that counts for anything!?
Elizabeth Duke
That price ratio might be expected when comparing a feature as delivered in the form of an electronic watch, versus as delivered in the form of a mechanical watch...
TBH, I think it looks like the sort of thing you used to see advertised in the back of sunday magazines.
CW appear to have little if any innovation and copy anything and everything.
When you look long into an abyss, the abyss looks long into you.........
If that were the case I don't think there'd be so much confusion about how the new model works...
What confusion?
Read the CW website - it is very simple.
When you look long into an abyss, the abyss looks long into you.........
Are you actually serious!
I have, and have read the CW forum. I think we can safely assert that "it" is unknown. "It" may be simple; but first we have to establish what "it" is. What are the crown positions, and what does each do with respect to 1) the main hands, 2) the red hand, 3) the airport code and 4) the red map dots.
That list of questions I'd suggest implies that the watch is not innovation free/a copy of something.
Yep, I looked at it and thought Argos. It may be great on the wrist, but I suspect it won't command a great value pre-loved.
This is a bad attempt at copying a number of World Time chronographs - nothing more to establish in my book.
Poor representation, badly designed and delivered IMO.
Please research at your leisure.
When you look long into an abyss, the abyss looks long into you.........
Wisemoth makes a good point though...the citizen is much nicer
It is an innovation free, simple piece of tat. There is no mystery if you take a two minute look at it, which is about all the attention it deserves.
It has a very basic off the shelf ETA The red hand shows a second timezone . Under the dial is a red painted piece of tin which makes a red mark at the holes in the map which coincide with the airports in the hole at the top. basically all those three things work in unison and do, not very attractively and certainly not very cleverly, exactly the same thing. It is a horological scherzo, and not very funny at that.
Yep. Doesn't mean I like it or the Skydweller though...
I am dismayed and shocked that you would see fit to make such a comparison. One is an annual calendar and a very, like it or not, sophisticated and innovative one at that, with an equally sophisticated and complex GMT function. The other is an over simple over priced piece of junk.
Strange that your powers of discernment would lead you to put those two watches up for comparison. Don't get where you're coming from at all.
Not keen on that.
Andy
Wanted - Damasko DC57
The initial link in my mind was that I recalled that both the SkyDweller and the World Timer offered functionality via their bezels and that they both occupied a similar ,niche in that they seem to be designed for a traveller by offering the display of differing time zones. It was a flip remark, nothing more than that. You are of course correct in observing that the Rolex is significantly more complex than the Christopher Ward model (which I'm sure we both agree that we dislike). I was merely commenting that Christopher Ward had attempted more than just another GMT copy and in comparison to their other models, which seem to consist of an ersatz B&R aircraft instrument watch, some mock subs and faux fliegers they were to be congratulated for trying something else.
But your reply prompted me to think a little more and review why I feel repelled by the SkyDweller when as you point out it has significantly more horological interest and sophistication than the Chrisopher Ward model. And after some contemplation I think that it is this: it lacks virtù.
My initial interest in watches was kindled by an interest in design, display and heritage. Much of my career has been spent in ergonomics where form and function are important. So I have always found design which is fit for use more attractive than extraneous and ephemeral decoration (although I do admit to a paradoxical regard for ridiculous 70s chronos - I'm nothing if not inconsistent). What is attractive about early Rolex, such as the Explorer and the Submariner, is that they had purpose, were fit for use and had the quality of personal virtù. As a personal accoutrement they could accompany one in the accomplishment of great things, an adventure, an expedition, a journey. I once owned a Citizen Aqualand, an awful thing that accompanied me on several dives which as a result I formed a bond with. Not because of the way it looked (believe me it was pretty unpleasant) but because it had been with me in an extreme environment which it and I had survived. There is a sense that the Rolex, Omega, Universal Geneve and Breitling models of the 40s, 50s and 60s had the quality of performing a function, of being fit for use in the sorts of places that we as men have a fantasy (or for some the reality) of being or surviving. That's why I think that the Walt in us responds to military and/or tool watches for example. So for our excursions sous marine we have the Sub, the Seamaster and my personal favourites the 6105 and Certina DS dive watches, but there are many others. For our fantasy racing driver there is the Newman Daytona and Autavia. For the astronaut none other than the Speedmaster.
I believe that Antoine de Saint-Exupéry once offered the view that a piece of writing is finished when everything that is unnecessary is removed. From a design perspective it seems to me that these earlier Rolex models offered an exemplar of Saint-Exupéry's advice - they provided only what was necessary for the watch to do its job both under the dial in terms of movement and in terms of dial, hands, case and crystal. There was no element that could be taken away without diminishing the essence and function of the watch.
Modern Rolexes seem to be many miles away from their original counterparts. To my mind the Daytona is a bloated remnant of the svelte Newman model, the Submariner (although still undeniably capable) has become a decorated fop or weekend paint-balling junior manager and the Explorer has middle aged spread and wears too much bling. To me they have all seemed to have misplaced their virtù.
The SkyDweller seems to me to epitomise this move away from the necessary to the extravagant, the worst culprit of which appears to me to be the Daytona with all its kitsch variants - diamonds, leopard skin and whatever. To me, the Daytona may just have become the Boysie and Marlene of the watch world.
The SkyDweller also seems to me to be the antithesis of Saint-Exupéry, who himself was a celebrated airman, and it is a mute point (which we could perhaps go on to debate) whether he would have worn a watch of this type. Whilst I can't help but agree that in terms of its workmanship and materials, the SkyDweller represents significant quality, but it seems to me that it isn't always the case that significant quality will guarantee excellence in design. Yes the SkyDweller has more complications than the average GMT watch but the manner in which these complications are displayed and housed are not particularly functional, perceptually or cognitively clear nor perhaps easy to use.
I can think of three people who could be legitimately termed Skydwellers: Charles Lindberg, Neil Armstrong and Howard Hughes. Two of these were and probably are our idea of quintessential airmen the third a sadly damaged man who in his latter years feared setting foot on the ground and quite literally lived in the sky and was a real life SkyDweller. Lindberg designed his own watch to his own specification and purpose and it doesn't really look much like the SkyDweller and it offers different functionality. We all know what Armstrong wore and used. The only one of these sky dwellers that I can imagine using a SkyDweller would be Howard Hughes. And that perhaps may also lie at the heart of my lack of enthusiasm for it.
I would imagine what I have written here will enrage many and might be enough to see me run out of town. Of course it is my own view and nothing else. I offer it because I wanted to substantiate what was originally a flip off the cuff comparison. But if nothing else it has encouraged me to have a good review of my prejudices and as always I hope it encourages some discussion and debate - preferably a little higher than name calling and descent to ad homonym squabbling..
Last edited by Harry Tuttle; 6th September 2013 at 00:49.
Certainly, your spelling of "mute" and later malapropism ("homonym") might see you run out of town, but I agree with most that you say.
Alternatively, your use of homonym might be an attempt to describe words that sound the same (hominem / homonym), in which case, it's a homophone.
Either way, the Chr Ward C900 Worldtimer is an interesting and potentially very useful watch: a visual representation of home time and global location is often helpful to those with memory problems, perhaps. It might also work equally well as a second timezone indicator. There are many occasions I've woken up in a hotel room on a business trip wondering where I was; with the c900, I can glance at my wrist and see from the little red dot the name of my nearest airport. To quote the meerkat, simples.
I really enjoyed reading that and agree with a good deal of it; nicely written.
In the Sotadic Zone, apparently.
And the Speedbird comes on a bracelet too.
Posting Permissions
