Reply With QuoteSinn EZM 10?
I'm never really asking for advice prior a watch purchase, however something got me thinking lately and I thought it would worth to get some inputs.
I'm into watches in a good few years now and guessing at least more than a hundred watches went through my hands. Safe to say half of them were vintage.
I've never been interested in low end or fashion brands, but never had the chance to try ultra high end either.
However I realised beside design and technic the main thing for me lately is quality. Craftmanship and precision in details is what makes a watch attractive for long time in my eyes.
I have or used to have some fine pieces in my small collection.
Watches like a Speedy Pro, MM300, new and vintage Sinns etc.
By the way talking about Sinn, I have a good example. I had a brand new 144 and bought by chance an old 142. One was all new but the Lemania made vintage piece is so well made, so much attention to details that made me quickly sell the 144.
Making the long story short, I came to a conclusion that maybe it's time to try a modern higher end piece with all the modern manufacturing tech. A piece which is hands down superior in quality to anything I've tried before.
Since I can't justify spending Rolex money on a watch, I was thinking Omega.
I love chronos, maybe a co-axial Speedmaster, or a new MkII...
The only drawback is that many of the modern stuff out there is oversized and if I sell a few watches ideally I would like to have a piece which is comfy for everyday use.
I'm sure some chaps here with first hand experience can answer my questions:
Is it worth to get a modern piece for this reason? Is it really a big difference in quality? Do they worth the premium?
I would also appreciate suggestions for a sport or aviation style, mostly chronograph watch for 6,75' wrist. Usually I prefer dark dial end lume would be essential. But there are always exceptions.. 😉
Thanks,
Csaba
Sinn EZM 10?
It's going to be difficult to get something that is hands down better quality. The Omega ProPlof is one of the best built watches I've ever handled, and own. The Patek 5711 is a step up from some of my other watches, but at what price. I find the Omega SMP 300m (Black dial), a very well made, and very good looking watch.
I fear that you won't get a huge difference, unless you are spending Rolex money on a watch. Any Omega that comes close cost about the same - although savings can be made on used purchases. I like a lot of the new Omega models, but they are still all over the place. How many Speedmadter models do they make! Or Seamasters for that matter? A new MKII, racing dial, looks great, and the SM300 (although I prefer the Ti model). I've just bought a bi-metal Globemaster, and I'm very impressed with it so far, the bracelet is ten times better than the aqua-Terra for me, but the watch could be thinner - the PO's are just crazily thick.
I think one of the best options for build and price are the new in-house Tudors, at a 25% or more discount new.
Last edited by Omegamanic; 1st January 2017 at 20:19.
It's just a matter of time...
Totally agree on tudor there.
It sounds to me like Grand Seiko might be worth considering.Originally Posted by witti
(Yes, yes, I know, I always recommend Grand Seiko but it does seem to be a good fit for these requirements).
Grand Seiko is a good call, but new they are Rolex money.
It's just a matter of time...
Usually a little below Rolex, I think?
But, either way, second hand is a great buy for Grand Seiko.
The Omega sm300 master co-axial is probably worth looking at. Well built and finished with vintage looks.
Thanks for the suggestions.
Actually it's one of those watches which made me thinking about the step up.
Good call, but I had several watches with the good old 7750 and would hesitate to pay premium for the same movement.
Thanks for the detailed answer. Forgot to mention that I'm usually thinking in second hand (exception can be a huge discount).
Maybe I could live with a thicker watch, but huge models, like the ProPlof are ruled out, I'm afraid. SMP 300 is there for a good reason.
And yes, Tudor is a good contender. Maybe more on the diver front and not necessary in chronos. Definitely food for thought.
I appreciate Grand Seiko and I now in quality it would be the right choice.
I have to say in general I don't care what others think about my watch.
However in Europe it's still "just a Seiko". I had it with the MM300 and could be tiring to explain how better and more in-house it is than most Swiss brands...
I agree with Mark, and was going to make the same suggestion.
If you really wouldn’t care about others’ thoughts on your “it’s just a Seiko” Grand Seiko, then you buy one and not even bother trying to educate them.
The old adage of 'ignorance is bliss’ is best, and if they show any interest in knowing more, then you can spend time bringing them up to speed.
If you want an analogy they can sort of correlate, ask them if they consider AMG or Alpina to be just a Mercedes or BMW, respectively?
If they look at you with a blank stare, don’t bother wasting your breath any further – they’re a lost cause! Just you carry on being happy with what you’ve bought.
If you don't really care what people think then just go along with them: Smile and say "yeah, it's just a Seiko" and carry on enjoying wearing your GS. :-)
^^^^^
That's a shame as there is a cracking Seiko GS on the FS section :)
My favourite GS dial combination.
Enjoy the hunt.
Speedie reduced?
Interesting point about do you get a massive step up if you buy Rolex? Might just be me but I struggle to determine one brands superiority over another under the bright lights. Seems to me we now have bracelet wars were one fan will cry my gridlock is sooo much better than yours. We have moved on from when the bracelet was an afterthought
If you want inhouse movement I might give some thought as to the overall stability of the brand and the watch repair crisis ( how many young watch repairers are there ?) ETA and Selita might not be so bad a choice after all.
Prepared to buy nearly new? How about IWC as their Pilot range is considered very high quality.
Still think the original Speedmaster Pro is a proper watch if you're happy with a manual.
You said lume was important: remember that its brightness fades with time.
'Against stupidity, the gods themselves struggle in vain' - Schiller.
I know, I know... I wouldn't rule out GS, still considering. But it's position in non-WIS world has been discussed to death. In my view you have to be very strong and maybe ignorant(?) to have a GS as not only a piece of a collection but more of a one watch, or at least the core watch you own.
Interesting thoughts. The best bracelet I've ever had was a vintage one. Hand windig is fine. The Speedmaster is like an E - type for me. Hard to find a better looking contender, but it's not exactly offering what the watch industry is capable of today.
I love it to every bits but believe me, it's not even a step up in quality from the swiss made Sinn. Same with the reduced Speedy, I'm afraid.
Correct. But they go for decades even if fading. Without lume I would need another watch next to my bed. I hate the idea.
How about a sinn 358 jubilaum anniversary le?
Thanks, that is definitely a good looking chrono. But I'm struggeling to see how it would be a huge step up in quality from the 142.
I think the problem you may find is that in sports / tool watches you are talking no nonsense movements, for instance the Rolex movements are not things of beauty but do their job very well indeed. Is there actually much craftsmanship difference between a datejust an Aqua Terra or a Breitling equivalent? All are made on production lines with teams carrying out an individual repetive job. If you want something which is a move forward then I'd guess the co-axial is the one. You could even save buckets of cash and buy a Hami/Tissot/Certina with a powermatic 80. It's still a step beyond what even a lot of high end inhouse can offer in terms of reserve and accuracy over the 80hrs.
For a step up in obvious quality you may have to go classic dress watch and compare the relative merits of JLC against , Audemar, Vacheron, Patek and LangeThat's where I'd guess levels of craftsmanship range from the very good to the absolute zenith.
Indeed, it's not going to be a significant quality improvement, if at all. Plus the 358 is simply a more-expensive, bloated version of the far-better-looking 356.
Sinn makes good stuff. Their German-made cases are excellent, and their dial work tends to be high-grade, too. The bracelets are a bit less refined than some of the fancier stuff, but they're strong and well-made. So to get a noticeably better-quality watch than a Sinn, a Speedmaster or an MM300 at sub-Rolex pricing is going to be a challenge.
"Is it worth to get a modern piece for this reason? Is it really a big difference in quality? Do they justify the premium?"
It really depends on which watch; more modern most definitely doesn't imply better quality. While some newer stuff is actually better, many companies are aware that consumers are fairly insensitive to subtle but fundamental quality differences, so they simply add some marketing gimmicks to impress the innocent, while saving costs and cutting corners elsewhere.
Essentially, it's a lot easier and cheaper for companies to add some extraneous "gee-whiz" pseudo-technical features than it is to invest in truly higher-quality manufacturing capabilities.
To be honest, you're probably not going to directly perceive that big of a difference in apparent quality compared to what you've tried with anything under £5K (to pick a rough number). A truly high-end piece such as the Audemars Piguet 15202 would be a perceptible upgrade, but it had better be considering that it costs about £15,000 for a decent used example. Plus a major drawback to its noticeable high quality is that the complex and fine finish requires careful wearing and costs a load to refinish properly, so it isn't all that practical as an everyday watch unless you're either extremely fastidious or scuffs and dents simply don't bother you.
And this raises an important point: to go much beyond (non-GS) Seiko, Sinn or Omega exterior finishing quality involves getting into some watches that are probably too fancy for stress-free wearing.
Bearing that in mind, you mentioned the following points:
• modern higher end piece
• all the modern manufacturing tech
• hands down superior in quality
• comfy for everyday use
• 6,75" wrist
and again
• the main thing for me lately is quality
While a modern Daytona movement is noticeably superior in smoothness and feel to the Valjoux, Zenith, ETA (i.e. modern Omega) and Lemania movmements that make up the vast majority of the sub-Rolex-priced mechanical chronographs out there, it's also one of their costliest watches in steel. A top-of-the-range Seiko is possibly the only thing that could be had for significantly less (you are buying used, I hope) that would be a step up from a 7750 or an 1861, if you're really set on a chronograph. They unfortunately tend to be rather bulky and are often a bit awkward-looking, which is a shame considering their manufacturing quality.
So considering your points above, I think a 36 mm Rolex is the way to go. Rolex's engineering, design, and manufacturing are absolutely first-rate, and this is what really separates them from the others around the price level, who have to rely on pretty meaningless marketing features in an attempt to compete, since they can't really do it on quality.
If you're into attention to detail, the subtle touches such as the leaf-shutter-like "click" of their superb date mechanism that can be adjusted at any time without fear of damage, the high-grade dial work, the silkiness of winding and setting, and the excellent-but-not-excessively-fussy finishing will give you plenty to appreciate. Their 31XX movements are superb, and easily provide the "hands down superior in quality" characteristic that you're looking for.
As an everyday watch for a sub-7" wrist that's state-of-the-art in how it's made, and superior in quality, there are a few Rolex options to choose from that would suit your preference for a sporty dark-dialled watch if you're willing to forego the chronograph feature.
Specifically, the 114270 Explorer, the 16200 Datejust, the 116000 Oyster Perpetual would all be excellent choices at reasonable money, and all are tops for not only quality, but also practicality and reliability — which are not mutually-exclusive characteristics.
The Explorer is the sportiest option of the three, and the Datejust can be quite sporty too with the right dial, as well as offering the bonus of their sublime date feature. The only potential drawback with these two is that you may not like their stamped clasps if you're after obviously-modern. (Personally, I think the old-school stuff is a pleasure to wear, and I tend to reach for them more often than the newer machined versions.)
If a modern-style bracelet and clasp are a priority, then the 116000 with the blue 3-6-9 dial could be a perfect watch for you. You get the best-in-class Parachrom-equipped 3130 movement in a beautiful case, along with their latest bracelet. If quality is the main factor, I don't think you'll find a better option, and I think the value for money that it offers on the used market is phenomenal.
In addition to the blue, you might like uncommon Asian-market black dial option:
image credit: jackroad
Finally, consider having a look at the 36 mm Nomos Club. I'm seriously impressed by its quality and looks; it frankly embarrasses some of the bigger brands, horologically speaking. For relatively little money, you get a legitimately no-excuses watch. :)
Last edited by Belligero; 2nd January 2017 at 22:20.
Maybe my thumbs do not feel the casework difference, maybe my eyes do not visually pick up the difference but having handled a modern datejust I really don't see what all the fuss is about and it appears emasculated under a sea of grape dials and diamond finishes.
A nice 70's Datejust at around a 2k would be a good buy as a classic.
A 2nd hand purchase of a Reverso using depreciation in his favour could also be a good option
Seiko SARK001 high quality finishing and an enamel dial. Beautiful, high end ish lots of value for money and rarity value.
Or the SARK003 for a dark dial.
Pictures from the net.
Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
That's a lovely looking Seiko beautiful really.
How about a shout for GP. Sourcing Chrono 24 up to £5500 you've got options on Seahawks and Chronohawks. JLC should give you loads of options. All pre loved of course.
The stand out chronograph in the sub-£5000 bracket has to be the Omega Speedmaster Professional, not least for the heritage. I wish I had bought one when second hand examples went for less than a grand.
If you like Sinns, why not try a Tutima chronograph or a Damasko for that matter?
^
Those seem to be more of a lateral move than the step up he's after.
He's also asked for a modern technically developed watch. I don't see this in Rolex. What I do see is bracelet enhancements and dial variations impeccably finished no doubt.^
Those seem to be more of a lateral move than the step up he's after.
Virtually everything else is "not broke don't fix it mentality."
Nothing wrong with that but if he does want a horologically advanced watch whether proven or not he's probably better off going co-ax. If he wants to test out some the best of haute horologie then maybe he can source second hand JLC / GP / UN and either go for in-house or reworked ETA.
Maybe look at the Breitling Navitimer 01 43mm. With its ground up in house movement but classic looks it could be what you are looking for?
Martyn
While they may not advertise it all over their casebacks, Rolex does have the best-engineered movements around, and they're produced in the most technologically-advanced manufacturing facilities in the industry. They're far from being a complacent company when it comes to the technical aspects, they just tend not to do novelty for its own sake.
Hodinkee wrote a reference-grade article on their production abilities not too long ago; it's well worth the read if you want to see just how far ahead of the game they are: https://www.hodinkee.com/articles/inside-rolex
If the priority is quality rather than gimmickry, then Rolex is a clear step up from the ETA-class options. JLC has some nice stuff too, but I've sworn off dealing with Richemont products because of the servicing liability.
Without being pedantic are you going to tell me that Rolex laser cutters are more accurate than Breitling laser cutters? I suspect that one puff piece about a glowing factory where the workers never grumble and not a spec of dust is found is much like another. I've seen the same about IWC and others. The reality is often not particularly well paid locals carrying out one process adinfinitum.
What on earth is "reference grade" is this some measurement you have devised?
Sure quality control is no doubt super high but then I don't see heaps of complaints from say Longine buyers saying their watches are falling apart.
ETA clones, So many poor ETA movements made. It's lucky you can rely on the extremely rare Rolex movements isn't it?They must start doing display backs so one can compare the hand craft against a JLC or similar brand.
Your idea of putting promotion on the back of a Rolex is interesting but might I suggest there is so much on the front dial it could get a tad dull.
Don't really care about Richemonts supposed service from "group think" on a watch site. I mentioned them as an option for haute horologie at a good depreciated price.
Clearly different grades of Swiss photons.
And comparing Swiss photons to high end Japanese photons is likely to really take this thread downhill. ;-)
Having an idea of the types of watches you like Csaba, I don't think you'll find what you're looking for with modern watches within the price bracket you're looking at. Particularly chronographs.
I think Belligero's last post makes a lot of sense to me; a three hander or GMT (probably expII for your budget) from the last decade or so would give you what you're looking for.
There's a quality about them that doesn't shout but becomes more evident the longer you keep them. They're a very well engineered product designed to do the job reliably over long periods of time.
Yes. :)
Laser cutting equipment is of very limited use in watchmaking, but CNC machining equipment is central to modern production techniques for manufacturers of any scale.
Pictured above are some of Rolex's bespoke CNC machining pods; these particular ones use a temperature-controlled oil bath to get 4-micron tolerances on baseplates. No other watch company has these resources or goes to this bother.
Likewise, the attention to detail extends to using Glucydur gears instead of brass ones, growing intricate playless chronograph wheels out of metal using LIGA technology, and taking the trouble to make hardened pivots. These things are invisible to the consumer initially, but there's a reason that their watches offer the tightest timing specifications in the industry at -2/+2 and tend to run reliably for ages before servicing.
By the way, it appears that have a small misunderstanding from earlier in the thread; by "lateral move" I was referring only to the Tutima and Damasko options, both of which are pretty much equivalent to Sinn. I agree that JLC, GP and UN all tend to be higher-grade and can offer great watchmaking value at their secondary-market pricing.
One of my favourite chronographs is this GP, in fact:
The technology's nothing too impressive, but the dial work is as good as anything I've seen in real life, and it's a bit of a special watch on the wrist — could be a good option.
As a basis for comparison, here it is with a few others. :)
Thanks, Dave. I just reckon that if someone's looking for a step up in quality from Sinn (which is already quite good) then the subtle improvements that Rolex's impressive design and manufacturing resources offer are probably worth a go. The technology's certainly there, too — they just don't shout about it, which probably a smart thing in the long run.
Last edited by Belligero; 3rd January 2017 at 12:50.
For me the difference is in the details.
Sinn make nice watches but have simple printed dials.
They have flat, lume centred hands.
I am generalising, but they lack the additional touches
And their case finishing (whilst good) usually lacks a contrast of btushed and ploished, coloured and so forth.
So, the step up would be to something with proper applied (albeit lume-centred) polished white gold or similar indices.
It would need a contrast of case material and or finishes.
Chamfered hands, or polished.
A dome to the crystal and a very high AR quality.
And whilst a Speedy pro is great, it lacks many of these features.
GS is an obvious answer (the SBGE001 especially), as is Rolex. But also a few random thoughts -
I would suggest you look at Bremont (although most of their dials are printed they are well done)
I also suggest you look at the Tutima Saxon one chrono, that looks quite lovely, and at £3.2 for this new, it is definitely possible. I have never handled one, but want to. Also, if you love the 5100, the Tutima movement sollows it nicely.
The quality of the new Ploprofs is truly amazing
And some of the Zeniths must catch your eye (but they have a very patchy range, some are very garish).
Dave
Inhouse movement was not my main goal, however there are ETA movements I'm currently have and simply getting tired to see: 2824 family and 7750 family. The dress watches you mentioned are clearly on top, bu I wouls rather go for something sporty/toolish.
Wow, that is quite a detailed post to the threadIndeed, it's not going to be a significant quality improvement, if at all. Plus the 358 is simply a more-expensive, bloated version of the far-better-looking 356.
Sinn makes good stuff. Their German-made cases are excellent, and their dial work tends to be high-grade, too. The bracelets are a bit less refined than some of the fancier stuff, but they're strong and well-made. So to get a noticeably better-quality watch than a Sinn, a Speedmaster or an MM300 at sub-Rolex pricing is going to be a challenge.
"Is it worth to get a modern piece for this reason? Is it really a big difference in quality? Do they justify the premium?"
It really depends on which watch; more modern most definitely doesn't imply better quality. While some newer stuff is actually better, many companies are aware that consumers are fairly insensitive to subtle but fundamental quality differences, so they simply add some marketing gimmicks to impress the innocent, while saving costs and cutting corners elsewhere.
Essentially, it's a lot easier and cheaper for companies to add some extraneous "gee-whiz" pseudo-technical features than it is to invest in truly higher-quality manufacturing capabilities.
To be honest, you're probably not going to directly perceive that big of a difference in apparent quality compared to what you've tried with anything under £5K (to pick a rough number). A truly high-end piece such as the Audemars Piguet 15202 would be a perceptible upgrade, but it had better be considering that it costs about £15,000 for a decent used example. Plus a major drawback to its noticeable high quality is that the complex and fine finish requires careful wearing and costs a load to refinish properly, so it isn't all that practical as an everyday watch unless you're either extremely fastidious or scuffs and dents simply don't bother you.
And this raises an important point: to go much beyond (non-GS) Seiko, Sinn or Omega exterior finishing quality involves getting into some watches that are probably too fancy for stress-free wearing.
Bearing that in mind, you mentioned the following points:
• modern higher end piece
• all the modern manufacturing tech
• hands down superior in quality
• comfy for everyday use
• 6,75" wrist
and again
• the main thing for me lately is quality
While a modern Daytona movement is noticeably superior in smoothness and feel to the Valjoux, Zenith, ETA (i.e. modern Omega) and Lemania movmements that make up the vast majority of the sub-Rolex-priced mechanical chronographs out there, it's also one of their costliest watches in steel. A top-of-the-range Seiko is possibly the only thing that could be had for significantly less (you are buying used, I hope) that would be a step up from a 7750 or an 1861, if you're really set on a chronograph. They unfortunately tend to be rather bulky and are often a bit awkward-looking, which is a shame considering their manufacturing quality.
So considering your points above, I think a 36 mm Rolex is the way to go. Rolex's engineering, design, and manufacturing are absolutely first-rate, and this is what really separates them from the others around the price level, who have to rely on pretty meaningless marketing features in an attempt to compete, since they can't really do it on quality.
If you're into attention to detail, the subtle touches such as the leaf-shutter-like "click" of their superb date mechanism that can be adjusted at any time without fear of damage, the high-grade dial work, the silkiness of winding and setting, and the excellent-but-not-excessively-fussy finishing will give you plenty to appreciate. Their 31XX movements are superb, and easily provide the "hands down superior in quality" characteristic that you're looking for.
As an everyday watch for a sub-7" wrist that's state-of-the-art in how it's made, and superior in quality, there are a few Rolex options to choose from that would suit your preference for a sporty dark-dialled watch if you're willing to forego the chronograph feature.
Specifically, the 114270 Explorer, the 16200 Datejust, the 116000 Oyster Perpetual would all be excellent choices at reasonable money, and all are tops for not only quality, but also practicality and reliability — which are not mutually-exclusive characteristics.
The Explorer is the sportiest option of the three, and the Datejust can be quite sporty too with the right dial, as well as offering the bonus of their sublime date feature. The only potential drawback with these two is that you may not like their stamped clasps if you're after obviously-modern. (Personally, I think the old-school stuff is a pleasure to wear, and I tend to reach for them more often than the newer machined versions.)
If a modern-style bracelet and clasp are a priority, then the 116000 with the blue 3-6-9 dial could be a perfect watch for you. You get the best-in-class Parachrom-equipped 3130 movement in a beautiful case, along with their latest bracelet. If quality is the main factor, I don't think you'll find a better option, and I think the value for money that it offers on the used market is phenomenal.
In addition to the blue, you might like uncommon Asian-market black dial option:
image credit: jackroad
Finally, consider having a look at the 36 mm Nomos Club. I'm seriously impressed by its quality and looks; it frankly embarrasses some of the bigger brands, horologically speaking. For relatively little money, you get a legitimately no-excuses watch. :)Thanks!
You say: "...many companies are aware that consumers are fairly insensitive to subtle but fundamental quality differences, so they simply add some marketing gimmicks to impress the innocent, while saving costs and cutting corners elsewhere."
^^This. It can hurt when on an otherwise well made dial money saved on the lume front. Some swiss brands still using a thin layer of lume while you can get tourch like dials for the fraction of price from boutique brands...
Also I have to agree with the Rolex models you mentioned. I have to make a deeper dive into Rolex models, especially because I was not even aware of dial variants and so on. Still don't forget that my original intention here was to see what is out there below Rolex prices.
You mention Nomos. Definitely a brand which needs attention. Quality wis they are there I think, also good in size. If they were only a touch sportier, and not that much on the dressy side. However your suggestion reminds me to have a look what German brands can offer, as toolish and flieger style is common for them.
Not bad, I have to say. Enamel dial is always cool. I'm wondering if it was still to dressy for me for everyday use.
Thanks, that is something I forgot about! Specially keeping in mind that from my experience Breitling is very detailed on the dial, which is something I'm after.
Thanks Dave, you are right. Still have to set up my mind to forget the chrono function and go for Rolex, but these opinions are most definitely helpful!
I think you hit the nail on the head! You described my goal far more precisely than I did in my first post.
Also this clarifies that the plus in terms of quality would be more importan on the visible parts, mostly on the dial. I don't mind a tool type work horse movement, but the mentioned Valjoux is seventies tech and just so common in the last two decades.
GS is a good call, but would prefer a sportiert model I guess.I love Tutima as brand but out of there latest offerings the M2 is closer to me in aesthetics, but large I guess.
I have a soft spot for Zeniths. The New Vintage 1969 is for example a perfect choice. Maybe not on the budget side though...
My pleasure; glad you found it to be of use.Wow, that is quite a detailed post to the thread
You say: "...many companies are aware that consumers are fairly insensitive to subtle but fundamental quality differences, so they simply add some marketing gimmicks to impress the innocent, while saving costs and cutting corners elsewhere."
^^This. It can hurt when on an otherwise well made dial money saved on the lume front. Some swiss brands still using a thin layer of lume while you can get tourch like dials for the fraction of price from boutique brands...
Also I have to agree with the Rolex models you mentioned. I have to make a deeper dive into Rolex models, especially because I was not even aware of dial variants and so on. Still don't forget that my original intention here was to see what is out there below Rolex prices.
You mention Nomos. Definitely a brand which needs attention. Quality wis they are there I think, also good in size. If they were only a touch sportier, and not that much on the dressy side. However your suggestion reminds me to have a look what German brands can offer, as toolish and flieger style is common for them.
While I'm not sure that the amount of luminescent material is a reliable indicator of quality, it is a bit unseemly when Swiss companies charge premium prices and then outsource major components to cheap-labour countries.
I mention those Rolex options because the 36 mm models tend to be underappreciated compared to the costlier 40 mm sports range, but share the same superb movements and are equally well-made. If you're considering something in the price range of an Omega co-axial chronograph, then they're a higher-quality alternative that can be had for reasonable money considering the no-excuses way that they're produced. In fact, the 34 and 36 mm models can somewhat of a bargain on the secondary market in my opinion. "Rolex price range" covers a rather wide band. :)
Indeed, Nomos tends to do more of the smart/dressy thing, but the Club model is a sporty alternative by their standards and could be worth a look.
Posting Permissions
