# High end everyday watch



## Copper8

I'd like to buy a watch that can take a decent beating, be worn for sports (be they extreme or not; swimming, diving, hiking...) but also to work (I work at a hedge fund, it's a fairly "serious" environment) without looking gaudy, tacky or show-off. I want it to have a deployant clasp (don't ask why, I just love them for some reason) but no leather band (not fit for sports - so either rubber or metal).

I've thought about several watches: the Blancpain FF, Rolexes (the Submariner, Deepsea, Milgauss, YachtMaster I, Explorer and most others look good, but which of them are fit in a corporate environment?), the usual Patek and AP (is the Offshore acceptable?), IWC Ingénieur.
Do you have any recommendations based on that list? Will I look "boring" if I wear a Rolex or an IWC? Should I get something more exclusive?
I've seen the modifications on blackoutconcept.com, what do you think about them?


----------



## sheon

You need a luxury sports watch. 

How about this: the Piaget Polo 45? I was considering it for somewhat similar reasons to yours, but the size was too big for me. In the end, I got a Grand Seiko.


----------



## Crunchy

The JLC Navy Seal is something I would get if I hadn't bought a JLC Master compressor diver chrono. The navy seals models are actually tested in the field and have many modifications frm the model I have including better bezel (my JLC takes a beating but the bezel is not as sturdy)

View attachment 983338

img frm net


----------



## Copper8

The Piaget looks good. It's definitely not "too sporty", I like it.

As for the JLC, I forgot to say I didn't really like chronographs. Sorry. The only one I like might be the Royal Oak Offshore's.
On the other hand, a JLC diver without a chrono is perfectly acceptable, but I don't really know about the Jaeger lineup.

As for the watches I mentioned in the OP post (the Rolexes and all, as well as the "black out" concept which IMO looks good on some timepieces), could anyone give me some feedback and opinions on them?


----------



## scenar

Patek Nautilus?

The one on this thread looks awesome : https://www.watchuseek.com/f381/hi-ends-eye-candy-thread-352840-32.html


----------



## amine

Plenty suggestions here:

https://www.watchuseek.com/f381/tap...-what-consider-next-ap-ro-15400st-813532.html


----------



## omega1234

VC Overseas, AP Royal Oak, PP Aquanaut, PP Nautilus, or the more economical option, the Rolex Explorer.


----------



## Copper8

@scenar
I'm in Paris at the moment, and I took the opportunity today to go see the different manufacturers at Vendôme and Rue de la Paix.
I have to say that, while I didn't like how the Nautilus looked on the Internet, it's much more impressive "in real life". I'll definitely consider it.
Damn, now I want both a dress watch and an everyday watch. The Vacheron Constantin shop had really awesome timepieces.
@amine
Thanks, I'm having a look right now, plenty of options indeed.
After seeing them, I think the ROOs are too big and bulky. However, the RO is very refined and good looking.
The Aquanaut has a controversial connotation; while it looks pretty good, I'd prefer the Nautilus if I'm going Patek.
I've also thought about Hublot. Most of the Big Bangs are too big, but the Classic Fusion line isn't bad. I doubt this would be appropriate when going to work, though. Same thing for Richard Mille.
I also don't understand why people say that the Deepsea looks bad/big. It seems very solid and rugged, just like the Submariner. All Rolex models look good, but these ones are my favorite.
@omega1234
The Explorer isn't my favorite after all. The other ones you mentioned are on my "to-try-on"-list (except the Aquanaut).


----------



## heuerolexomega

Copper8 said:


> @scenar
> I'm in Paris at the moment, and I took the opportunity today to go see the different manufacturers at Vendôme and Rue de la Paix.
> I have to say that, while I didn't like how the Nautilus looked on the Internet, it's much more impressive "in real life". I'll definitely consider it.
> Damn, now I want both a dress watch and an everyday watch. The Vacheron Constantin shop had really awesome timepieces.
> @amine
> Thanks, I'm having a look right now, plenty of options indeed.
> After seeing them, I think the ROOs are too big and bulky. However, the RO is very refined and good looking.
> The Aquanaut has a controversial connotation; while it looks pretty good, I'd prefer the Nautilus if I'm going Patek.
> I've also thought about Hublot. Most of the Big Bangs are too big, but the Classic Fusion line isn't bad. I doubt this would be appropriate when going to work, though. Same thing for Richard Mille.
> I also don't understand why people say that the Deepsea looks bad/big. It seems very solid and rugged, just like the Submariner. All Rolex models look good, but these ones are my favorite.
> @omega1234
> The Explorer isn't my favorite after all. The other ones you mentioned are on my "to-try-on"-list (except the Aquanaut).


Yes the Aquanaut has controversial connotation, but the reason is because the watch is design to work in both worlds: dress attire and sport attire. So yes it looks intriguing, it wants to be dressy and wants to be sporty. That watch fits exactly what you are looking for. The problem is that no matter what, a watch like that, will compromise somewhere. Face it, you can't be gold 2 hand watch (dressy) and water resistant, rough (sporty) at the same time.
I totally agree that if you are going Patek, Nautilus is my preference too.

Don't forget the more versatile (arguably of course) watch Rolex has ever produce : DateJust

So I would say this
Compromise choice: PP aquanaut 
The in between choice: Rolex
Best Choice: buy 2 watches: Dressy and sport

Just my 0.02 cts
Good luck


----------



## Copper8

heuerolexomega said:


> Yes the Aquanaut has controversial connotation, but the reason is because the watch is design to work in both worlds: dress attire and sport attire. So yes it looks intriguing, it wants to be dressy and wants to be sporty. That watch fits exactly what you are looking for. The problem is that no matter what, a watch like that, will compromise somewhere. Face it, you can't be gold 2 hand watch (dressy) and water resistant, rough (sporty) at the same time.
> I totally agree that if you are going Patek, Nautilus is my preference too.
> 
> Don't forget the more versatile (arguably of course) watch Rolex has ever produce : DateJust
> 
> So I would say this
> Compromise choice: PP aquanaut
> The in between choice: Rolex
> Best Choice: buy 2 watches: Dressy and sport
> 
> Just my 0.02 cts
> Good luck


No, I don't think I'm going to buy the Aquanaut.
I should've asked to try the Nautilus on back when I went to Patek's boutique...

The Datejust isn't the best looking Rolex for me, but it sure is classy.
I'm not looking for a "pure sports watch", though.
I want a watch which I can wear casually (when doing sports, or hanging out) but that wouldn't look that much out of place at work.
That's why I mentioned the Deepsea, if I wanted a compromise, I wouldn't have considered it.


----------



## heuerolexomega

Copper8 said:


> No, I don't think I'm going to buy the Aquanaut.
> I should've asked to try the Nautilus on back when I went to Patek's boutique...
> 
> The Datejust isn't the best looking Rolex for me, but it sure is classy.
> I'm not looking for a "pure sports watch", though.
> I want a watch which I can wear casually (when doing sports, or hanging out) but that wouldn't look that much out of place at work.
> That's why I mentioned the Deepsea, if I wanted a compromise, I wouldn't have considered it.


Well it sounds to me that you want the Nautilus. That's a watch that you will love always, beautiful, iconic, not flashy, water resistant (I prefer bracelet over leather) and classy.
Don't hesitate go for it!:-!


----------



## Copper8

heuerolexomega said:


> Well it sounds to me that you want the Nautilus. That's a watch that you will love always, beautiful, iconic, not flashy, water resistant (I prefer bracelet over leather) and classy.
> Don't hesitate go for it!:-!


Heh, well I'm definitely going to try it on tomorrow. I wouldn't go for it without hesitation though, there are other models that I really like and have to try on, the Deepsea, Submariner, Royal Oak and others for instance. Also the JLC Master Compressor Diving without a chrono...


----------



## heuerolexomega

Copper8 said:


> Heh, well I'm definitely going to try it on tomorrow. I wouldn't go for it without hesitation though, there are other models that I really like and have to try on, the Deepsea, Submariner, Royal Oak and others for instance. Also the JLC Master Compressor Diving without a chrono...


I got a little overboard, I just love the watch, and I would pick the Nautilus over any of the others you mention. But it really doesn't matter what I like, at the end you are the one that has to end with a big smile
Good luck, all of your choices are great watches, so you are in great predicament, you can't go wrong.


----------



## iim7v7im7

Copper8 said:


> No, I don't think I'm going to buy the Aquanaut.
> I should've asked to try the Nautilus on back when I went to Patek's boutique...
> 
> The Datejust isn't the best looking Rolex for me, but it sure is classy.
> I'm not looking for a "pure sports watch", though.
> I want a watch which I can wear casually (when doing sports, or hanging out) but that wouldn't look that much out of place at work.
> That's why I mentioned the Deepsea, if I wanted a compromise, I wouldn't have considered it.


Here are eight choices that fit your bill. Some, however will be only available on a bracelet.


Audemars Piguet Royal Oak 15300 (39 mm) and 15400 (41 mm)
Blancpain Leman Ultra Slim Grand Date (rubber strap)
Breguet Marine (rubber strap)
IWC Ingenieur Mission Earth IW32601(rubber strap)
Patek Philippe Nautilus 5711
Rolex Yacht-Master 116622
Ulysse Nardin Marine Chronometer Manufacture (rubber strap)
Vacheron Constantin Overseas
I own two of these, so I will show you some shots to see if they interest you.


















Choose the watch that makes you smile (not us, or your colleagues).

Good Luck,


----------



## Copper8

heuerolexomega said:


> I got a little overboard, I just love the watch, and I would pick the Nautilus over any of the others you mention. But it really doesn't matter what I like, at the end you are the one that has to end with a big smile
> Good luck, all of your choices are great watches, so you are in great predicament, you can't go wrong.


Well, yeah, I'm not exactly sure. I have no "favorite watch", so it's a little more difficult. Same thing with dress watches, there are so much great choices that you don't know what to do with all those options.
I can't go wrong? Good to know. I thought stuff like the Deepsea would make me (assuming I bought it) look pretty stupid in the office or during meetings... Haha.


----------



## heuerolexomega

These are my two favorites sport and dressy(very, very bias):

View attachment 983981

View attachment 983993


----------



## Copper8

iim7v7im7 said:


> Here are eight choices that fit your bill. Some, however will be only available on a bracelet.
> 
> 
> Audemars Piguet Royal Oak 15300 (39 mm) and 15400 (41 mm)




Yep, considered it.


> Blancpain Leman Ultra Slim Grand Date (rubber strap)



 I *love* Blancpain dress watches and the FF isn't bad either, but this one doesn't cut it for me, sorry.



> Breguet Marine (rubber strap)


Not bad! Classy, simple, I like it.


> IWC Ingenieur Mission Earth IW32601(rubber strap)


I don't like the Mission Earth that much, but some other Ingénieur watches (the AMG Black Series ceramic seems to look good, for example) are cool.


> Patek Philippe Nautilus 5711


Yeah, I'm considering that too.


> Rolex Yacht-Master 116622


It looks good. But tell me, what purpose does the YachtMaster (I, not the II, it's incredibly gaudy) serve? I mean, the Milgauss is the antimagnetic one, the Deepsea is the diver... What about the YM?


> Ulysse Nardin Marine Chronometer Manufacture (rubber strap)


Why not. I'm not overly enthusiastic about it, but I don't dislike it either.
Maybe it could grow on me. I have yet to find an Ulysse Nardin seller in Paris, though. I'll search.


> Vacheron Constantin Overseas


Yeah. I'd rather get a dress watch if I'm going VC, I'm eyeing the Patrimony Traditionnelle World Time at the moment.


> I own two of these, so I will show you some shots to see if they interest you.


Your Rolex looks really good. I remember seeing it today, but I didn't look at it as much as I inspected the Deepseas and Subs, so I'll have to get a closer look tomorrow. Watches tend to look much, much better in real life than they do online. Just like cars.



> Choose the watch that makes you smile (not us, or your colleagues).
> 
> Good Luck,


Heh. I'm not looking for my coworkers' approval, just for something that won't attract the bad kind of attention at work.

Thank you.


----------



## Copper8

heuerolexomega said:


> These are my two favorites sport and dressy(very, very bias):


Awesome watches, mate. Your Lange looks great.
Making a decision about which dress watch to buy is much harder than making a decision about a sports watch.
There are so much dressy watches (and less dressy, but still very elegant ones) that I like. ALS is awesome, just like Patek, VC, or smaller manufacturers (Kari Voutilainen, Dufour, Roger W Smith...)


----------



## heuerolexomega

|>


Copper8 said:


> Awesome watches, mate. Your Lange looks great.
> Making a decision about which dress watch to buy is much harder than making a decision about a sports watch.
> There are so much dressy watches (and less dressy, but still very elegant ones) that I like. ALS is awesome, just like Patek, VC, or smaller manufacturers (Kari Voutilainen, Dufour, Roger W Smith...)


Thanks,
Eventually you will see the light, and say to yourself this is the watch!
When that happens just remember to post pics|>


----------



## amine

My humble suggestion: 

1-Go Royal Oak 15300/15400 depending on your wrist size and feel on the wrist, and it won't break the bank.
2-Settle for a Nautilus 5711/1A, it tics all the boxes but might hurt your pocket since it doesn't come cheap (even pre-owned).
3-The other choices...(god knows the list is long).

Happy hunting and good luck!


----------



## GETS

Royal Oak Jumbo (15300) which is 39mm. Such a versatile watch and much more stunning when viewed personally than pictures ever do justice.

Here's mine:


----------



## Copper8

@heuerolexomega
Haha, yeah. I'm not the type of guy to buy something simply because of the feeling it gives me, I consider the pros, cons and everything first.
But I will surely find the perfect watch for me.
@amine
Yep. I can afford both the Nautilus and the Royal Oak, I'd just like to save a little for a dress watch after that.
Thank you. I think I'm going to enjoy trying on all those timepieces tomorrow.
@GETS
The AP shop didn't show a lot of watches, but yeah, the RO definitely was more beautiful in real life.
The Offshores were too bulky, but the 15300 looked really cool.


----------



## Watcheroo

Copper8 said:


> @heuerolexomega
> Haha, yeah. I'm not the type of guy to buy something simply because of the feeling it gives me, I consider the pros, cons and everything first.
> But I will surely find the perfect watch for me.
> @amine
> Yep. I can afford both the Nautilus and the Royal Oak, I'd just like to save a little for a dress watch after that.
> Thank you. I think I'm going to enjoy trying on all those timepieces tomorrow.
> @GETS
> The AP shop didn't show a lot of watches, but yeah, the RO definitely was more beautiful in real life.
> The Offshores were too bulky, but the 15300 looked really cool.


If you're like most here, this hunt will not end with the 2 watches you want to get!

Good luck, there are many good suggestions here.

Cheers.


----------



## Copper8

Watcheroo said:


> If you're like most here, this hunt will not end with the 2 watches you want to get!
> 
> Good luck, there are many good suggestions here.
> 
> Cheers.


Well, I know I won't end up with only two watches. I'll surely build up a collection, but slowly. I won't buy watches because "they're classics", or "they're must haves", but rather because I find them interesting, unique or both.


----------



## gouverneur

Jaeger LeCoultre Deep Sea

View attachment 984036


View attachment 984040


----------



## Copper8

gouverneur said:


> Jaeger LeCoultre Deep Sea


Chronographs aren't my cup of tea, I never use them. The Master Compressor Diver (without chrono) I mentioned looks better, in my opinion.


----------



## iim7v7im7

I am not sure what you are asking exactly. You can read the propaganda on the Rolex site as well as I can. Here is my take..._

It looks good. But tell me, what purpose does the YachtMaster (I, not the II, it's incredibly gaudy) serve? I mean, the Milgauss is the antimagnetic one, the Deepsea is the diver... What about the YM?

_The Yacht-Master was introduced by Rolex in the early 1990s and was updated in 1999 and again in 2012. I believe that Rolex was creating a luxury model alternative to the sportier Submariner for rich men (think Thurston Howell III) on their yachts floating above the divers beneath the sea. They replaced the dark bezel with a 950 platinum bezel and the silver dialed versions are solid 950 platinum as well (my dial is brass with a brushed blue sun ray finish). I like it because it is an unusual Rolex model and does not jump out to others and say "ROLEX" from afar. Up close, you see the Rolex design DNA, but the platinum bezel from afar really changes the wrist presence of the watch.

I never wanted a Rolex, yet when I saw this one. I wanted it.

It sounds like you should go check out a AP RO, BP Fifty Fathoms, Breguet Marine, IWC and PP.


----------



## Copper8

iim7v7im7 said:


> I am not sure what you are asking exactly. You can read the propaganda on the Rolex site as well as I can.


Yeah. As you say though, it's pretty much propaganda, doesn't explain much. Just a "reference for navigators".



> Here is my take..._
> 
> _The Yacht-Master was introduced by Rolex in the early 1990s and was updated in 1999 and again in 2012.



The YM II doesn't replace the YM I though, does it?


> I believe that Rolex was creating a luxury model alternative to the sportier Submariner for rich men (think Thurston Howell III) on their yachts floating above the divers beneath the sea. They replaced the dark bezel with a 950 platinum bezel and the silver dialed versions are solid 950 platinum as well (my dial is brass with a brushed blue sun ray finish). I like it because it is an unusual Rolex model and does not jump out to others and say "ROLEX" from afar. Up close, you see the Rolex design DNA, but the platinum bezel from afar really changes the wrist presence of the watch.
> 
> I never wanted a Rolex, yet when I saw this one. I wanted it.


Ah, okay. So basically it's a more refined Submariner. Alright.



> It sounds like you should go check out a AP RO, BP Fifty Fathoms, Breguet Marine, IWC and PP.


Yeah, I'll also check out the Deepsea, Sub, YM I, JLC Master Compressor Diver, etc.


----------



## Crunchy

You mentioned "be they extreme or not, swimming, diving, hiking". IMO, PP or AP watches are not as durable as Rolex or JLC sports models! You can swim a little with a nautilus or RO, but not diving or hiking, and you will scratch polished surfaces very easily. PP does not make a dive watch, but AP does, it's the RO diver.

Depending how much of a beating you like the watch to endure, the Rolex any model, and JLC specifically Navy Seals are the most rugged high end sports watch. If you want cheaper durable beater watches, I learnt from another thread about Sinn, Damasko and Bremont. The JLC master compressor alarm Navy Seals was field tested, and Rolex was actually issued by some armies long ago. These are your best bets.

Alternatively, If you'd leave your watch while doing extreme sports, then any of the suggestions here so far will fit as everyday luxury models. Avoid a rubber strap like the aquanaut or ROO though, they don't look too good with full suit or dinner parties.


----------



## heuerolexomega

It might raise some eyebrows because Panarai is essentially a tool watch, but this one is 300m WR, comes with a rubber strap to interchange, beautiful Minerva movement and not bad looking at all. I just think its interesting

Radiomir 1940

View attachment 984436
View attachment 984441


Just throwing choices, I still prefer Patek or AP

From the net:

View attachment 984444
View attachment 984452

View attachment 984454
View attachment 984490


----------



## Copper8

@Crunchy
Okay. The JLC Navy Seals looks a bit overkill for my everyday life (like the Royal Oak Offshores), I like it but I don't know if it would fit a full suit or in dinners as you say. Same thing for the ROO Diver, it may not be appropriate. I think I'll go for a less durable watch, but a more versatile one (unless I go Rolex, in which case I'll get both reliability and versatility).

@heuerolexomega
The Panerai? I didn't think about it.
The Nautilus looks good in the pictures you posted. The Aquanaut, not quite (imo).

After trying some watches on, I find it even more difficult to decide. The RO, Nautilus and Deepsea are great, so are other Rolex models such as the Sub.
I didn't get to try what others recommended (the Fifty Fathoms, Bréguet Marine and all), though.


----------



## amine

heuerolexomega said:


> It might raise some eyebrows because Panarai is essentially a tool watch, but this one is 300m WR, comes with a rubber strap to interchange, beautiful Minerva movement and not bad looking at all. I just think its interesting
> 
> Radiomir 1940
> 
> View attachment 984436
> View attachment 984441


I see 30 M not 300, the Luminor line is rated 300M usually (my ones are) and the Radiomir variants come with a 100M rating apart from few models like the one you posted which has a lower WR due to some specific reasons (might be the gold case in this one).


----------



## heuerolexomega

amine said:


> I see 30 M not 300, the Luminor line is rated 300M usually (my ones are) and the Radiomir variants come with a 100M rating apart from few models like the one you posted which has a lower WR due to some specific reasons (might be the gold case in this one).


You are absolutely right mate, when someone ask about such a large variety of choices for a watch I find very useful to use an app from my iPad which gives me right model within a few secs. On the app is listed as 300m but it was kind of weird to me because I usually don't associate hand wound movement with WR. So I went to the panerai web site and yes the correct WR is 30 M.
Godd catch! also find out that this specific model doesn't come with the interchangeable rubber strap like in the case of my Luminor.

nevertheless is a beautiful watch: Pam00398
View attachment 984923


----------



## iim7v7im7

Copper8 said:


> @Crunchy
> Okay. The JLC Navy Seals looks a bit overkill for my everyday life (like the Royal Oak Offshores), I like it but I don't know if it would fit a full suit or in dinners as you say. Same thing for the ROO Diver, it may not be appropriate. I think I'll go for a less durable watch, but a more versatile one (unless I go Rolex, in which case I'll get both reliability and versatility).
> 
> @heuerolexomega
> The Panerai? I didn't think about it.
> The Nautilus looks good in the pictures you posted. The Aquanaut, not quite (imo).
> 
> After trying some watches on, I find it even more difficult to decide. The RO, Nautilus and Deepsea are great, so are other Rolex models such as the Sub.
> I didn't get to try what others recommended (the Fifty Fathoms, Bréguet Marine and all), though.


You're getting close and all are fine choices...

Audemars Piguet Royal Oak 15300 (39 mm) and 15400 (41 mm) (bracelet)
Blancpain Fifty Fathoms (sail cloth strap)
Breguet Marine (rubber strap)
Patek Philippe Nautilus 5711(bracelet)
Rolex GMT Master II, Submariner or Yacht-Master (bracelet)

I few comments the Blancpain Fifty Fathoms and the Rolex Deepsea don't wear well under a dress shirt sleeve do either there size or thickness. I personally, might not include these. I also think the Submariner and GMT Master II while fine watches are perhaps a bit ubiquitous for your liking. I also think the RO is not a watch to take swimming whereas in the Genta camp, the Nautilus can.

Breguet Marine (rubber strap)
Patek Philippe Nautilus 5711(bracelet)
Rolex Yacht-Master (bracelet)

I think between these three, there may be a watch for you. The Breguet and the Patek don't hack (e.g. Have a stop seconds) and the Rolex does. The Breguet offers the rubber strap you desired and is quite distinct in its look.

Bob


----------



## heuerolexomega

I have the impression that this dilemma is very common. if I am not wrong this might be 3rd thread in the last 1 or two months with this predicament. So you are not alone:-!. And it also seems that they all try all kind of different options and at the end they all succumb to either AP RO or PP nautilus.
Isn't that so? :-s
Not a bad thing at all, is just that they're really amazing watches, is hard to compete against those two.
I am curious of which is gonna be for you? Who knows you might surprise us!:-x
Might the force be with you:-d,


----------



## Copper8

iim7v7im7 said:


> You're getting close and all are fine choices...
> 
> Audemars Piguet Royal Oak 15300 (39 mm) and 15400 (41 mm) (bracelet)
> Blancpain Fifty Fathoms (sail cloth strap)
> Breguet Marine (rubber strap)
> Patek Philippe Nautilus 5711(bracelet)
> Rolex GMT Master II, Submariner or Yacht-Master (bracelet)


Do you think the rubber strap of the Bréguet makes it less dressy, like it was mentioned earlier (when talking about the Aquanaut)?



> I few comments the Blancpain Fifty Fathoms and the Rolex Deepsea don't wear well under a dress shirt sleeve do either there size or thickness.


Hm. I was indeed not sure if the Deepsea was acceptable with suits and all.



> I personally, might not include these. I also think the Submariner and GMT Master II while fine watches are perhaps a bit ubiquitous for your liking.


The fact that the Submariner is probably the most common Rolex indeed made it less appealing to me, despite the fact that it looks good.
I haven't really considered it up to now, but what about the Skydweller? I find it surprisingly elegant.
I also haven't really thought about the Explorer II and the Milgauss, both of which aren't "in your face" but are still distinctive.



> I also think the RO is not a watch to take swimming whereas in the Genta camp, the Nautilus can.


Why is that?



> Breguet Marine (rubber strap)
> Patek Philippe Nautilus 5711(bracelet)
> Rolex Yacht-Master (bracelet)
> 
> I think between these three, there may be a watch for you. The Breguet and the Patek don't hack (e.g. Have a stop seconds) and the Rolex does. The Breguet offers the rubber strap you desired and is quite distinct in its look.
> 
> Bob


Thanks for your contribution. Those are very fine watches, and I'm kind of leaning towards either the Nautilus or some Rolex models. This might change, though.

@heuerolexomega
Oh, really? I didn't really check. Maybe I should've looked at these other threads.


> is hard to compete against those two


What do you mean?

I don't know what I'm going to buy yet. Maybe I'll end up with a Nautilus/RO, or maybe I'll choose something more surprising, indeed.
Thanks


----------



## iim7v7im7

Regarding the Breguet, I think the dial with its guilloche and Roman numerals takes a water resistant sports watch into a dressier aesthetic. The rubber is sportier and there is a bracelet if you prefer. This watch also has a large date complication. 

My comment on the RO is based on it only having a 50 m water resistance rating. It really is not meant to be taken swimming. The other two options have 100 m and 120 m water resistance which is fine to take swimming. 

The Skydweller is not a watch that I like aesthetically although I respect it mechanically. It is also only available in gold which is less robust than the steel watches that we have discuss.


----------



## Copper8

iim7v7im7 said:


> Regarding the Breguet, I think the dial with its guilloche and Roman numerals takes a water resistant sports watch into a dressier aesthetic. The rubber is sportier and there is a bracelet if you prefer. This watch also has a large date complication.


Oh, okay.



> My comment on the RO is based on it only having a 50 m water resistance rating. It really is not meant to be taken swimming. The other two options have 100 m and 120 m water resistance which is fine to take swimming.


I see. Do you think that in terms of robustness, the AP is less resistant than the other watches mentioned?
Is it the same as the Nautilus in terms of resistance to scratches?



> The Skydweller is not a watch that I like aesthetically although I respect it mechanically. It is also only available in gold which is less robust than the steel watches that we have discuss.


Okay. Does Rolex plan to sell a steel version, you think?
What interests me in the Skydweller, apart from its looks, is its interesting complication.


----------



## heuerolexomega

Copper8 said:


> @heuerolexomega
> Oh, really? I didn't really check. Maybe I should've looked at these other threads.
> 
> What do you mean?
> 
> I don't know what I'm going to buy yet. Maybe I'll end up with a Nautilus/RO, or maybe I'll choose something more surprising, indeed.
> Thanks


You never know?:-s You might choose something different.
What do I mean?
i mean there is reason why those are thought after by collectors. The reason is simple: they tickle all the boxes!:-!. 
I love the Rolex explorer II, it doesn't yell I am Rolex ! It's not the cup of tea for a lot of people, but it's my favorite Rolex. Don't like at all the Skydweller, 
View attachment 985217


----------



## Copper8

heuerolexomega said:


> You never know?:-s You might choose something different.
> What do I mean?
> i mean there is reason why those are thought after by collectors. The reason is simple: they tickle all the boxes!:-!.


Yeah, they seem like the quintessential versatile luxury sports watches. As you said, though, I might choose something different.


> I love the Rolex explorer II, it doesn't yell I am Rolex ! It's not the cup of tea for a lot of people, but it's my favorite Rolex. Don't like at all the Skydweller,


Yeah, the Explorer II is more discreet. Does it have any special complications?
The Skydweller seems to be a "love it or hate it" watch. I think it has class and distinction. We'll see.


----------



## Medphred

I'd lean towards a PP Nautilus 









or VC Overseas









I also like the Exp2 if you travel as it has the 2nd timezone complication. But its not a refined as the above two, so it depends on what you like.


----------



## heuerolexomega

Copper8 said:


> Yeah, they seem like the quintessential versatile luxury sports watches. As you said, though, I might choose something different.
> 
> Yeah, the Explorer II is more discreet. Does it have any special complications?
> The Skydweller seems to be a "love it or hate it" watch. I think it has class and distinction. We'll see.


Yes Is a GMT ( 2nd time zone), on the pic the orange hand is kind of covered. But that's your Hometime.


----------



## Copper8

@Medphred
Do you really think Rolex is less refined? I'd agree on the fact that it's maybe less exclusive, but they can be very elegant. IMHO.
The Overseas isn't really my type.

@heuerolexomega
Ah, ok. So it's basically the same function as the Skydweller (which has two timezones too)?


----------



## heuerolexomega

Copper8 said:


> @Medphred
> Do you really think Rolex is less refined? I'd agree on the fact that it's maybe less exclusive, but they can be very elegant. IMHO.
> The Overseas isn't really my type.
> 
> @heuerolexomega
> Ah, ok. So it's basically the same function as the Skydweller (which has two timezones too)?


 yes, but the skydweler is also an annual calendar. Night vision is very good with the Explorer II. Well it was meant to explore caves. (They have the story on the Rolex website)


----------



## Copper8

heuerolexomega said:


> yes, but the skydweler is also an annual calendar. Night vision is very good with the Explorer II. Well it was meant to explore caves. (They have the story on the Rolex website)


Okay.
Well, anyway. We'll see. I'm staying long enough in Paris to try on a lot of watches. I have yet to decide if I want a more dressy one or a more sporty one, which features I want it to have exactly, etc.
Considering that I'm looking at 15k+ watches here, I'm going to think twice before buying anything, it's not a small investment.


----------



## tigerpac

Have you considered any GOs? Panoreserve or Panomatic lunar?

View attachment 985464


Borrowed pic


----------



## iim7v7im7

Copper8 said:


> Oh, okay.
> 
> I see. Do you think that in terms of robustness, the AP is less resistant than the other watches mentioned?
> Is it the same as the Nautilus in terms of resistance to scratches?
> 
> Okay. Does Rolex plan to sell a steel version, you think?
> What interests me in the Skydweller, apart from its looks, is its interesting complication.


AP RO's due to their faceted, sharp edged bezels are more prone to inadvertent dings than watches with radiused bezels. The Nautilus with its hard edged bezel will also be somewhat susceptible to dings as well if handled roughly as you implied you might. The Breguet and Rolex will be less scratch prone, but they will also ding and scratch if handled roughly.

Even if Rolex announces a steel Skydweller in late April at Baselworld (which I doubt, they'll go two-tone first) the new models won't really be available until late in the year. Just another thought here but aside from what we have discussed take a look at the Omega Seamaster Aqua Terra Chronometer if you haven't. Lastly, in terms of robustness, Rolex will be the most robust of what we are discussing.


----------



## mark1958

The GO Panoreserve is a great all around dress or sporty watch.. Perhaps not the watch i would use to go to the beach or play in a sporting event.


----------



## heuerolexomega

Copper8 said:


> Oh, okay.
> 
> I see. Do you think that in terms of robustness, the AP is less resistant than the other watches mentioned?
> Is it the same as the Nautilus in terms of resistance to scratches?


I think the AP is sportier and more resistant to scratches than the Nautilus. The reason is because the AP has Brushed/matt finish Whereas the Nautilus has a Mirror finish. I have to say that mine still looks great with no scratches or dings but I am conscious about it more that if I was wearing my Explorer II for example. So If resistance of scratches where you're only concern then it will go like this from more prone to less :
Nautilus >AP> Rolex.
Its sounds kind of harsh but the Rolex is a good beater watch (sorry, but is true)


----------



## Crunchy

I think the sky dweller is awesome. If you are going to wear a watch every day, you will appreciate the annual calendar complication, which you only have to reset once a year.


----------



## HPoirot

There's been plenty of good recommendations, but i just thought i'd add something to the mix. If it's gonna be a rubber strap, do take a look at Richard Mille. Try the RM010 or RM 023. 

Works well with suits, or with berms. Though, the funny thing about RM is, you gotta try it to 'get it'. 

2nd choice would be APRO for me. The AP was my everyday watch for the longest time, till i got the RM. Now i kinda have to force myself to wear my other watches and skip the RM.


----------



## shnjb

After having tried different variations of Nautiluses and the ROs, I was not so keen on using either of them for everyday purposes.
They are "sport" watches to be sure, but at 12-17K and 25K+, it just doesn't seem sensible to wear them "everyday."

I've owned a DJII before and it was too noticeable and conspicuous for everyday purposes.
It is in many ways more pretentious than any Patek in most social circles.

I find myself preferring a watch from a lower echelon, like a stainless Panerai or a Navitimer.
But then I don't need to wear suits everyday.


----------



## refugio

Not "high end" but I am enjoying my newly acquired 14060M as my daily knockabout watch. It's nice to not even think about dinging it.


----------



## heuerolexomega

Take your pick b-)

View attachment 988780


either way kind of a bling if you ask me, but nice


----------



## omeglycine

Late to the party. I don't recall seeing either of these suggested FP Journe: the Centigraph Sport and the Octa Sport. Aluminum alloy case and bracelet (or rubber, also rubber inserts on the case to protect from shocks), scratch resistant, anti-corrosive and and anti-allergic. And of course the wonderful cal 1300-3 movement. And there's a boutique in Paris.

(pics from the web)

View attachment 990327


View attachment 990328


----------



## sheon

OP,

Since you're considering travel watches, and since you work for a hedge-fund, how about the GP ww.tc financial? It's a world-timer and has major stock market opening and closing times on the dial:


----------



## Copper8

OP back, I left for several days for an emergency - I'm not in Paris anymore but I'll be in Geneva next week.
So, first of all, I didn't buy anything in Paris, because I always have a hard time deciding when I have interesting choices. Might have some kind of OCD, I have to really weight the pros and cons before deciding on a purchase like that.
Maybe I'll be getting a Seamaster (don't ask, I didn't even like Omega that much before I tried it on) as a real beater when doing extreme sports, though. But that's not really relevant.

I see there are lots of other recommendations... Richard Mille, FP Journe and all.
@HPoirot
This is interesting. If RM watches have to be tried on to "understand", then I'll see if I can get my hands on one in Geneva.
Richard Mille makes several really odd yet eye-catching watches, why did you recommend these models in particular?

@shnjb
Well, I understand what you mean. As I said, I'm probably going to get a Seamaster to beat up when hiking/diving/whatever, so hopefully I won't get too much dings and scratches on my other watch. Therefore, wearing it everyday might not be a problem.
Conspicuous? Hm, yes. Rolex is perceived as the classic "rich guy" watch, some kind of Porsche of timepieces, I guess. Now, if I get one, I'm not exactly going to wave it in the faces of everyone, and my coworkers and friends all wear luxury watches anyway (well, there are exceptions, but I highly doubt I'll be frowned upon by my family because I'm wearing a Rolex).
I do have to wear a suit and tie to work, though.

@refugio
Not exactly high end, but it's still a luxury watch. It's very common, though (the model)...

@heuerolexomega
Yeah, I prefer them in gray. And leather just doesn't fit the Sky-Dweller, imho.
Oh also, I spotted a very small Yacht-Master II during the last day I had in Paris. Is it a woman's model? Because it sure looked more attractive than the usual YMII. And the bezel was gray, so not gaudy like the standard gold/blue YMII.

@omeglycine
Interesting. FP Journe is an independant watchmaker, no? I like the odd look of the Octa Sport, I'll have to try one on and see it for real, though. The design is too uncommon for me to get an opinion based on pictures.

@shoen
Ah, yes, I'll be getting a dress watch too, not the subject of the thread but your recommendation is interesting too. If we're talking about dress watches, though, there are even more choices than if we're talking sports watches. World time timepieces are indeed convenient for my job (I like the Platinum World Time and Patrimony Traditionnelle WT, the GP looks good too), but I also am fond of complications such as Franck Muller (yeah, I might have bad taste, but the Master Banker is surprisingly elegant - tried it on), Thomas Prescher, Philippe Dufour...


----------



## HPoirot

Those 2 are the most popular time-only models offered by RM. Also, the RM 016, but no rubber option.

There are nicer ones, like the RM 035 and RM 055, but one of them is all black, and the other is all white, not too suitable for everyday wear. 

As for the rest, they come with a tourbillon and, though still surprisingly suitable for daily wear, are not usually recommended immediately for someone who wants to wet his feet.


----------



## Copper8

HPoirot said:


> Those 2 are the most popular time-only models offered by RM. Also, the RM 016, but no rubber option.
> 
> There are nicer ones, like the RM 035 and RM 055, but one of them is all black, and the other is all white, not too suitable for everyday wear.
> 
> As for the rest, they come with a tourbillon and, though still surprisingly suitable for daily wear, are not usually recommended immediately for someone who wants to wet his feet.


Okay.
The RM010 is my favorite, I might actually know someone who owns one (not sure if it's an RM010, but definitely a Mille with a rubber strap) so I'll ask to try it on. I'll also try one on at a boutique.
Why are they not recommended? The tourbillons are not suitable for underwater?


----------



## iim7v7im7

Most RM010's that I have seen specifications on are 50 meter water resistance watches. This level of water resistance is not really suitable for extended swimming (>100 m typically but sometimes can be less, for example for IWC its 60 meters). Keep in mind that you are buying a limited in production, highly complex mechanical device with a RM that costs a fortune. These watches while mechanically and aesthetically fascinating are not going to be "Rolex robust" and service will likely be both lengthy and costly.

My $.02



Copper8 said:


> Okay.
> The RM010 is my favorite, I might actually know someone who owns one (not sure if it's an RM010, but definitely a Mille with a rubber strap) so I'll ask to try it on. I'll also try one on at a boutique.
> Why are they not recommended? The tourbillons are not suitable for underwater?


----------



## HPoirot

I wouldn't worry about the 50m rating on the RM 010. You can swim with it safely as many have done so. Just don't go diving. lol 

RM tourbillons are definitely robust. Bubba Watson's 038 is worn when playing, Messa wore a 006 when his car crashed and both him and the watch walked away unharmed, Nadal wears his 027 when playing tennis, and it's even been proven that the 027 floats on water. 

I find, however, that the tourbillons are not too suitable for your requirement. As most tourbillon models are designed with a sport in mind, or inspired by them, they look more sporty. There are a few none sports-inspired tourbillon models, but they're a little too dressy and eye catching for daily wear. Eg, 051, 019, etc. 

And for half a mil a pop, i want that baby on my wrist all the times!


----------



## Crunchy

I absolutely love RM. I wouldn't swim with it because it doesn't have a screw down crown. RM makes dive watches too but they are too big for me.

rm10 is amazing. In titanium it's the lightest watch I've ever worn. If you like more heft, can go for the wg or rg models.


----------



## Watcheroo

OP - did you end up getting a watch?


----------



## mravery

I vote for the Girard Perregaux Sea Hawk Pro II..... Comes in a wide variety of metal (steel, titanium, titanium/gold and gold). Rubber or leather or metal strap. Here is my Titanium/Rose gold with rubber strap (and deployment buckle)... I wear it in the office and everywhere else.....







Love the watch and the brand!


----------



## BigChief

Copper8 said:


> I'd like to buy a watch...


Well, which one did you choose???


----------

