# Is it just me?



## born_sinner (Sep 17, 2013)

Or are there others who do not like the Damasko "crosshairs" on the dial?

I got around the problem easily by choosing a DC-66, which I love, but I just really don't like the look of the vertical and horizontal lines bisecting the center of the other watches. Besides looking unattractive to me, it seems to reduce legibility; the user could mistake the line for a hand. It just seems to me that the only lines radiating from the center of a watch should be the hands, if for no other reason than to avoid confusion.

I would be particularly interested in hearing from Damasko on this issue. I am also curious if one could order, say, a DA-36 with a "crossless" dial. I'm guessing not, since it is not a mater of simple part substitution.

Oh well, there is always the Sinn 856 Tegimented, but I would rather have a DA-36 with a plain dial.

And of course, no offense to those who love the dial design in question. Clearly, it is quite popular.


----------



## StufflerMike (Mar 23, 2010)

No, it's not just you. However, the majority obviously like the croos-hairs which over the time became kind of a trademark of Damasko three hand watches. I do not think that Damasko is going to change this. Not sure they will do a custom dial without cross-hairs. Anyway, send Damasko an email and you are in the know.


----------



## nymfan (Feb 15, 2013)

Without the crosshairs the day/date placement would seem very strange.


----------



## OnTheRoad99 (Sep 24, 2014)

born_sinner said:


> Or are there others who do not like the Damasko "crosshairs" on the dial?
> 
> I got around the problem easily by choosing a DC-66, which I love, but I just really don't like the look of the vertical and horizontal lines bisecting the center of the other watches. Besides looking unattractive to me, it seems to reduce legibility; the user could mistake the line for a hand. It just seems to me that the only lines radiating from the center of a watch should be the hands, if for no other reason than to avoid confusion.
> 
> ...


The crosshairs on the dial work much better in person than they appear in photos. I too thought I'd hate them and purchased a Sinn 856. It was very stark and I exchanged it for a Sinn 857 UTC. I liked it, but while it was highly legible, there was too much going on between the dial and bezel. I then picked up a Damasko DA-34 and I love it. Despite my reservations about the crosshairs, I couldn't imagine the watch without them.


----------



## OnTheRoad99 (Sep 24, 2014)




----------



## Nokie (Jul 4, 2011)

I like them. Adds character to the dial.


----------



## mpalmer (Dec 30, 2011)

While I really admire Damasko for everything they have achieved, aside from the DK101, there is a not a single dial that they produce that does anything for me....


----------



## ehansen (Sep 20, 2013)




----------



## born_sinner (Sep 17, 2013)

I was the same way for quite some time, but somehow the DC-66 crept up on me. To me, it has a certain "controlled chaos" (more like controlled busyness). I kept seeing it on the web, and it just eventually got hold of me. The fact that I like such a busy dial surprises me, as my two other favorite watches are the Sinn 656/856 and the EZM2, which are both very spartan.



mpalmer said:


> While I really admire Damasko for everything they have achieved, aside from the DK101, there is a not a single dial that they produce that does anything for me....


----------



## Brettg (Aug 14, 2012)

I also prefer a clean dial. However, I found this picture on the net, I think, of a DA36 prototype. It looks odd without the cross-hairs. As mentioned earlier in this thread, the off-set day/date window looks unbalanced without the cross-hair design.


----------



## karhu (Apr 27, 2013)

I like them and haven't mistaken them for a hand. If anything, it makes visualizing the time at a glance easier...I'm now in the third quarter of the hour, or the fourth quarter of 12 hours, etc. Not that you need them for this but it makes it a bit more intuitive. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## jwk7443 (Nov 13, 2012)

Brettg said:


> I also prefer a clean dial. However, I found this picture on the net, I think, of a DA36 prototype. It looks odd without the cross-hairs. As mentioned earlier in this thread, the off-set day/date window looks unbalanced without the cross-hair design.


I agree, the date window looks off without the lines, I guess it may also have to do with the sword hands.


----------



## Time On My Hands (Apr 28, 2014)

I prefer uncluttered dials. Somehow, with subtle design excellence, the DA36 remains clean to my eye, despite having day, date, and crosshairs.

Using Brettg's picture on the previous page for comparison, the crosshairs, as suspected, aid legibility and balance. Crosshairs are a design feature found on many vintage watches, and in my opinion, a positive feature of the DA36.


----------



## Axl911 (Apr 1, 2016)

Brettg said:


> I also prefer a clean dial. However, I found this picture on the net, I think, of a DA36 prototype. It looks odd without the cross-hairs. As mentioned earlier in this thread, the off-set day/date window looks unbalanced without the cross-hair design.


Very nice. Seeing one without the crosshair made me realize the crosshair does add balance and character to the dial.


----------



## madwolfa (Feb 13, 2011)

I like the cross hair. Never mistaken it for a hand or anything..


----------



## David Woo (Feb 12, 2006)

Axl911 said:


> the crosshair does add balance and character to the dial.


this.


----------



## WichitaViajero (Feb 22, 2013)

I like the dials a lot, but mpalmer, I really like the dial on the DK101, thanks for pointing it out!



mpalmer said:


> While I really admire Damasko for everything they have achieved, aside from the DK101, there is a not a single dial that they produce that does anything for me....


----------



## WichitaViajero (Feb 22, 2013)

I love that dial! is the one that caught my attention when looking at Damasko.



born_sinner said:


> I was the same way for quite some time, but somehow the DC-66 crept up on me. To me, it has a certain "controlled chaos" (more like controlled busyness). I kept seeing it on the web, and it just eventually got hold of me. The fact that I like such a busy dial surprises me, as my two other favorite watches are the Sinn 656/856 and the EZM2, which are both very spartan.


----------



## ridnovir (Feb 20, 2015)

I like the dial and especially cross-hairs which balance it out. I would be happy if Damasko would do smaller numbers and remove day/date slits and use only D for the logo - then the dial would be perfect for me.


----------



## Watchyman (Mar 4, 2010)

I like the cross hairs, remind me of the Universal Geneve Polerouter 

Sent from the Iron Throne using Westerosi ravens


----------



## born_sinner (Sep 17, 2013)

Yes, it definitely looks off with the offset day/date and logo placement. They would need to redo those. Meh. I decided I like the Sinn 856 tegimented better anyway, but it's a bit pricey.


----------



## Andy Chen (Jan 29, 2016)

Between Sinn and Damasko, I will always pick Damasko. D's prices are far more reasonable and its fantastically engineered cases are found even in the entry-level models. The Sinn 556 has only a standard 316L stainless steel case - I detest such a business practice, which forces customers to feel somehow inferior when they buy the lower-priced models.


----------



## timefleas (Oct 10, 2008)

While I prefer Damasko as well (this is after all, a Damasko forum), I also think Sinn makes a great watch, and having owned both the 556 and 656, never at all felt that I was wearing an inferior product--in fact, both, I think, represent outstanding bang for the buck, just as I think most of the DA3x series do. Different companies take different paths in order to keep their production costs down for the entry level models--both of these companies offer outstanding products in their given price range.


----------



## born_sinner (Sep 17, 2013)

I still think that Damasko could come up with some great non-crosshair dial layouts. I really love how they use the tiny crosshair for the seconds sub-dial on the DC66, and I think that there might be other such uses for a small crosshair on the dial. Of course they have already done another dial with no crosshair- the DSub2.

Here is a mockup I did of a DS 30 with no crosshair. A little too spartan? Not for my taste. Some text on the lower half of the dial might spice this up, but I don't think it's needed. I would buy this modified DS30 right now. I love the layout, power and simplicity of the dial. If Damasko offered this in ice-hardened steel, all the better. To me, Damasko's most special features are their case metallurgy, crown system, and other tech. I do not need the crosshairs to remind me of that. The Damasko name is enough on its own.


----------



## born_sinner (Sep 17, 2013)

As someone who owns both, I agree that Damasko beats Sinn in the value department, hands down. Sinn's Tegement process is not the equal of Damasko's ice hardening process. I have both a Damasko DC66 and a Sinn 856 Tegimented, and the Damasko looks much newer, though they have received comparable use. And don't even *think* of comparing a Sinn rotating bezel to a Damasko- there is no contest at all, in quality of operation *or* durability. The Damasko bezel is the best on the market. Good luck putting any kind of mark at all in the Damest-inlaid bezel. It is practically indestructible.


----------



## ancap95 (Aug 26, 2019)

The crosshairs are definitely a selling point for me, love them


----------



## DaveXS (Aug 21, 2019)

At first I wasn't crazy about the cross hairs, but I really like them now. Damasko's dials are uniquely Damasko, just like the rest of the watch.


----------



## neatlittlefellow (Feb 11, 2006)

Brettg said:


> I also prefer a clean dial. However, I found this picture on the net, I think, of a DA36 prototype. It looks odd without the cross-hairs. As mentioned earlier in this thread, the off-set day/date window looks unbalanced without the cross-hair design.


This is my picture  It isn't of a prototype, but a photoshop of my DC56. I did a few while we were discussing the DA36 on the forum a loooong time ago.

Grtz, Peter


----------



## seungbum81 (Jul 3, 2019)

I entirely agree with you. Damasko without cross hairs is not Damasko to me


----------



## whineboy (Aug 12, 2012)

seungbum81 said:


> I entirely agree with you. Damasko without cross hairs is not Damasko to me


I like the crosshairs on my DA46. But what do you say about the DSub2, Dsub3, DC5X, DC6X, DK105 and DK20X, they don't have crosshairs yet, to me, they are still very much Damaskos.


----------



## Miked6 (May 12, 2018)

When I first saw them, I wasn’t sold. I really preferred the clean aesthetic of the Sinn 556. Now, I much prefer the Damasko. It just seems more legible.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## The watch knob (Apr 7, 2018)

The dials are so incredibly stark, they add a little character. I also think they help with legibility at a glance as you kind of see which "sector" the hands are in when you look down. And as others have said, the day/date windows would look out of place without them.


----------



## HorologicOptic (Jun 17, 2019)

I think many of us have come to appreciate the crosshair more after perusing this thread - thanks OP!

:-!


----------



## seungbum81 (Jul 3, 2019)

whineboy said:


> I like the crosshairs on my DA46. But what do you say about the DSub2, Dsub3, DC5X, DC6X, DK105 and DK20X, they don't have crosshairs yet, to me, they are still very much Damaskos.


yes, you are right.
Let me correct it.

DS30 without crosshairs is not DS30.


----------



## oso2276 (Apr 19, 2017)

I actually prefer the DSUB1 over the other divers, just because the crosshair









Sent from my Moto Z3 Play using Tapatalk


----------



## cooper99 (Aug 6, 2019)

DA36 with the yellow second hand..contrast black dial...you do not even notice crosshairs...just outstanding..besides the lume is terrific


----------



## ldo123 (May 15, 2015)

I love the fact that Damasko adds the crosshairs to most of their 3 hand models, whereas it's good that they are not present on their Tricompax Chronographs - and possibly not on their future Bicompax Chrono models.


----------



## Greg H. (Feb 23, 2006)

Beautiful watch!!


----------



## Nidan (Nov 4, 2011)

The crosshairs don't bother me, I like them. I think they add to the legibility, especially if you take a quick glance at the watch off axis.


----------



## Rolexplorer (Sep 6, 2018)

The Damasko crosshairs do not bother me. In fact I never really notice the ones on mine.

What REALLY bothers me is when the manufacturers print half the specification sheet on their dials! "GRrrrrrr!!!!" :-|


----------



## V10k (Oct 18, 2008)

I really dislike the cross-hairs and I bought a DSub3 precisely for this reason 😁


----------



## 1234tuba (Oct 7, 2020)

Brettg said:


> I also prefer a clean dial. However, I found this picture on the net, I think, of a DA36 prototype. It looks odd without the cross-hairs. As mentioned earlier in this thread, the off-set day/date window looks unbalanced without the cross-hair design.


While it looks like it's missing something (because it is), that particular proto really strikes me. Like very much. Maybe it's the red tip on the seconds hand. I wonder if they would do this&#8230;. Like mike said, I guess it's worth an email.


----------



## ark1985 (Aug 1, 2019)

Nope. I love the crosshair. It provides a certain feel uniquely as DAMASKO design.


----------



## bts01 (Jul 27, 2017)

born_sinner said:


> I still think that Damasko could come up with some great non-crosshair dial layouts. I really love how they use the tiny crosshair for the seconds sub-dial on the DC66, and I think that there might be other such uses for a small crosshair on the dial. Of course they have already done another dial with no crosshair- the DSub2.
> 
> Here is a mockup I did of a DS 30 with no crosshair. A little too spartan? Not for my taste. Some text on the lower half of the dial might spice this up, but I don't think it's needed. I would buy this modified DS30 right now. I love the layout, power and simplicity of the dial. If Damasko offered this in ice-hardened steel, all the better. To me, Damasko's most special features are their case metallurgy, crown system, and other tech. I do not need the crosshairs to remind me of that. The Damasko name is enough on its own.
> 
> View attachment 14513363


This looks fine.

Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk


----------



## bts01 (Jul 27, 2017)

Brettg said:


> I also prefer a clean dial. However, I found this picture on the net, I think, of a DA36 prototype. It looks odd without the cross-hairs. As mentioned earlier in this thread, the off-set day/date window looks unbalanced without the cross-hair design.


When the watch has the offset day/date and name, it looks aweful to my eye without the crosshairs. Add them in and it balances very well (to my eyes).

Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk


----------

