# What "Not High End" Brands Do You Admire?



## TimelessFan

Are you guys into high-end watches only? Or do you admire everything from Timex to ALS? Are there pieces you wear regularly or from time to time that are not high-end? Are there watches that are arguably better than high-end even though they're considerably cheaper? Is there a watch you're eyeing currently that's not high-end?

Me, I have a $50 Seiko military watch that I absolutely adore. It's surprisingly smooth and accurate and does not attract unwanted attention wherever I go. And I almost always wear it when I take the kid(s) out to a park or shopping malls.










And I'm also lusting after this Nomos at the moment:










(both images stolen from google)

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Watchbreath

That's what this forum is about.


----------



## mark1958

I second NOMOS… and also would add Muhle Glashutte


----------



## Galactic Sushiman

I have lot of respect for some G-Shock, Nomos, Sinn, Seiko, and Zenith models. I am sure there are others


----------



## TimelessFan

mark1958 said:


> I second NOMOS&#8230; and also would add Muhle Glashutte


That particular Nomos would be in my collection already if it was 36-38mm. Looking to try it on but difficult to find a retailer in LA who has it.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## ilikebigbutts

Rolex :-d

Sorry, couldn't resist. Can't really think of any off the top of my head, 'admire' is a strong word. I do like that Seiko up their, and actually got one recently. 

I also really like my Stowa Flieger. 

Been meaning to see a Baume & Mercier Capeland chrono in the flesh. They look nice in the pics. A lot of the WIS favourites such as Sinn and Nomos leave me relatively cold. 

Now I can think of one. Heuer! I love vintage Heuer Chronos.


----------



## bjh123

I own three of the so called 'High end' watches but I still think that the like's of Casio , Seiko and Citizen give you a lot of watch for the money. See attached!


----------



## heuerolexomega




----------



## World

I like the brand Victorinox (known for their Swiss army knives):
Timepieces - Victorinox Swiss Army I suggest the automatic dive master 500 (in white or red) and/or their night vision. If it is not for yourself, then they would at least make for a nice (Christmas) present for any of your family members or friends. I remember when they just launched the latter watch: they did a good job at marketing: many airport shops had nice stands for the then newly released night vision and big ads were all over the place, especially in certain malls I've visited. As a matter off fact, I bought a night vision for my little nephew in Senayan city mall in Jakarta when they had a big promotion at the time. He liked it very much. Personally, I also like the small sized automatic time piece of Longines: the Lindbergh hour angle watch, their automatic GMT w/ steel bracelet and their classic diver. And of course, the standard bread and butter omega seamaster/ planet ocean (ss w/blue dial) or the rolex submariner (ss w/ black dial) would normally also fit in this respect, though personally, I don't like them for reasons mentioned elsewhere. And of course, the standard swatch. I grew up in the 80's w/ the big Swatch ads & commercials all over the place, so, yeah, how can you not like their themed plastic quartz watches.


----------



## mark1958

You can order one from Watchbuys and if you don't like it.. send it back.. you only pay for the shipping



TimelessFan said:


> That particular Nomos would be in my collection already if it was 36-38mm. Looking to try it on but difficult to find a retailer in LA who has it.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Ric Capucho

You had to ask, didn't you?

Beijing Beihai, SB18 inhouse movement. The best looking watch in my collection, even topping my Max Bill Chronoscope in the looks department.
















Beijing Zhufeng, SB18 inhouse movement. Ceramic dial, blobs of molten metal applied markers. Excuse the mismatched milanese. The bloody watch has 21mm lugs, so I'm experimenting to see if the look floats my boat.
















Beijing ZunJue, T18 (actually a de-rotored auto hybrid) inhouse movement
















Beijing ZunDa, inhouse automatic
















Bejing Liaoning, yet another inhouse automatic








Beijing Model One Reissue, yet another another inhouse movement








Shuangling 40 Zuan, earlier inhouse movement with 40 jewels that actually do something. Red dials were a Chinese things during the cultural revolution.
















Shuangling 20 Zuan, earlier inhouse handwind. The dial is a simply wonderful vertical brushed affair.








Say what you want about Chinese horology, but during the loooooooooong post-quartz winter whilst Tag Heuer, Omega, IWC and the like have been stuffing ETA pop outs into their (yes, I agree very beautifully finished) cases, Beijing have been making *watches* from the ground up. I own ten Beijings at the moment (Shuangling was a sub-brand) and there're seven different movements amongst them. And not one of them is a copy of some generic ETA. Beijing still have about eight movements extant, which is stunning in the modern world.

I'll soon be getting my third SB18 powered watch, but that'll be an entirely different brand. Watch this space.

Ric


----------



## TimelessFan

mark1958 said:


> You can order one from Watchbuys and if you don't like it.. send it back.. you only pay for the shipping


Yeah, I'm aware of that but I don't feel like paying $5k for a Nomos, not when I have another GMT (Rolex) in mind. A mint Nomos can be had for $3k or slightly less which I think is more reasonable. But I need to make sure it looks good on my wrist. I hear it wears a lot bigger than its 40mm size.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## drhr

Bremont, Grand Seiko, Muhle Glashutte, Nivrel, Nomos, (older) Union Glashutte . . .


----------



## lmcgbaj

Seiko is my favorite non high-end brand.


----------



## shnjb

Rolex 
Breitling - navitimer
Panerai - love their dial designs.
Casio - g-shocks


Hmm. That's all I can think of for now.


----------



## cedargrove

Rolex, Omega, Zenith, Meistersinger.


----------



## GlenRoiland

Ric, you nailed it!


----------



## hoppes-no9

Muhle Glashutte, Seiko


----------



## tony20009

Admire any number of them, if only because they offer something that looks good, functions reliably and doesn't cost an arm and a leg. There're many things one can buy that cost far more than a cheap watch and that don't, at the thing for which they exist to do, function as well as as reliably, despite sometimes even being less complicated objects. I don't think every watch going has to be notable for being at the height of the art of mechanical watchmaking. It's enough to appreciate this or that brand for just making a good, solid product.

Take even Rolex, which some may say isn't high end, others, including myself, think it is. Either way, I think most agree Rolex don't have the absolute best movements in the world. Other brands offer ones that are far more refined. Rolex haven't the most reliable movements in the word; plenty of ETA and other folks movements are just as long lasting and tolerant of abuse. What Rolex does have, however, is an outstanding compromise of features -- looks, reliability, proven and deserved reputation, luxury materials, and price when compared against a great many directly competitive products. That's what makes them so highly admired. But the same could easily be said of many other brands at a swarm of price points, from $100 to $100K, maybe even higher.

Some specific brands:
- Timex
- Seiko 
- Citizen
- Swiss Army (pick the maker that suits you)
- Tag
- Swatch
- Obris Morgan
- Sea-gull
- Orient
- Hamilton

And those are just the ones that come easily to mind.

All the best.

&#8230;but you, O you,
So perfect and so peerless, are created
Of every creature's best!
- The Bard, _The Tempest_


----------



## Dane17

My least expensive watch by far is a marathon GSAR. I really appreciate it for what it is. 

I also really like the Sinns and suspect one will be my next purchase.


----------



## MattHofstadt

*Nomos* - Highest quality craftsmanship at the price point... by far.
*Rolex* - Excellent brand reputation + gotta love the Daytona.
*Panerai* - Love it or hate it, you've got to respect the unique design and the brand's lightening fast, meteroic rise to fame.
*Zenith* - A lot of watch for the money.


----------



## rightrower

Sinn. I love the watch till the moment I sold it. The design and build is something that I mesmerize me. 

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk


----------



## georges zaslavsky

Jenny-Fantastic tool dive watches for the money
Marathon Sar-Rugged Diver that withstands the abuse quite well
Breitling-Chronomat, Navitimer or Transocean with their inhouse movements offer a lot for the money
Omega-An indisputable choice for the value they represent
Rolex-For their never losing Value on resale and great robustness
Ball-For the craftsmanship on their cases, dial legibility and antimagnetism on the movement
Longines-The L688 inhouse chrono offers a lot of a chrono with a column wheel for the money


----------



## ncmoto

Crepas


----------



## beatific

Seiko. Excluding their 'Grand Seiko' range, which are high end.

Seiko is reliable, Value for money, and for all intent and purposes, their movements are 'inhouse'.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## PremierCurrency

I think Maurice Lacroix & Chronoswiss perfectly fit the "admirable non-high-end" brands.


----------



## R.Palace

beatific said:


> Seiko. Excluding their 'Grand Seiko' range, which are high end.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Glad someone said it. Say what you want, there's no denying that GS is high end. Think less about the price and more about innovation and craftsmanship when labeleing something high end, IMO.


----------



## shnjb

R.Palace said:


> Glad someone said it. Say what you want, there's no denying that GS is high end. Think less about the price and more about innovation and craftsmanship when labeleing something high end, IMO.


I'm not disagreeing with anything so just an honest question.
What innovations are GS known for?


----------



## imaCoolRobot

Seiko - about 2/3 of all the watches I've ever owned are Seiko
Casio - almost every early watch I had was a Casio
Suunto
Orient
Vostok


----------



## ilitig8

I don't know about "admire" but I like at least one watch from a TON of brands that are not high end, many of them are not ones I am "supposed" to like. For example I can't help but really like Panerai, in fact I own more PAMs than any other single brand. I also like Bell & Ross and though I don't have one at the present I probably will buy another one sometime this year. I also like a lot of affordables but I always seem to decide just a little too late and watch them go out of stock.


----------



## Domo

shnjb said:


> I'm not disagreeing with anything so just an honest question.
> What innovations are GS known for?


Grand Seiko is all about the 'best basic' concept, so all their innovations are subtle. If you want headline making innovations, look to Credor and their masterpiece series.
Nevertheless, off the top of my head...
1) MEMS manufacturing is exclusive to the Grand Seiko escapement and is the most precise technique in machining alloys to be perfect in shape and smoothness on earth.
2) SPRON 610 & 510 anti-magnetic alloys used in 9S & 9R Grand Seiko calibres that are the strongest and highest-performance springs ever used in a watch.
3) Although Spring Drive is available in other watches, it really is the halo product and selling point of a Grand Seiko. Some people like it, others don't, but it's extremely impressive. Seiko has stipulated that going forward it will only feature in Credor and GS. Occasionally in Prospex, but only in L.E's. No more SD Ananta's apparently.

I'm trying to strictly stick to GS, but if you open it up to Seiko (which is one and the same thing) the list would be gigantic. And GS utilize many regular Seiko innovations, like the magic lever for example

To answer the thread, I'm not a huge high-end guy (funds, mostly  but I really like Maurice Lacroix. Their 10K masterpiece manufacture lines are awe inspiring in person and the finishing is phenomenal. I get the feeling that a lot more thought, innovation and care has gone into these low production watches than your average AP RO for example.


----------



## shnjb

Hmm those don't seem to stand up to invention of entire complications or some of the recent innovations from GP, zenith, etc.


----------



## Domo

shnjb said:


> Hmm those don't seem to stand up to invention of entire complications or some of the recent innovations from GP, zenith, etc.


Absolutely. I put that down to two things:
1) A complication by it's very definition would not suit a Grand Seiko watch.
2) I think it's safe to say that the long established houses of haute horologie have time on their side. Seikosha was established in 1892 (clocks) and watches themselves only appeared in 1924. And lets just say that Japan was not in the same position technologically as Europe at that time.

If you pile together everything Seiko has brought to the table from then to now, the list would be enormous. But as far as innovations only to traditional mechanical movements go, the Swiss as a _whole _certainly win that battle. Seiko is more about technological innovation, both in electronics, manufacturing and materials (i.e. NOT Haute horologie)


----------



## shnjb

Domo said:


> Absolutely. I put that down to two things:
> 1) A complication by it's very definition would not suit a Grand Seiko watch.
> 2) I think it's safe to say that the long established houses of haute horologie have time on their side. Seikosha was established in 1892 (clocks) and watches themselves only appeared in 1924. And lets just say that Japan was not in the same position technologically as Europe at that time.
> 
> If you pile together everything Seiko has brought to the table from then to now, the list would be enormous. But as far as innovations only to traditional mechanical movements go, the Swiss as a _whole _certainly win that battle. Seiko is more about technological innovation, both in electronics, manufacturing and materials (i.e. NOT Haute horologie)


Thanks for that informed opinion.
But doesn't the fact that seiko is not about "haute horlogerie" necessitate that it's also not a high end manufacturer (don't they mean the same thing in different languages?)
The innovations listed above remind me of another great brand which would not be categorized as high end: Rolex.


----------



## GETS

Longines - I admire them and like them
Seiko - I admire them but don't like them
Christopher Ward - I admire them and like some of them

I don't agree that Rolex or Panerai are NOT high end. I think that they are.


----------



## PremierCurrency

GETS said:


> I don't agree that Rolex or Panerai are NOT high end. I think that they are.


 I think the problem is that the term "high end" is much too broad. In other words, yes Rolex is high end&#8230;except that Patek, Vacheron, Lange, etc are uber-high end.


----------



## Domo

shnjb said:


> Thanks for that informed opinion.
> But doesn't the fact that seiko is not about "haute horlogerie" necessitate that it's also not a high end manufacturer (don't they mean the same thing in different languages?)
> The innovations listed above remind me of another great brand which would not be categorized as high end: Rolex.


I absolutely agree. I don't understand a lot of animosity between Seiko people and Rolex people. I see them as very similar makers, bar the joaillerie work Rolex does.
Seiko certainly isn't a high-end manufacturer, but some of their offerings are high-end I think. Their very finely adjusted precious metal hi-beats and certain Credors come to mind. But when you have to start pick-and-choosing models, it's easier to just not worry about it, LOL.
I wasn't trying to argue that Seiko as a maker was high-end or that they belonged here, BTW. I was just trying to answer your question about innovations. When I sniff Seiko coming up in conversation, I can't help but jump in


----------



## imaCoolRobot

Domo said:


> Absolutely. I put that down to two things:
> 1) A complication by it's very definition would not suit a Grand Seiko watch.
> 2) I think it's safe to say that the long established houses of haute horologie have time on their side. Seikosha was established in 1892 (clocks) and watches themselves only appeared in 1924. And lets just say that Japan was not in the same position technologically as Europe at that time.
> 
> If you pile together everything Seiko has brought to the table from then to now, the list would be enormous. But as far as innovations only to traditional mechanical movements go, the Swiss as a _whole _certainly win that battle. Seiko is more about technological innovation, both in electronics, manufacturing and materials (i.e. NOT Haute horologie)


ermmm the Astron...did anyone forget?
That's an innovation arguably greater than any complication ever made. It paved the way for watches to be both accurate and inexpensive. That innovation single handled killed 2 out of 3 Swiss watch makers. 
Here's an interesting article about cheap "high end watches."
The Cheapest High End watch - Monochrome Watches

to quote:
_Let us summarize what would qualify a watch as being High End._


_A mechanical_
_Manufacture movement_
_From a brand with undisputed pedigree_
_With preferably still involvement of the founding family_
_A vintage_
_With a steel case_
_Under 40mm in diameter_


----------



## imaCoolRobot

Domo said:


> I absolutely agree. I don't understand a lot of animosity between Seiko people and Rolex people. I see them as very similar makers, bar the joaillerie work Rolex does.
> Seiko certainly isn't a high-end manufacturer, but some of their offerings are high-end I think. Their very finely adjusted precious metal hi-beats and certain Credors come to mind. But when you have to start pick-and-choosing models, it's easier to just not worry about it, LOL.
> I wasn't trying to argue that Seiko as a maker was high-end or that they belonged here, BTW. I was just trying to answer your question about innovations. When I sniff Seiko coming up in conversation, I can't help but jump in


Seiko is honest and definitely democratic.
They make great watches and charge an honest price for them. Democratic in the sense that they make something for just about anyone...no matter what the budget.
Only have $50 but want an automatic watch? Seiko Men's SNK809 "Seiko 5" Automatic Watch with Black Canvas Strap: Watches: Amazon.com
The 7s26C movement might be made in Malaysia but regulated, it can easily meet COSC standards.
Have more to spend, you can get a GrandSeiko costing over $5000 which easily exceeds any Rolex in that price range.

A lot of the Luxury makers simply charge as high as they can knowing that the luxury market seems to equate high prices with value. Even worse are the ones who simply sprinkle diamonds all over a watch in attempt to bring prestige. *cough Hublot*


----------



## shnjb

Hmm I don't know. All profitable companies have fiduciary duties to maximize their profits by charging the maximum price justified by the market. I don't believe for a second that seiko somehow does not do this or it won't charge more if it could.


----------



## Galactic Sushiman

shnjb said:


> Hmm I don't know. All profitable companies have fiduciary duties to maximize their profits by charging the maximum price justified by the market. I don't believe for a second that seiko somehow does not do this or it won't charge more if it could.


Well, if your strategy is $$$ through volumes, you can technically be in a situation where minimizing price (and therefore margin/unit) is the reason for maximizing profits


----------



## Domo

shnjb said:


> Hmm I don't know. All profitable companies have fiduciary duties to maximize their profits by charging the maximum price justified by the market. I don't believe for a second that seiko somehow does not do this or it won't charge more if it could.


In my own opinion, Seiko does both. They've worked to make many, many of their innovations and once-expensive technologies affordable for all, chasing the "high volume, low $$$" scheme, but other things like Spring drive for example are being used to leverage a high price and make more profit on their expensive watches. I'm sure Seiko would charge more for their GS's and Anantas if they could, but their brand perception and distributor network (mainly mall jewellers, etc) would restrict that.
Eventually, looking forward IMO, Seiko's premier offerings will only go up in price. They've got their eye on the prize (Big bucks) IMO.


----------



## DelbertQ

Ric Capucho said:


> You had to ask, didn't you?
> 
> Beijing Beihai, SB18 inhouse movement. The best looking watch in my collection, even topping my Max Bill Chronoscope in the looks department.
> View attachment 1292556
> 
> 
> View attachment 1292557
> 
> 
> Beijing Zhufeng, SB18 inhouse movement. Ceramic dial, blobs of molten metal applied markers. Excuse the mismatched milanese. The bloody watch has 21mm lugs, so I'm experimenting to see if the look floats my boat.
> View attachment 1292558
> 
> 
> View attachment 1292559
> 
> 
> Beijing ZunJue, T18 (actually a de-rotored auto hybrid) inhouse movement
> View attachment 1292560
> 
> 
> View attachment 1292561
> 
> 
> Beijing ZunDa, inhouse automatic
> View attachment 1292562
> 
> 
> View attachment 1292563
> 
> 
> Bejing Liaoning, yet another inhouse automatic
> View attachment 1292565
> 
> 
> Beijing Model One Reissue, yet another another inhouse movement
> View attachment 1292566
> 
> 
> Shuangling 40 Zuan, earlier inhouse movement with 40 jewels that actually do something. Red dials were a Chinese things during the cultural revolution.
> View attachment 1292571
> 
> 
> View attachment 1292572
> 
> 
> Shuangling 20 Zuan, earlier inhouse handwind. The dial is a simply wonderful vertical brushed affair.
> View attachment 1292573
> 
> 
> Say what you want about Chinese horology, but during the loooooooooong post-quartz winter whilst Tag Heuer, Omega, IWC and the like have been stuffing ETA pop outs into their (yes, I agree very beautifully finished) cases, Beijing have been making *watches* from the ground up. I own ten Beijings at the moment (Shuangling was a sub-brand) and there're seven different movements amongst them. And not one of them is a copy of some generic ETA. Beijing still have about eight movements extant, which is stunning in the modern world.
> 
> I'll soon be getting my third SB18 powered watch, but that'll be an entirely different brand. Watch this space.
> 
> Ric


Those are beautiful watches, and when I searched for them online I was shocked at how affordable they are! I found some on E-bay and others on a site called Times International (but url is good-stuffs.com). What online retailers would be most trustworthy for purchasing these Chinese mechanicals?


----------



## Ric Capucho

DelbertQ said:


> Those are beautiful watches, and when I searched for them online I was shocked at how affordable they are! I found some on E-bay and others on a site called Times International (but url is good-stuffs.com). What online retailers would be most trustworthy for purchasing these Chinese mechanicals?


The Ebay seller (trusthonestman) and the website good-stuffs.com is the same guy, Jun Liao. He's, erm, an honest man that can be trusted. Bought six watches from him over time.

Ric


----------



## tony20009

My first post in this thread addressed the idea of appreciation more from the standpoint of specific watches whether the company makes any specific watches I'd be happy to or want to own. I think it's worth noting that sometimes I don't have much of an opinion or appreciation, in the sense of desire, for any watch a given company may make, yet I have appreciation for the brand/company that makes the watch.

In some way, I admire almost every watch company out there because one way or another, they are providing something that folks desire in a watch. Some fill needs the easy way, such as Parnis, Invicta, Stuhrling Original, and others, and some do it the hard way, which is to say by innovating and designing things from scratch. Regardless of the approach any company uses, so long as it means that someone who wants a thing, a watch, having certain attributes at a price they can afford, I have some degree of admiration for the company that legally provides it for those people. Finding needs and filling them are what drive business, and there's a level of respect that must be accorded any entrepreneur who can do so consistently and profitably.

I know some folks here disagree with that view. That's okay. For example, I know lots of folks don't care much for cheaply made, cheaply sold watches. I get that. I don't care for them either. Yet there are consumers for whom such watches are exactly what they want. Those folks don't give a tinker's dam about watches and they know enough not to expect "too much" from their ~$50 or less watch. I don't mind at all giving some "cred" to the companies that make those products, much the same way I give props to the "dollar store" that sells all sorts of cheap stuff for folks who want just that, something cheap that gets the job done, whatever that "job" is. If one wants to collect "dollar watches," so be it. Who am I to ridicule that collector or the things s/he collects or the company that makes it possible and enjoyable for him/her to collect them?

When it comes to admiration in the sense of being impressed or not with the offerings of this or that company, there are plenty that I just don't like. For example, I really don't like most any watches made expressly for children. I don't say that from the position of one who'd buy them for myself, but from the position of one who this past Christmas had a request from a child for a watch. The child could see as well as I could that the majority of the stuff targeted to children is just ridiculously tawdry stuff. I don't know if the kid for whom I was buying is just more "advanced" than his peers or what, but I know he had no interest in the silly things that are so called "kids' watches." Of course, I'm not stupid enough either to think that most folks are willing to spend $100+ on a watch for a child, and having had three children, I know why. So there's something of dilemma there. The solution I came up with was to buy an inexpensive adult's watch was offered in silly (to me) color combination that he child really liked.

All the best.

He has all the virtues I dislike and none of the vices I admire.
- Winston Churchill, _Wealth, War and Wisdom_


----------



## shnjb

Galactic Sushiman said:


> Well, if your strategy is $$$ through volumes, you can technically be in a situation where minimizing price (and therefore margin/unit) is the reason for maximizing profits


Yes but wouldn't they still rather charge higher margin per unit while selling at lowest price possible?


----------



## imaCoolRobot

tony20009 said:


> In some way, I admire almost every watch company out there because one way or another, they are providing something that folks desire in a watch. Some fill needs the easy way, such as Parnis, Invicta, Stuhrling Original, and others, and some do it the hard way, which is to say by innovating and designing things from scratch. Regardless of the approach any company uses, so long as it means that someone who wants a thing, a watch, having certain attributes at a price they can afford, I have some degree of admiration for the company that legally provides it for those people. Finding needs and filling them are what drive business, and there's a level of respect that must be accorded any entrepreneur who can do so consistently and profitably.
> 
> When it comes to admiration in the sense of being impressed or not with the offerings of this or that company, there are plenty that I just don't like. For example, I really don't like most any watches made expressly for children. I don't say that from the position of one who'd buy them for myself, but from the position of one who this past Christmas had a request from a child for a watch. The child could see as well as I could that the majority of the stuff targeted to children is just ridiculously tawdry stuff. I don't know if the kid for whom I was buying is just more "advanced" than his peers or what, but I know he had no interest in the silly things that are so called "kids' watches." Of course, I'm not stupid enough either to think that most folks are willing to spend $100+ on a watch for a child, and having had three children, I know why. So there's something of dilemma there. The solution I came up with was to buy an inexpensive adult's watch was offered in silly (to me) color combination that he child really liked.


I'm not terribly crazy about the Luxury Imposters. It feels like it is a parody of the concept of "luxury." Worse yet at the brands who are only heritage in name but no longer have anything to do with the original company. Trading purely on good will. Worst of all are the brands who do all they can to legally imply that they have some legitimacy...like Stauer and Steinhausen.

Hey I <3 my Seiko SNK809 

I don't have any kids but what you said about kids watches make sense. I can't stand the gimmicky plastic watches that are given away free as swag either. Or the cheap rubbish that passes off as kids watches these days.
The first watch I ever owned was a Swiss Made Bradley MickeyMouse with the Pink Face. I was like 5 at the time  I think...hell it was a long time ago.
Is it a kids watch? I think so...was it cool? heck yes.


----------



## imaCoolRobot

shnjb said:


> Yes but wouldn't they still rather charge higher margin per unit while selling at lowest price possible?


So Seiko's biggest sin is not charging enough for its terrific watches to be considered high end?


----------



## tony20009

chuasam said:


> *I'm not terribly crazy about the Luxury Imposters*. *It feels like it is a parody of the concept of "luxury."* Worse yet at the brands who are only heritage in name but no longer have anything to do with the original company. Trading purely on good will. Worst of all are the brands who do all they can to legally imply that they have some legitimacy...like *Stauer and Steinhausen. *
> 
> Hey I <3 my Seiko SNK809
> 
> I don't have any kids but what you said about kids watches make sense. I can't stand the gimmicky plastic watches that are given away free as swag either. Or the cheap rubbish that passes off as kids watches these days.
> The first watch I ever owned was a Swiss Made Bradley *MickeyMouse* with the Pink Face. I was like 5 at the time  I think...hell it was a long time ago.
> *Is it a kids watch? I think so...was it cool? heck yes.*


*Red: *
I'm not crazy about them either. I have yet to come across Steiinhausen. I have come across Stauer. They are one of the very, very few companies that I genuinely despise. I don't despise the fact that they offer cheap watches or clone watches. I despise the fact that they consistently offer as a "good value" alternative watches that are priced far, far higher than what those watches need to be priced at in order for Stauer to make a good profit. It's one thing to charge $50 or so for a cheap copy that might really be more fairly priced at ~$35 as do Parnis and Invicta. It's altogether something else to charge ~$250+ for a watch that could be sold for $50, and that should probably only cost $35. In the financial services industry that sort of thing is called "usury." It's unfortunate no such laws exist for tangible consumer products.

*Blue:*
Well, I think there's a fair case to be made that "the concept of 'luxury' " is one ripe for well deserving of parody. LOL Even as a luxury goods consumer, I can laugh at myself and at the sums I and others are willing to spend on luxury goods and pursuits. If folks want to make merry about me and my fancy, pricey and elaborate gizmos and gongs on, I can live with that just fine. I'm even fine if someone gifts to me one of the items that "parody" my "stuff." I can see the humor in it and laughing is certainly one of the most enjoyable things I do daily.

*Green:* +100

All the best.

It would seem that even self-love may be the dupe of goodness and forget itself when we work for others. And yet it is but taking the shortest way to arrive at its aim, taking usury under the pretext of giving, in fact winning everybody in a subtle and delicate manner.
- Francois Duc De La Rochefoucauld, Prince de Marsillac, _Reflections; or Sentences and Moral Maxims _


----------



## ricochet

agree


----------



## PremierCurrency

TimelessFan said:


> Are you guys into high-end watches only? Or do you admire everything from Timex to ALS? Are there pieces you wear regularly or from time to time that are not high-end? Are there watches that are arguably better than high-end even though they're considerably cheaper? Is there a watch you're eyeing currently that's not high-end?


I certainly wouldn't go as far down as Timex, but yes, I do admire _some_ non-high-end watches. Such as this:


----------



## ricochet

http://[URL=http://s82.photobucket.com/user/rhettpiczon/media/DSC01804.jpg.html]

http://[/URL]


----------



## shnjb

I like as low as G-shocks but I'm not a fan of watches that typically cost 300-5000 MSRP when new.
Between 5000-10000, there are lots of variety to choose from even if they are not high end.


----------



## AbuKalb93

Not sure how many people mentioned this as i havent gone through this thread but for me...i sure admire Grand Seiko and would probably get one if i had some spare cash lying around somewhere.

Tag Heuer as well...i have to anyways since i own 2 lol


----------



## mackguy

Threads like this are all a little amusing. OP maybe should have specified a little more what he meant by not high end. It's all pretty relative after all.

For me pretty much any European made mechanical movement watch is going to be "high end", because at the very very cheapest end we are talking about $500 or more which
A) You can buy a very nice functional watch MUCH cheaper than that
B) For me personally a $500 purchase requires some deliberation and thought about where the $ is coming from for the purchase. 

For the person who can walk out and spend $20k on a watch without even needing to consult his bank account I'm sure a $3,000 Omega is not high end. 

Here's a question. Would high end be defined more by the individual price point or the brand itself. That is to say a gold Rolex Daytona is going to be more expensive than an entry level Patek Phillipe, so is the Patek still considered more high end.

In the spirit of the original post though, my collection indicates the non high end brands I like.
Timex Weekender ("Beater" watch)
Citizen Eco Drive (slightly nicer beater watch)


----------



## entropy96

Besides the brands in my sig,

Omega
Aquadive
Nomos
Stowa
Tag Heuer
Squale
Doxa
Rado
Longines
Frederique Constant
Maurice Lacroix
Breitling
Oris
Tudor


----------



## KiwiRed

I'll keep my list to three:

1) Casio - Simply because of the G shock. I mean seriously, is there anything out there as sturdy and reliable in any situation for $100 USD? Its the main watch anyone I've talk to in spec ops use in the field. Can't get better praise than that.
2) Nomos - Can't get a more respected in-house movement at that price. Beautiful watches too.
3) Victorinox - The quality really surprised me. When I bought mine 3 years ago I thought it would be in the dumpster after 6 months of abuse but it is still my favorite rugged travel watch.


----------



## shnjb

KiwiRed said:


> I'll keep my list to three:
> 
> 1) Casio - Simply because of the G shock. I mean seriously, is there anything out there as sturdy and reliable in any situation for $100 USD? Its the main watch anyone I've talk to in spec ops use in the field. Can't get better praise than that.
> 2) Nomos - Can't get a more respected in-house movement at that price. Beautiful watches too.
> 3) Victorinox - The quality really surprised me. When I bought mine 3 years ago I thought it would be in the dumpster after 6 months of abuse but it is still my favorite rugged travel watch.


Ah the victorinox.

I had one as a child. My father gave one to me.
Good watch it was.
Maybe I should buy another.


----------



## KiwiRed

shnjb said:


> Ah the victorinox.
> 
> I had one as a child. My father gave one to me.
> Good watch it was.
> Maybe I should buy another.


Victorinox are solid. Not a bad move.


----------



## hanzo

Frederique Constant
Tudor


----------



## chance4u

I've prepared images for my post but as I'm new to WUS "To be able to post links or images your post count must be greater. You currently have *0* posts." - so postimn with test only so far 

In addition to "high-end" Girard-Perregaux ww.tc Financial Borsa Italiana 49805-11-683SBA6A

I also like some of my Certina watches.
They are on ETAs but have corresponding price.

Certina DS1 C006.430.16.081.00
for $650 - new one.

Also old Certina DS CASCADEUR 541.8110.42.55p (quartz) on ETA-251.262
They are ~20 years, I've bought them used for $130 - in very good condition. I can wear them for some sports activities.

Also Certina Fiction 115.8030.42.62 (on ETA 955.112)
Got it from Ebay in NOS state for $250.

I know certina is far for high-end brand and is not very popular on WUS but I like it anyway.


----------



## WTSP

chuasam said:


> ermmm the Astron...did anyone forget?
> That's an innovation arguably greater than any complication ever made. It paved the way for watches to be both accurate and inexpensive. That innovation single handled killed 2 out of 3 Swiss watch makers.
> Here's an interesting article about cheap "high end watches."
> The Cheapest High End watch - Monochrome Watches
> 
> to quote:
> _Let us summarize what would qualify a watch as being High End._
> 
> 
> _A mechanical_
> _Manufacture movement_
> _From a brand with undisputed pedigree_
> _With preferably still involvement of the founding family_
> _A vintage_
> _With a steel case_
> _Under 40mm in diameter_


This article has gotten far too much circulation over the years. It misconstrues what high end means. Seiko 5 watches are wonderful and define quality in the low end mechanical segment.

In response to the OP's question, my vote goes to Eterna. The quality of their movements, overall finishing and materials put many a high end manufacturer to shame.


----------



## micrec

In different leagues:
Rolex - strong and value retention 
IWC - beautiful watches, especially the Portuguese.
Nomos - great inhouse movements for the price
Junghans - classy designs


----------



## Dapuma

Rolex

Speake Marin (not sure if that is high end or not, love their unique style)

Nomos for the price point seems like a winner

Seiko constantly makes nice time pieces at good prices

I would also throw Mont Blanc in there as well, they make a great looking watch and a good price, most are a bit too large for me, however if you have a large enough wrist to wear it, you could do much worse


----------



## lianghee

IWC, Rolex and Seiko


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## gjku hgfdg

I like Seiko watches particularly in the lower end as I find them fun to wear. 

I also like the Rolex exp 1, IWC pilot watches and Panerai is beginning to grow on me.


----------



## kylerhasson

I have a Seiko SARB033 which, for the price, is one hell of a watch. There's a big jump in fit and finish over the Seiko 5's, along with a couple of upgrades to the movement.


----------



## omega1234

Seiko is a pretty remarkable brand.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N930A using Tapatalk


----------



## GETS

Just wanted to add Tudor to my previous contribution.


----------



## mark1958

I would say GO number 1 but some including me would include them in the high end. Same may be said for Dornbluth. Otherwise I would say my three favs

Nomos Glashutte
Muhle Glashutte
FC-- really underrated brand in my opinion.


----------



## ndrenfro

Sinn - love the toughness and tech they put in their watches
Alpina - I have a Startimer Panda Big Date that is fantastic 
Halios - my favorite micro brand, great designs


----------



## Full of Days

I really enjoy my tudors more than my rolexes to be honest.


----------



## mark1958

wanted to add Chronoswiss to my list



mark1958 said:


> I would say GO number 1 but some including me would include them in the high end. Same may be said for Dornbluth. Otherwise I would say my three favs
> 
> Nomos Glashutte
> Muhle Glashutte
> FC-- really underrated brand in my opinion.


----------



## mpalmer

Sinn, Damasko, Nomos, Chronoswiss, Frederique Constant, Eterna, Jean Richard


----------



## WTSP

Here are some "Not High End" watches that are easy to admire:
Audemars Piguet Royal Oak 4100
AP RO chronograph 25860


----------



## Maiden

For me it's Zenith, Tag Heuer and Baume and Mercier.


----------



## ThomG

Zenith. 

Although they could be considered high-end, so they may not qualify for this thread. Zenith has created some high-horology masterpieces over the years. The Academy line for example offers watches with in-house created tourbillion movements that can run into the quarter-million dollar range.


----------



## nmm19529

Great thread. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## plastique999

Heuer

















Sent from my 16M


----------



## ThomG

mackguy said:


> Threads like this are all a little amusing. OP maybe should have specified a little more what he meant by not high end. It's all pretty relative after all.
> 
> For me pretty much any European made mechanical movement watch is going to be "high end", because at the very very cheapest end we are talking about $500 or more which
> A) You can buy a very nice functional watch MUCH cheaper than that
> B) For me personally a $500 purchase requires some deliberation and thought about where the $ is coming from for the purchase.
> 
> For the person who can walk out and spend $20k on a watch without even needing to consult his bank account I'm sure a $3,000 Omega is not high end.
> 
> Here's a question. Would high end be defined more by the individual price point or the brand itself. That is to say a gold Rolex Daytona is going to be more expensive than an entry level Patek Phillipe, so is the Patek still considered more high end.
> 
> In the spirit of the original post though, my collection indicates the non high end brands I like.
> Timex Weekender ("Beater" watch)
> Citizen Eco Drive (slightly nicer beater watch)


Those are some interesting questions. The response to the question of what constitutes "high-end," I assume is going to be answered differently by most everyone who is asked. The most common response I think would be the brand. So what is it about a brand that that makes it worthy of being considered high-end? Let's start a list:

History and Horological Expertise - How old is the company? Have they been making watches in the same location for generations? Do they have a long history of patents for designs, complications, and metallurgical developments? Do all their current watches contain in-house movements? Are all the components made in-house?

Price point - Has the brand focused on high-horology and/or established themselves as a maker of watches that would be considered very high quality jewelry in the areas of design, and craftsmanship? i.e. Chopard, Cartier, etc. I consider a price point of $8,000-$10,000 to be the entry point for a watch to be considered high-end. That does NOT include watches that don't meet a general consensus of quality and value at a particular price.

I'm far from from an expert in this field, so feel free to add to the list.

Another annoyance is the "holy trinity" that supposedly represents the pinnacle of watch brands (Vacheron, Audemars, Patek).
This phrase as related to watches is so woefully inadequate and out-dated, it's irrelevant. But that's just my opinion...;-)


----------



## WTSP

ThomG said:


> Zenith.
> 
> Although they could be considered high-end, so they may not qualify for this thread. Zenith has created some high-horology masterpieces over the years. The Academy line for example offers watches with in-house created tourbillion movements that can run into the quarter-million dollar range.


That's a very good point. Which of these watches is genuinely high end?





















ThomG said:


> Those are some interesting questions. The response to the question of what constitutes "high-end," I assume is going to be answered differently by most everyone who is asked. The most common response I think would be the brand. So what is it about a brand that that makes it worthy of being considered high-end? Let's start a list:
> 
> History and Horological Expertise - How old is the company? Have they been making watches in the same location for generations? Do they have a long history of patents for designs, complications, and metallurgical developments? Do all their current watches contain in-house movements? Are all the components made in-house?
> 
> Price point - Has the brand focused on high-horology and/or established themselves as a maker of watches that would be considered very high quality jewelry in the areas of design, and craftsmanship? i.e. Chopard, Cartier, etc. I consider a price point of $8,000-$10,000 to be the entry point for a watch to be considered high-end. That does NOT include watches that don't meet a general consensus of quality and value at a particular price.
> 
> I'm far from from an expert in this field, so feel free to add to the list.
> 
> Another annoyance is the "holy trinity" that supposedly represents the pinnacle of watch brands (Vacheron, Audemars, Patek).
> This phrase as related to watches is so woefully inadequate and out-dated, it's irrelevant. But that's just my opinion...;-)


I've been circulating my list of criteria for a watch being unmistakably high end. They have to meet three criteria:
1- Made with precious metal
2- Have many complications and/or a high level of technological execution for its regular functions. 
3- Finishing of the movement must be of the highest level (lots of bevelling and chamfering)

If a watch doesn't meet these criteria it isn't necessarily not high end, but it's subject to more debate. A "high end brand" would be one that predominantly manufactures and sells watches that meet these criteria, but not ever watch in its portfolio is necessarily high not lower end.


----------



## ThomG

WTSP said:


> That's a very good point. Which of these watches is genuinely high end?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I've been circulating my list of criteria for a watch being unmistakably high end. They have to meet three criteria:
> 1- Made with precious metal
> 2- Have many complications and/or a high level of technological execution for its regular functions.
> 3- Finishing of the movement must be of the highest level (lots of bevelling and chamfering)
> 
> If a watch doesn't meet these criteria it isn't necessarily not high end, but it's subject to more debate. A "high end brand" would be one that predominantly manufactures and sells watches that meet these criteria, but not ever watch in its portfolio is necessarily high not lower end.


A definition for "high-end" is certainly difficult to nail down. For example, your item number one. We'll use Zenith as an example again for the sake of argument. It would be tough to say that an El Primero Tourbillion Chronograph in SS that sells for about $58,000 is not high-end. Those pesky folks at Zenith again, rewriting the rules..:-d

Edit:_

All kidding aside, that's a pretty good assessment of what constitutes "high-end."

_


----------



## gjku hgfdg

I would certainly consider a steel AP RO, PP Nautilus or a VC OS as high end, even though it may not have complications other than a date and it's not made out of precious metal. A good example is the Rolex Skydweller that has complications, is made out of precious metal and has a hefty price tag however I would not consider it high end.

Then there are some brands whose offerings crossover into high end territory.


----------



## ThomG

gjku hgfdg said:


> I would certainly consider a steel AP RO, PP Nautilus or a VC OS as high end, even though it may not have complications other than a date and it's not made out of precious metal. A good example is the Rolex Skydweller that has complications, is made out of precious metal and has a hefty price tag however I would not consider it high end.
> 
> Then there are some brands whose offerings crossover into high end territory.


Just curious, what is it in your opinion that precludes the Skydweller from being considered high end?


----------



## ThomG

I also consider all offerings from AP, VC, and PP, as high-end due to brand history and quality of craftsmanship. My problem is that the uninformed think these brands are above all others. In today's world of modern horological achievements, there are many brands (many of them in the independent horology category) that have created absolutely stunning timepieces. Brands like MB&F, De Bethune, and Greubel Forsey, just to name a few. These brands and others are taking the art and science of horology to new levels of creative engineering and design, pushing the envelope of what has previously been created. *These brands I consider ultra high-end.*


----------



## gjku hgfdg

ThomG said:


> Just curious, what is it in your opinion that precludes the Skydweller from being considered high end?


Don't get me wrong I think the Skydweller is a great watch but in my humble opinion there are a few things that prevent it from being considered high end. 
It's produced by Rolex, a brand that produces an estimated million watches a year, therefore lack of exclusivity. It's not haute horology. The standard of finishing of movements is not high end level and also the watch is not hand finished just to name a few.


----------



## PJ S

^
Are you aware of how that watch has been engineered?
As an Annual Calendar, it’s a remarkable achievement, and for all but those who know the score, it’s just another Rolex with a fluted bezel.
I couldn’t give a toss about the Platona, but the SkyDweller and YM II – those are definitely worth of some praise beyond the usual Rolex robustness, etc.


----------



## WTSP

ThomG said:


> I also consider all offerings from AP, VC, and PP, as high-end due to brand history and quality of craftsmanship.


I respectfully disagree with this. I believe that the Royal Oak was released by Audemars Piguet to compete in Rolex's segment of the market when they noticed the popularity of steel sport watches. As such it marks a descent into a segment in which it previously would not have been active.

Other than design, finishing and certain aspects of the case construction, the Royal Oak is identical to mid-tier luxury watches such as the early IWC Ingenieur...









...or the Chopard St-Moritz chronograph.









Note that the Ingenieur and AP three hand RO have both used the JLC 888 or 889 caliber, while Chopard and the RO chrono use the same Frederic Piguet 1185. Granted, the IWC and Chopard are "me too" watches that followed on the popularity of Rolex and the Royal Oak, but it's difficult not to conclude that these are all part of a single mid-tier luxury segment.

Next, imagine that you're marketing director at AP, you have models like this on one hand:









And this one the other:









In AP's own eyes I am certain that there is a tiering strategy where the three hand AP is an entry level model. From there they aim to move collectors up the complications and precious metal ladder with higher end watches, many of which are more complicated and expensive Royal Oaks which could genuinely be categorized as high end.


----------



## ThomG

Maybe I'm just biased. My first luxury watch was a vintage gold Audemars Piguet, with a solid gold custom band from the 1960's. So yes we have our subjective opinions. ;-)


----------



## oak1971

Seiko innovation? They damn near killed the swiss watch industry with quartz.


----------



## hrobi

Anything below $500, *Seiko* is by far the best quality watch.

I think from $500 - $1500 ish, *Sinn *are hard to beat for value

moving upwards, $1500 to the $4000 range *NOMOS *are easily the best value entry level luxury out there

higher still, I think *Glashutte Origina* are an excellent quality brand with a strong history, that are severely undervalued!


----------



## mlcor

Another vote for Zenith. OK, OK, they have some awful clunkers like the Defy range in their past, but any company with movements like the El Primero and the Elite, and the ability to design beautiful, simple classics like these is admirable:


----------



## Ron521

As a former Omega Speedmaster owner, I have very high respect for my Casio Edifice (EF503's and a lone EF305) and GShock (GW5000), Orient 2ERO and Timex Chronograph (all stainless steel, comparable to the EF 503). In these models, the ratio of quality/dollar is high. I won't say that more expensive watches are not even better in the absolute sense, but as the price goes up, the quality/dollar ratio decreases. In other words, spending twice as much doesn't necessarily buy a watch which is twice as good.


----------



## plastique999

gjku hgfdg said:


> Don't get me wrong I think the Skydweller is a great watch but in my humble opinion there are a few things that prevent it from being considered high end.
> It's produced by Rolex, a brand that produces an estimated million watches a year, therefore lack of exclusivity. It's not haute horology. The standard of finishing of movements is not high end level and also the watch is not hand finished just to name a few.


This

Sent from my 16M


----------



## gjku hgfdg

WTSP said:


> I respectfully disagree with this. I believe that the Royal Oak was released by Audemars Piguet to compete in Rolex's segment of the market when they noticed the popularity of steel sport watches. As such it marks a descent into a segment in which it previously would not have been active.
> 
> Other than design, finishing and certain aspects of the case construction, the Royal Oak is identical to mid-tier luxury watches such as the early IWC Ingenieur...
> 
> View attachment 9196410
> 
> 
> ...or the Chopard St-Moritz chronograph.
> 
> View attachment 9196434
> 
> 
> Note that the Ingenieur and AP three hand RO have both used the JLC 888 or 889 caliber, while Chopard and the RO chrono use the same Frederic Piguet 1185. Granted, the IWC and Chopard are "me too" watches that followed on the popularity of Rolex and the Royal Oak, but it's difficult not to conclude that these are all part of a single mid-tier luxury segment.
> 
> Next, imagine that you're marketing director at AP, you have models like this on one hand:
> 
> View attachment 9196498
> 
> 
> And this one the other:
> 
> View attachment 9196466
> 
> 
> In AP's own eyes I am certain that there is a tiering strategy where the three hand AP is an entry level model. From there they aim to move collectors up the complications and precious metal ladder with higher end watches, many of which are more complicated and expensive Royal Oaks which could genuinely be categorized as high end.


The Royal Oak was characterized by a revolutionary design in the form of a rounded octagon.[SUP][12][/SUP] At the time, luxury watches on the market were all round, slim and in gold.[SUP][6][/SUP] Genta designed an avant garde octagonal watch in steel with sharp angles and visible screws.[SUP][6][/SUP][SUP][13][/SUP][SUP][15][/SUP][SUP][16][/SUP] Priced at 3,650 Swiss francs when first launched, it was the most expensive luxury sports watch, priced ten times more than a Rolex Submariner (costing around 300 Swiss francs in circa 1973).
The Royal Oak was the first high-end sports watch made of steel.

Source Wikipedia


----------



## gjku hgfdg

ThomG said:


> I also consider all offerings from AP, VC, and PP, as high-end
> 
> agree 100%


----------



## WTSP

gjku hgfdg said:


> Source Wikipedia


With the caliber 2120 and in precious metal I have no trouble accepting an AP RO as high end. In steel with the JLC 889 it's on a similar level as the IWC Ingenieur above, Zenith Elite, GP Laureato 3300, Rolex and other mid tier luxury watches. This of course is merely my opinion.


----------



## KtWUS

I would give the RO props just for the dial work even if the JLC 889 is not considered to be substantially better than the Rolex 3135 or other similar movements.


----------



## ThomG

hrobi said:


> Anything below $500, *Seiko* is by far the best quality watch.
> 
> I think from $500 - $1500 ish, *Sinn *are hard to beat for value
> 
> moving upwards, $1500 to the $4000 range *NOMOS *are easily the best value entry level luxury out there
> 
> higher still, I think *Glashutte Origina* are an excellent quality brand with a strong history, that are severely undervalued!


I also have great respect for the Glashutte Original brand. This is yet another brand that I think could be considered high-end. I've seen their watches on display at my favorite AD, and they are stunning.


----------



## rockroyalty

I'll have to say Oris... one of the best swiss watches you can get for the price... followed by Seiko for me. In fact, I think that even if Oris was double/triple the price (for their flagship divers), they'd still be worth the asking price (provided they offer a better movement).


----------



## WTSP

ThomG said:


> I also have great respect for the Glashutte Original brand. This is yet another brand that I think could be considered high-end. I've seen their watches on display at my favorite AD, and they are stunning.


I agree. Including brands like Glashutte Original and Zenith in a list of "Not high end brands that you admire" is basically damnation through faint praise. Brands like these have offerings that fit within both the mid tier and high end.

In a thread like this I'd only be comfortable in referring brands that are far enough from high end that it isn't an insult to include them, like JeanRichard, Eterna, Oris, Rado, etc.


----------



## EyeAmSpartacus

Nomos and Stowa


----------



## Pun

rockroyalty said:


> I'll have to say Oris... one of the best swiss watches you can get for the price... followed by Seiko for me. In fact, I think that even if Oris was double/triple the price (for their flagship divers), they'd still be worth the asking price (provided they offer a better movement).


Look at this Oris. A good contender for HE watch. Pic taken from Internet


----------



## LARufCTR

Sinn...ingenuity and engineering...just something about the faces that are just very pleasant to view...distracting actually. 
Seiko...Honestly, can't go wrong at any price....SKX is an icon @ $200 = amazing! GS are also fantastic, but I'm really only a Spring Drive admirer. 
Squale...1521 is simply fantastic in build quality, design, heritage and fit. Putting history on your wrist. This one never gets old. 60 Atmos also beautiful. 
Oris....A fantastic catalog of fine pieces @ great value. 
Zenith...Simple: A lot of watch for the $$


----------



## astrum3d

My fondness for Orient watches continues to grow. I own a Bambino, gen 1. Black dial. I love the look of the Mako gen2.


----------



## manofrolex

Vintage brands that no longer exist but had some awesome lookers and great movement 
One example Nivada Grenchen w Valjoux 23 column wheel calibre


















Newer brands prob Sinn, Oris, Alpina...

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## pascal_cl

Nomos,FC,Zodiac.


----------



## modasf

Rolex, Panerai

and the 'Bagelsport' LOL
fricken knock off of patek but their story and the piece is just too great to not admire haha


----------



## avi8or

Steinhart. Seiko.


----------



## Vette45

I've always admired Citizen and the different watches they put out. When I was a kid I always thought they looked fancy


----------



## KtWUS

1) Seiko, especially the Presage enamel series and the Urushi dials.
2) Beijing watch factory/Maison Celadon, especially silk dials, cloisonne dials, and the B24 movement. 
3) Tudor, particularly the 36mm Black Bay.
4) Seagull ST19 chronograph movement (Venus 175)
5) Nomos with their modified Peseux movements. Their higher end in-house movements like the DUW1001 don't impress me relative to other options in that price range.


----------



## carlings

hrobi said:


> Anything below $500, *Seiko* is by far the best quality watch.
> 
> I think from $500 - $1500 ish, *Sinn *are hard to beat for value
> 
> moving upwards, $1500 to the $4000 range *NOMOS *are easily the best value entry level luxury out there
> 
> higher still, I think *Glashutte Origina* are an excellent quality brand with a strong history, that are severely undervalued!


Excellent picks. I would add Tudor for your range up to 4K, as they have excellent finishing, and now also in-house movements to boot.

Higher up I think Zenith deserves a mention alongside Glashutte


----------



## Karlisnet




----------



## xherion

For me it's gotta be Oris and Ball (Trainmaster series), they really offer great value and nice designs.


----------



## Ctaranti

G-Shock, Nomos,Seiko,Sinn, Tudor for me.


----------



## regulateurBear




----------



## jkingrph

Ball, Glycine, Seiko, Seiko Presage. Orient.


----------



## jmcbooty83

Someone said it early on in this thread, but Victorinox (or at least their watches from about five years ago), represented an incredible value, since you could always find them for like 60% off. Excellent build quality, sapphire crystals, good designs, and well under $1000. My favorites were the Dive Master 500 and the Chrono Classic:



















Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## domayotte

Casio, Citizen, and Victorinox give you a lot for your money. 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## jmcbooty83

Dan Henry really impressed me with the 1970 Dive watch. $250 and is my go-to pool watch. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Mr.Jones82

I don't think you can beat Casio or Seiko for overall quality and style at their price point. I want to say Orient and Citizen, both great brands, but I am not a fan of their more expensive models, whereas with Seiko and Casio they have interesting offerings at all price points. As for lower end Swiss and German brands, there are a lot of good arguments to be made there too, but Seiko and Casio seem like such obvious choices in terms of their product range.


----------



## yankeexpress

Casio makes what no "hi-end" brand sells....an all titanium world timer, chrono-diver., atomic adjusted, solar charged that in my experience last decades on original battery.



These are scarce JDM only, out of production ten years that occasionally appear pre-owned.


----------



## GETS

GETS said:


> Longines - I admire them and like them
> Seiko - I admire them but don't like them
> Christopher Ward - I admire them and like some of them
> 
> I don't agree that Rolex or Panerai are NOT high end. I think that they are.


Interesting to see what I posted in January 2014...

I would still go with Longines (I am wearing the Master Retrograde today in fact). I would also add Omega, Breitling, Zenith, Hublot and TAG. None of which I consider High End. To be truthful I'm not sure I consider Rolex or Panerai to be High End now either (nearly five years on from my original contribution).

What is High End anyway? To me it would be all the obvious independents plus

Patek,
VC
AP,
Breguet,
JLC,
ALS

After that........


----------



## WTSP

This whole thread is premised on entire brands being high end, rather than specific watches, which is something I tend to disagree with.



















Anyway, some Bulovas are really fantastic.


----------



## Watchfiend12

Seiko and Wenger...


----------



## jeromegz82

I grew up on Timex so they'll always have a place in my heart. Still wear one occasionally.


----------



## Lo0o0o0n

Oris all the way! build, quality and design gotta be one of the best value for $$


----------



## WTSP

Revue Thommen


----------



## Mirabello1

I would agree with you if they actually did something to those sellita movements they drop in the cases besides just slapping on a red rotor.


Lo0o0o0n said:


> Oris all the way! build, quality and design gotta be one of the best value for $$


Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk


----------



## Chronocase

Rolex actually is not really a high end watch. They make very few watches with complications and the bottom end is not really expensive. Unfortunately they are very common and seem to also appeal to a lot of people who know little about watches. You can see them on nearly every high street and there are more copies about than the genuine.
They have of course a few historical highly collectible pieces which are of naturally considered high end by most.


----------



## GrouchoM

Chronocase said:


> Rolex actually is not really a high end watch. They make very few watches with complications and the bottom end is not really expensive. Unfortunately they are very common and seem to also appeal to a lot of people who know little about watches. You can see them on nearly every high street and there are more copies about than the genuine.
> They have of course a few historical highly collectible pieces which are of naturally considered high end by most.


While not high end, they also appeal to many very knowledgeable watch geeks.

If there are any typos in this post, I blame Tapatalk!


----------



## panzerr

MkII


----------



## WnS

Oris, Oceanus (by Casio), H2O, Rado (awesome ceramics), Balticus (affordable aventurine). But despite all these nice affordables, I'd like to save up for ONE high end watch.


----------



## melb

Seiko Presage and Prospex


----------



## cinealta

I think Omega, Rolex and Seiko make some very respectable everyday watches.


----------



## RPF




----------



## thetony007

i'm going to say what others have been saying but say with my pitchfork raised all the way up.

SEIKO

CASIO

can't argue with these guys man.


----------



## quattro98

Seiko
Citizen
Casio
Apple
Omega
Rolex
Tudor


----------



## Deluxy

Love the Hamilton Valiant line


----------



## Mstrmusic

Another vote for Hamilton.


----------



## 14060

Sinn, Nomos, Seiko.


----------



## jwillson

While I don’t care for many of the styles, I certainly respect what Srini does. A true manufacture that can make everything from the case to the dial to the balance spring. Good value across the board. Exceptional craftsmanship at the higher end. Even movement innovation. Definitely worthy of respect.

I also have a fond place in my heart for Nomos. Good value, clean designs, and they obviously care about watchmaking. 

If Rolex isn’t included in one’s list of “high end” they are certainly worthy of respect. They are at the forefront of automation, consistent quality, and mechanical accuracy. Second to none in generating demand and upholding value. 

I’d also have to give kudos to Omega for their continued work on the coaxial movement. I don’t know that it is actually better than a traditional escapement when you get down to it, but it has the potential to increase times between servicing, and Omega, to its credit, sees it as much more than a marketing gimmick. 

Finally, Casio for the G-shock. Enough said.


----------



## jwillson

jwillson said:


> While I don't care for many of the styles, I certainly respect what Srini does. A true manufacture that can make everything from the case to the dial to the balance spring. Good value across the board. Exceptional craftsmanship at the higher end. Even movement innovation. Definitely worthy of respect.


Meant "Seiko". Dang auto correct.


----------



## Sam-C-NYC

RPF said:


>


NO! No. Attractive design, but famously poor quality. Cheap for a reason.


----------



## jooxbox

Well, define "not high-end" 

Swatches are a lot of fun for the price and fun designs. Not something I really wear anymore, but they have their place.
Casio, Citizen, Seiko make solid watches at affordable prices.
I think everyone has heard of the better micro brands, like Halios. It's amazing what you can produce when there isn't a massive profit built in, and production is done in Asia.
Nomos is really excellent watch making for the price, and if it were Swiss would be a good bit more.


----------

