Expensive Sports Watches that are really Dress Watches
Вставка
- Опубліковано 9 лип 2024
- BRISBANE STORE
Shop 12-13 Ground Level
Brisbane Arcade
160 Queen Street
Brisbane QLD 4000T: + 61 7 3210 6722
F: + 61 7 3210 6766
brisbane@vintagewatchco.com.au
WATCH TECH
190 Edward Street
Brisbane QLD 4000T: + 61 7 3012 7023
info@watchtech.com.au
SYDNEY STORE
Shop 28 Ground Level
The Strand Arcade
412-414 George Street
Sydney NSW 2000T: + 61 2 9221 3373
F: + 61 2 9232 5019
sydney@vintagewatchco.com.au
Email Archie directly at archieluxury72@gmail.com
Please feel free to write to Archie:-
ArchieLuxury
PO Box 299
MT OMMANEY Q 4074
AUSTRALIA
has a $5,000 watch.. doesn't iron his shirt... why bother
I disagree. I wear my Rolex Gmt for mowing the law, going to the beech, playing tennis and for work. It's a sports watch and is used as such by those who buy it as a sports watch. If you have to scrimp and save up to buy one, then sure you'll only use it as a dress watch Incase it gets damaged, but the vast majority of Rolex owners don't need to worry about that so they use it as a sports watch as intended and buy a Patek for a dress watch
I agree
I my opinion you still have to call them sports watches to differentiate them from the dress watches, you have a valid point though you wouldn't use these " mechanical sports " if you wanted any sort of reliability.
"What a big swinging dick I am" LOL
Archie you are spot on with this....Times change...trends evolve...
SPORT watches can actually look as smart with a suit as dress watches (if chosen carefully).
Thank God for James Bond and co..
Spot on Archie! Most sports watches that are actually used for their intended purpose are under $2500 with the majority being under $500. The prime example is a Seiko Divers at the low end. Brands like Fortis and Oris make up the upper end of watches you would consider using for their intended purpose. Yes you certainly can use a Submariner, Deep Sea for diving but a specialized dive computer, Seiko divers or Citizen Promaster will function equally as well and is fit for purpose. Back in the late 50's through the early 70's there was no equivalent to the Submariner, it was THE dive watch, but it was also $80-$200 at the time and there was the Tudor option that many in the military and working class individuals opted for. A Tudor Submariner could be had for $800 (new) (The Rolex was just north of 2K (new) by that time) as late as 1990 while a Citizen Promaster was $495 at the same time period.
Watches over $3K are luxury / near luxury statement of prestige pieces.
the price of a watch does not make it sport or dress - there are many other considerations
But it does affect how you treat it. An expensive sports watch will likely be babied by the owner, like a dress piece normally would. A sports watch is intended to be banged around--something my SMPc never has been. : )
That Explorer II is a beautiful piece.
Absolutely Agree Archie!
Original purpose has been lost or changed
Lmao...Archie right on! I only took my Submariner to the bottom of the jacuzzi. Yup, it's a dress watch.
I have to say that i agree with Archie, i will not spend 20k in a rolex only to see it destroyed after a few months of heave usage, maybe if i could afford 4 of those a year maybe, other than that, dress watch it is
Yes, great point. But Please give Charles Walhingford credit for your discovery. I heard it from him first. Thanks
I love my SKX doesnt need anything else
ARCHIBALD CHESTERFIELD THE TURD!!!: The luxury guru, talking about "sports watches" (only sport-related activity this guy has done lately= walking to Domino's)
Can u imagine Mr Pluta playing polo with his Jaeger LecoulTRA?? Poor horse!!!
jigrodrigues
Yeah Chuuddas are the best !!!! Ya gaattaaa wear ya Chuuudaar ! ( Tudor )
I like archie, he's the only one that talks any sense.
Depends on how much money you have, The"sport" watch I have is a Breitling, sure its not up there with zenith, or Girard Perregeaux, but its big and heavy and takes a beaten, but is an everyday.
+bgast 33 my nicer run in high 4 low 5 figs and are my dress watches, but the sky is the limit
exactly I have a Breitling (titanium super avenger 2) as my daily and 2 Rolexes a steel date sub for weekends and a gold yacht master for parties
I do see this behaviour in a lot of high end watch owners, they buy a sub to wear with a suit or tuxedo LOL, thats not what a sub is for. If you want a watch to wear with a suit buy a precious metal thin watch, perhaps with a complication that would be too fragile to golf, dive or run with... If you want to wear a sports watch as a dress watch you may as well buy a pseudo sports watch that looks sporty but can't take any abuse like for example a Royal Oak. The problem is people trying to buy a watch that will do everything because they can only afford one expensive watch, they can't afford both a dress watch that makes sense with suits and formal occasions and a watch that can take the abuse a sports watch should which requires high water resistance and a durable movement. I believe the reason a lot of people move towards Rolex is because 99% of people can recognize the most popular Rolex watches and believe it is a great watch and expensive, not everyone will recognize a Patek and even fewer will have ever heard of FP Journe, so if people want to show off, its easier to do so with a Rolex than with something that is higher quality but less known brand. Another reason is because Rolex is just so much cheaper and easier to maintain, Rolex has ADs everywhere as well as service centres, their service costs are cheap and turn around time is lightening fast compared to other luxury watch brands. While owning other luxury watch brands can be a frustrating experience due to both reliability and service, Rolex is easy and cheap. Rolex in the watch world is more like a Lexus/Toyota of the car world, they are everywhere but for the most part are very reliable but excluding the LFA and Supras of the past, as brand they aren't really leading the way or outperforming anyone other than maybe reliability and fuel efficiency. I own a couple vintage Rolex watches and intend to buy a third modern Rolex as a daily beater because after extensive homework, there really isn't a brand that can compete with the robustness of a Rolex automatic movement and I'm not going to wear a G-shock when I have a collection of high end watches at home. After I purchase my next and probably last Rolex, to use a daily beater I will focus only on vintage or modern dress watches and for that I wouldn't even consider Rolex. Nobody in their right mind is going to try to compare their day date or Rolex of any model to a A. Lange & Sohne Datograph or Zeitwerk, the same goes for most of Patek's offerings or a Master Grande Tradition Jaeger LeCoultre. Because thats like comparing your Toyota to a Mclaren, sure the Toyota is more reliable, tougher and easier/cheaper to service but they have little in common aside from both being cars.
i have ceramic sub, tudor and AP diver. They are well, well over 3K US, and the only piece I would wear in a party would be AP diver with after market crocodile strap. any thing with exposed, blunt rotatable bezel is not dress watch in my opinion. explore in that sense could be worn as dress watch :).
Just great!
Hmm Comments make two different points, some agreeing with the video while misunderstanding it. The point is not the suitability of a luxury sports watch to use for actual sports or manual activities. They ARE suitable, some people choose to baby them and others don't. Both choices are fine. What is not always fine is pretending a blue solid gold Rolex is appropriate for a suit and tie event. The JLC though I think should get a pass, sports history or not. especially the smaller sized Reverso is more than dressy enough, IMHO. But not any kind of chronograph, not the explorer and especially not the 80's porn star Sub.
Saying that the gold sub is a dress watch is a sacrilege.
It's more of a lounge dweller's watch. They should not call it submariner, they should name it "the Lounge Dweller".
Resistant to grease for all you can eat buffets, alcohol spills, pussy stains and occasional scratch from throwing the dice at the casino.
Superlatively polished for maximal superficiality and attention. Very valuable in the case when the debt collectors come knocking.
This is the biggest nonsense I've ever heard.... You can buy sneakers or jeans for 5000 USD. Does it make sneakers classic shoes or jeans - suit. Bullshit. Suit + expensive sports watch shows the owner has a lot of money, but very little taste, style. Period.
Hilarious how luxury watch owners try to rationalize by suggesting there's some additional utility to their investment. How many sub owners use them for diving? Or have ever dived? The only luxury priced 'sport' brand watches fit for purpose would be a Sinn U Boat or a Damasko with hardened scratch/corrosion resistant cases.
OK Archie, using your "logic" a Lambo is not a sports car. It's a luxury automobile. Money defines everything. Don't ever change my friend. It's enlightening to hear what the poor think about luxury goods.
If I ever get enough money for a Lambo, I'll drive it into the ground. I'd drive it everywhere and do everything in that car. Same goes for expensive watches. You can't enjoy a Lambo if it sits in the garage. You can't enjoy a watch if it sits in a drawer. What good is luxury if you only look at it? You can go to showrooms for that experience. I want the experience of OWNING and USING luxury items.
I'd say cars would be a completely different case.
Actually you can say Lambo is a luxury super car as well.
+Wayne Brinker Lambo is a definitely a Supercar brand. Some Lambos are even hypercars such as LP700-4. Which by all mean, Lambo is a LUXURY AUTOMOBILE. What are sports cars? For me, they are cars such as Toyota GT86, Mitsubishi Lancer EVO, Nissan GTR. Anyhow Lambo shouldn't consider as a Sports car brand.
If I'm spending good money on a watch, it better be able to keep up with my cheap Seikos and Citizens. These "sports" watches had better be just as durable as a sub $1000 watch.
It’s a funny one. This is both correct and wrong. And what it really comes down to is money. If somebody has saved up for a long time and is only ever going to buy one expensive watch then I would say Archie is in fact correct because it is less likely that a person would risk damaging it. If the cost of the watch is less material to a person and could quite easily replace it then a tool watch is more likely to be worn as such.
I would also add that somebody that is seriously into diving would not buy a yellow gold diamond encrusted beast for example - one because you would look like a bit of an idiot down at the dive club and also whilst diamond encrusted sub is technically a dive watch it is most definitely a dress watch at that point. Albeit a horrendous one to most people. A steel sub is however the perfect tool watch.
Confusing myself here - in short there is no answer, everybody has different requirements and different needs. A tool watch is however still a tool watch even if you don’t wear it as such. Just as a pair of Gucci trainers would be awful on an athletics track but they are still by form and definition a pair of trainers
@4:25 ok, I'll give you 22 Aussie dollars for it.....what's that then in sterling? About 50p?
do you think. that there is a brand you could buy . and not care if you lost it .
Go dive with your gold submariner. It will still work.....thats a spotrwatch.
Where you trolling Andy Hunter, I made a comment like this to him on his Video about the Dress Watch being dead?
Garmin, suunto, coros... those are sport watches...
What's a true sports watch then? A G-Shock?
probably a Seiko Orange Monster
iron your shirt!
Some fruitcake!
While you may have an extensive knowledge on watches and condescendingly blurt it out loud your taste is no where near perfect. Please, don't ruin your watches with your wrinkly worn out shirts, dress with class to honor those watches many people would love to have. Humble yourself please.
doesn't anyone else think that submariner gold watch looks too big...possible fake?