ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

Fensterdub · 2 June 2016, 05:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by el1125

Yea ok. What I posted was not a dress watch b/c that article says its not? Your right, its a sports watch.

I think if we go to the absolute definition of a classic dress then this forum would be sh1t. We'd only see 32 mm time only tired watches instead of the collection of stunners we are currently enjoying.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

jd57 · 2 June 2016, 09:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fensterdub

Love it! Is that the Richard Lange? Such a classy piece! Congrats on a great pick up!

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Thanks and yes - the Boutique edition in white gold with blued hands.

Skyrider01 · 2 June 2016, 11:15 PM

Just purchased this JLC MUT Moon a few days ago. It's on a grey alligator strap for now, but I also have the black strap to dress it up.

Hollister · 3 June 2016, 05:11 AM

Not really a dress watch, but quite smart.

Vincent65 · 5 June 2016, 07:48 PM

Does this qualify, with swim-shorts!?

lapince · 5 June 2016, 09:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by el1125

Thank you and i agree��
But I do not own both, thinking about it though but seems a bit nutty to do. I only own the white one which you are correct is discontinued.

Well I do agree having both is a little intense, but so is having 9 Nautilus

Quote:

Originally Posted by chessebj

Words have meanings, and a "dress watch" is a "specific kind of thing."

Everyone has a different appreciation of what is a sports watch as well as what is a dress watch, for me a PP 5711 is a sporty dress watch...

Quote:

Originally Posted by el1125

Yea ok. What I posted was not a dress watch b/c that article says its not? Your right, its a sports watch.

No it's a sporty grand complication dress watch, I totally agree that it should be in the dress watch category, maybe not the 32mm 2 hander grandpa dress watch but still...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul_I

41 total posts and you're complaining about grammar?

Quote:

Originally Posted by chessebj

It's not that often that I meet somebody with no sense of humor. Congrats!

I have a feeling you're gonna make a ton of friends here

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fensterdub

I think if we go to the absolute definition of a classic dress then this forum would be sh1t. We'd only see 32 mm time only tired watches instead of the collection of stunners we are currently enjoying.

Exactly, but Chesse has a very narrow definition of dress watch, oh my God how this thread would be boring if the guys posting would follow his definition of a dress watch, but he seems to think a dress watch is a 2 hander, small and made to be worn only with a tux or minimum a 3 piece suit... BORING

cervantes · 5 June 2016, 10:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skyrider01

Just purchased this JLC MUT Moon a few days ago. It's on a grey alligator strap for now, but I also have the black strap to dress it up.

Congrats! Enjoy that beauty.

Hollister · 5 June 2016, 11:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lapince

Exactly, but Chesse has a very narrow definition of dress watch, oh my God how this thread would be boring if the guys posting would follow his definition of a dress watch, but he seems to think a dress watch is a 2 hander, small and made to be worn only with a tux or minimum a 3 piece suit... BORING

Whether you like it or not, a dress watch strictly speaking should be time only, and discreet. As pointed out upthread, words have meanings and a cucumber is not the same thing as a strawberry.

el1125 · 6 June 2016, 12:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lapince

Well I do agree having both is a little intense, but so is having 9 Nautilus

Everyone has a different appreciation of what is a sports watch as well as what is a dress watch, for me a PP 5711 is a sporty dress watch...

No it's a sporty grand complication dress watch, I totally agree that it should be in the dress watch category, maybe not the 32mm 2 hander grandpa dress watch but still...

I have a feeling you're gonna make a ton of friends here

Exactly, but Chesse has a very narrow definition of dress watch, oh my God how this thread would be boring if the guys posting would follow his definition of a dress watch, but he seems to think a dress watch is a 2 hander, small and made to be worn only with a tux or minimum a 3 piece suit... BORING

Lapince, I never said I have NINE Nautilus

Tony64 · 6 June 2016, 03:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hollister

Whether you like it or not, a dress watch strictly speaking should be time only, and discreet. As pointed out upthread, words have meanings and a cucumber is not the same thing as a strawberry.

Probably will regret saying this, but agree with Hollister on this one.
A true dress watch really should be as he has described.

Plenty of threads to show off these other fantastic watches, but some of the watches posted, nice as they are, aren't what most would categorize as dress watches.

If we were looking at dress shoes rather than dress watches would this be viewed any differently? Some would still choose sneakers and rubber soles with their tux and Armani suits, and who are we to judge if that's your thing?

Preferences and individual styles aside, I think a classic dress watch in its truest sense however is as Hollister has described.

Tony64 · 6 June 2016, 03:42 AM

Maybe it would be better to simple ask to see 2-hand time only watches?
That preserves all definitions of dress watches, while allowing a dedicated thread to these more traditionally, and perhaps narrowly, defined dress watches. Could do "strap only" for the purists.

My comments are only my opinion, so please nobody take offense. To be clear, I continue to enjoy seeing all of your beautiful timepieces, regardless of how you choose to categorize them.

Fensterdub · 6 June 2016, 07:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tony64

Maybe it would be better to simple ask to see 2-hand time only watches?
That preserves all definitions of dress watches, while allowing a dedicated thread to these more traditionally, and perhaps narrowly, defined dress watches. Could do "strap only" for the purists.

My comments are only my opinion, so please nobody take offense. To be clear, I continue to enjoy seeing all of your beautiful timepieces, regardless of how you choose to categorize them.

Well dress watches can have a third hand in a small seconds format a la 5196 or the VC Traditionelle. But again, I think that if you can describe the watch as being 'dressy' then it should qualify here. I just want to see 'formal-centric' time pieces. Elegant and beautiful mechanical master pieces. Not 32mm time only 1920's watches from Downton Abbey!

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Hollister · 6 June 2016, 07:18 AM

If I had unlimited funds, I would buy this tomorrow. Discreet, er no. But just look at it!

https://watchxchange.london/products...ue-piece-watch

themast · 6 June 2016, 07:47 AM

This is the closest I have got so far... I will acquire (what I consider) a true dress watch down the road but I feel this is appropriate for my style right now.

Looking good everybody!

IMG_GO_small.jpg

hoppes-no9 · 6 June 2016, 10:06 AM

Closest for me, too

Celter · 6 June 2016, 12:34 PM

KINGROLESAR · 6 June 2016, 01:42 PM

SearChart · 6 June 2016, 03:18 PM

Skyrider01 · 7 June 2016, 04:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cervantes

Congrats! Enjoy that beauty.

Thank you!

lapince · 7 June 2016, 05:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by el1125

Lapince, I never said I have NINE Nautilus

I don't know, you have so many maybe I lost count somewhere and got carried away

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hollister

Whether you like it or not, a dress watch strictly speaking should be time only, and discreet. As pointed out upthread, words have meanings and a cucumber is not the same thing as a strawberry.

Yeah a dress watch "strictly speaking" but the thread said "dress watches", didn't say "strictly speaking"

Quote:

Originally Posted by KINGROLESAR

Oh this one is awesome, but quick take it off, the dress watch police is not far

SearChart · 7 June 2016, 05:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vincent65

Does this qualify, with swim-shorts!?

I think it does

SearChart · 24 June 2016, 05:21 AM

PrinceT · 24 June 2016, 05:38 AM

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

topcat30093 · 27 June 2016, 03:35 AM

Second time around, owning one of these beauties :)))

Celter · 27 June 2016, 04:26 AM

There has been a change in my dresswatch setup:

The keeper:

The new keeper:

The outsider:

Plastique999 · 27 June 2016, 10:42 AM

Sent from my 16M

AF_Rob · 27 June 2016, 01:01 PM

Very nice! Love the blue hands.

SearChart · 3 July 2016, 06:30 PM

Amazing watches gentlemen

ThomG · 10 July 2016, 09:39 AM

My personal definition of a "dress watch" would be any elegant and thin watch that fits nicely under the cuff. But these two adhere to what most people seem to define as a dress watch. They are Zenith Port Royals w/the in-house cal. 2562, and are very comfortable wear.

DSC_0350.jpg

DSC_0364.jpg

RUK · 10 July 2016, 06:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Plastique999

Sent from my 16M

nice!

27 June 2016, 03:35 AM	#414
topcat30093 "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Real Name: Tony Location: England Posts: 5,425	Second time around, owning one of these beauties :))) __________________

3 June 2016, 05:11 AM	#394
Hollister Banned Join Date: Apr 2016 Real Name: James Location: UK Watch: 114300 Posts: 1,750	Not really a dress watch, but quite smart.

6 June 2016, 03:42 AM	#401
Tony64 "TRF" Member Join Date: Apr 2013 Location: U.S.A. Posts: 2,796	Maybe it would be better to simple ask to see 2-hand time only watches? That preserves all definitions of dress watches, while allowing a dedicated thread to these more traditionally, and perhaps narrowly, defined dress watches. Could do "strap only" for the purists. My comments are only my opinion, so please nobody take offense. To be clear, I continue to enjoy seeing all of your beautiful timepieces, regardless of how you choose to categorize them.

6 June 2016, 07:18 AM	#403
Hollister Banned Join Date: Apr 2016 Real Name: James Location: UK Watch: 114300 Posts: 1,750	If I had unlimited funds, I would buy this tomorrow. Discreet, er no. But just look at it! https://watchxchange.london/products...ue-piece-watch

6 June 2016, 07:47 AM	#404
themast "TRF" Member Join Date: Oct 2012 Location: US Posts: 2,707	This is the closest I have got so far... I will acquire (what I consider) a true dress watch down the road but I feel this is appropriate for my style right now. Looking good everybody! IMG_GO_small.jpg

6 June 2016, 10:06 AM	#405
hoppes-no9 "TRF" Member Join Date: May 2011 Location: DC Metro Posts: 327	Closest for me, too

6 June 2016, 12:34 PM	#406
Celter "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2011 Location: Norway Posts: 130

24 June 2016, 05:38 AM	#413
PrinceT "TRF" Member Join Date: Nov 2015 Location: One Degree North Posts: 340	Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

27 June 2016, 04:26 AM	#415
Celter "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2011 Location: Norway Posts: 130	There has been a change in my dresswatch setup: The keeper: The new keeper: The outsider:

27 June 2016, 10:42 AM	#416
Plastique999 "TRF" Member Join Date: Jun 2014 Location: CA Watch: VC Toledo 1952 Posts: 1,063	Sent from my 16M

27 June 2016, 01:01 PM	#417
AF_Rob "TRF" Member Join Date: May 2012 Real Name: Rob Location: Virginia Watch: Sub/Polar/OP/BB Posts: 4,517	Very nice! Love the blue hands.

10 July 2016, 09:39 AM	#419
ThomG "TRF" Member Join Date: Mar 2016 Real Name: Tom Location: U.S.A. Watch: Milgauss Posts: 84	My personal definition of a "dress watch" would be any elegant and thin watch that fits nicely under the cuff. But these two adhere to what most people seem to define as a dress watch. They are Zenith Port Royals w/the in-house cal. 2562, and are very comfortable wear. DSC_0350.jpg DSC_0364.jpg

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)