The Breitling Watch Source Forums
https://www.breitlingsource.com/phpBB2/

Breitling vs Rolex
https://www.breitlingsource.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=62272		 Page 1 of 2
Author:  jnelson3097 [ Thu Feb 16, 2017 5:48 pm ]
Post subject:  Breitling vs Rolex
These types of threads are always amusing on the other forums. While I agree there are differences, I find it humorous so many are quick to claim that Rolex is "far superior" than Breitling.

Breitling vs Rolex

I know if we all liked the same things, these forums would be boring but I feel like you can put any brand with the exception of Patek, AP, and Lange on that forum and the members would have the same opinion.
Author:  poppydog [ Thu Feb 16, 2017 11:14 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Breitling vs Rolex
It does become a little tiresome when people can't or won't move beyond the whole personal choice issue, which is what it boils down to. I have both brands for different reasons and I guess the biggest test has been cold-water diving and they've performed equally well under those conditions. There's no noticeable difference in quality or finish that I can tell and to try to justify why someone likes or hates something beyond "personal choice / aesthetics" is redundant in my view.
Author:  John in California [ Thu Feb 16, 2017 11:27 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Breitling vs Rolex
Apples and oranges if you ask me.
Author:  Sniper [ Fri Feb 17, 2017 4:29 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Breitling vs Rolex
I think many people buy what they like regardless of wealth. Take for example the guy in the pic. He is shiekh Mohammad bin Zayed al nahyan. He is the crown prince of the UAE and the actual ruler of the country. Their investment authority is the richest in the world and valued at over 1 trillion dollars. His country has almost 10 % of the worlds oil and as many of you know, it's a dictatorship.

It wouldn't be an exaggeration to say this guy is easily worth more than Bill Gates and Warren Buffet combined. I was watching him on YouTube the other day attend the world governments meeting in Dubai and being a watch nut, I paused to see what kind of watch he is wearing. This guy could easily buy a new Patek every morning, throw it out at the end of the day and keep doing that for the rest of his life and he won't even feel it.

As you can see he is wearing a Breitling Evo night mission. He probably likes the watch as I have seen him wear it quite often. To get back to the discussion, I think many buy what they like regardless of how wealthy the are. Being super rich doesn't mean you automatically have to buy a Patek or whatever. Buy what you like!!!

Image

Image
Author:  BP80 [ Fri Feb 17, 2017 5:19 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Breitling vs Rolex
Easy. It takes me about 2 days to get bored when I buy a Rolex. My NOS Chronomat beats my DD like a champ... But I like both. :)
Image
Image
Author:  themystro [ Fri Feb 17, 2017 6:33 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Breitling vs Rolex
I own both. Both have equally quality and build. What seperates them is their personality. Breitling is a bit more "purpose built" with a bit more masculinity engineered into their design. When I think "chronograph" I think Breitling.
Author:  GolfPunk [ Fri Feb 17, 2017 9:38 am ]
Post subject:  Breitling vs Rolex
I have a Rolex Ceramic Daytona and 2 Breitling Airbornes and I love all 3. Both brands are luxury watches and are exceptionally high quality.

Image
Author:  Chronomat01LE [ Fri Feb 17, 2017 9:39 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Breitling vs Rolex
I often see various comments, especially on YouTube, people putting down harshly on certain watches/brands, thinking that they could make their own watches more superior this way. Breitlings are quite commonly targetted. "Breitlings make the ugliest watches." "Breitlings are for rappers." "This is a gaudy looking watch and not even the same league as the Omega Speedmaster(example)", blar blar blar.....

Rolex vs Breitling has always been a popular topic. Frankly speaking, there has been no solid evidence to prove that a brand makes more durable or accurate watches than the other. There isn't any solid evidence even that a Patek, an AP, or a high brand makes more durable watches than Rolex or Breitling, except that the making process involves more human intervention and higher end polishing(which does not contribute to the watch being more functional or durable). Of course this comparison is assuming 2 watches with the same number and type of complications and same material used(eg, stainless steel).
It's really apples vs oranges because different brands focus on different aspects and it depends what appeals to you.

Rolex IMO focuses on durability and simplicity. No fanciful or complicated stuff. Just do what a watch is supposed to do, nothing more. Using the minimum number of components in their movements so that they cause potentially lesser problems and easier to maintain. In a way, they want to create the most practical mechanical watch you can ever find, and they spend a considerable amount of effort on the material of their watches(e.g, inventing ceramic bezels) to ensure that their watches are not only practical, but able to last. The attractive part about this brand is almost every of their model has a success story to tell, and have distinctive features that contribute to the identity of every model. In a way you won't go wrong buying almost any Rolex. They mass produce but they control production of their popular models to make them appear more valuable and desirable.

Breitling IMO focuses a lot on legibility and functionality, since their main aim is to produce instruments for professionals. Their pieces do more than just telling time and they want the user to use the watch not only to tell time, but for multi tasks like a high tech instrument. Many of their pieces are big and classic lovers dislike that, because they think they look gaudy and blingy and simply used to attract attention. Seriously, who would try to attract attention with a chunk of steel??? To appreciate Breitling pieces, you need to stand from a professional's (pilot, diver, etc) perspective. Many pieces are meant to be worn outside the sleeve and especially for intricate dials with plenty of information on the watches, the sizes have to be bigger to ensure that the info on the dials remain highly legible and easy to read. I love intricate dials because I like to see how the designer arranges all the information in such a small circle and the things they do to make every info legible for the user to easily read and obtain information, even in extreme conditions. I usually look out for details like how the minute/sec hands align to the hour/minute markers, how the hour markers are applied, how and why the chronograph sec hands are designed this way, etc.... all these contributes to the legibility of the entire piece. A lot of times the watch looks simple but if you zoom in to every detail in the dial especially, you will realize that it is not an easy task. The thickness and design of the hands, the type of color being used to contrast between the dial and markers in the dial, the type and size of the fonts being used and their arrangement on the dial, etc. Each detail must be precise to ensure the highest possible legibility. It takes a lot more effort and experty to design such a piece as there are so many details to consider, and they have to balance functionality with form. That is the reason why I love Breitlings because detailings is one main reason why I go into luxury watches. I do understand why many watch lovers dislike Breitlings. A lot of their pieces do not look nice with the first look and many even look cheap. However stand from a professional's perspective and you will start to appreciate their watches. I believe Breitling has no wish at all to make their pieces "valuable" like Rolex. They seem to try create the image that they are high tech and innovative and able to produce mechanical watches like Quartz watches, make difficult and time consuming tasks productive and able to complete in a smaller time frame, without compromising on quality. It's like they want to go high tech in this manner that most watch lovers do not welcome as that pretty much makes mechanical watches look cheap and less worth. Their invented industrial chain production of their movements is a good example. IMO they are indeed innovative, but majority do not like it. It's like nobody likes to spend so much on a watch that seems "easier to produce". And when they experience problems, many blame the cause on the production chain, simply because it has passed through many hands. Well, they do go through the same stringent tests so I don't personally see a difference in quality between a chain produced piece and a piece assembled by one man. One main characteristic about Breitling that I do not appreciate in the past, but do now, is that they tend to make more obvious cosmetic changes to every models' descendents while retaining the main iconic features to ensure that the model's identity is maintained. Plus the fact that Breitlings do not appeal to many, it's not that easy to spot someone else wearing the same watch as you out there and so it feels more exclusive having paid so much for a watch. Last of all, it is afterall a jewellery, and thus I like how Breitlings look on the wrist. Different from a usual luxury watch that often look generic. I have never thought Breitlings look blingy. In fact if I do not want to attract attention I often wear my Breitlings.

To me Breitlings are value for money and great for those who have intentions of keeping their watches forever. Take Chronomat vs Daytona for example. Chronograph with date function, higher WR, but a Rolex Daytona, without even a date complication, costs almost double the amount(I am comparing the older version with the steel bezel and not the ceramic one). For Daytona it's like you are paying almost double the price to buy an "insurance" that will allow your watch to hold its value.

I believe many classify Rolex as a higher end brand than Breitling because of their price points and more stringent discount on Rolex. Also Rolex uses precious metals and diamonds more commonly on their pieces than Breitling. As mentioned there is no solid evidence to prove which is more durable or accurate than which. In fact if you want to view it from another perspective, Breitling does complicated pieces like the QP and 1461, but Rolex does not. So you can even place Breitling a notch above Rolex if you want to compare that way. To me they are in the same league but focus on different aspects.

IMHO, no collection is complete without a Rolex. Breitlings are not for everyone. My preference? Breitling :lingsrock: Because I like to use my watch like a high tech instrument. But I still love Rolex.
Author:  jnelson3097 [ Fri Feb 17, 2017 8:32 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Breitling vs Rolex
I don't think it's just limited though to Breitling vs. Rolex, I feel like if the thread over there was Rolex vs. Omega or Rolex vs. IWC, etc., the reactions would be the same. I can respect both brands but it just amazes me that some are so quick to say that one brand is junk since they make some models that don't appeal to everyone. There are a few questionable Rolex models as well, and no matter how big and bold some Breathings tend to be, nothing can be as bad as the leopard Daytona.

I'll admit, resale isn't the best on Breitling and if I were buying strictly for flipping, one of the major appeals of Rolex is resale value.
Author:  56scooter [ Sat Feb 18, 2017 5:16 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Breitling vs Rolex
Justin, Thanks for bringing attention to that hideous watch, I find it hard to believe that it actually leaves the factory that way. The next time someone makes a comment about Breitling's Bling on the Rolex forum I will be sure to point that out. I have never been fond of Rolex simply because of the cyclops present on most models and the "general" pompous attitude that most Rolex owners posses. I thought that one day I would get a Daytona only because of its iconic status, however, once I tried it on I found it to be to small. However, recently I was able to bring myself to purchase one model from their lineup only because of it unique non-Rolex appearance.
Getting back to the original topic I find that most of the forum members of that site will dismiss any watch for one reason or another unless it wears a silly crown! The whole site reminds me of a high school, where you had two groups, the "haves" and the "have nots". Never have I seen a group of grown men take all sorts of photos with the items you encounter in everyday life, cars, motorcycles, planes, wallets, cigars, shoes, pants, shirts and on and on. I am a little bit disappointed that Rolex does not distribute the swag like Breitling USA does, because I am sure you would have a whole new topic of what rolex are you wearing today with your boxer shorts!! Enough of a rant for today but thanks for pointing out the Leopard Daytona!!!
Author:  Moana43 [ Sat Feb 18, 2017 8:08 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Breitling vs Rolex
jnelson3097 wrote:
I can respect both brands but it just amazes me that some are so quick to say that one brand is junk since they make some models that don't appeal to everyone.


That seems to be a common denominator in most forum threads comparing any particular brand to Breitling. Invariably, Breitling winds up getting slagged by people who clearly know very little about the brand. But, you can count on the fact that Breitlings are "too big", "too blingy", "too busy", "use ETA movements -- so how good can they really be", etc., etc. And, in true internet style, people pick up on these views and parrot them incessantly, since it is fashionable these days to bash Breitling. I find reading those threads to be an exercise in futility.

When you're talking about Rolex, Omega, Breitling, and others, you're talking about watches that all have excellent quality. Are there differences? Sure. But people seem to be quick to confuse their own subjective preferences with notions of objective quality -- and so, the merry chase begins.

As for me, I'm not a Rolex guy. The brand doesn't speak to me. That doesn't mean I'm going to go out and slag Rolex (which would be an exceedingly silly thing to do), or suggest that someone who likes Rolex as a brand -- or who happens to like any particular Rolex model -- somehow lacks discernment. I have actually made surgical strikes at Tourneau for the express purpose of trying on Rolex watches, with an eye to adding one to my collection. But, for me, they just don't stack up. That's simply my own subjective determination about what works for me -- nothing more, nothing less.

While I'm at it, I'm always a bit surprised that the TOC is not more well-known. I think it's one of Breitling's real gems -- and I think someone would be hard-pressed to disparage Breitling if they had a chance to check out a TOC on their wrist. It's a classy piece.
Author:  DreamWatcher [ Sat Feb 18, 2017 8:46 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Breitling vs Rolex
Moana43 wrote:
jnelson3097 wrote:
I can respect both brands but it just amazes me that some are so quick to say that one brand is junk since they make some models that don't appeal to everyone.


That seems to be a common denominator in most forum threads comparing any particular brand to Breitling. Invariably, Breitling winds up getting slagged by people who clearly know very little about the brand. But, you can count on the fact that Breitlings are "too big", "too blingy", "too busy", "use ETA movements -- so how good can they really be", etc., etc. And, in true internet style, people pick up on these views and parrot them incessantly, since it is fashionable these days to bash Breitling. I find reading those threads to be an exercise in futility.

When you're talking about Rolex, Omega, Breitling, and others, you're talking about watches that all have excellent quality. Are there differences? Sure. But people seem to be quick to confuse their own subjective preferences with notions of objective quality -- and so, the merry chase begins.

As for me, I'm not a Rolex guy. The brand doesn't speak to me. That doesn't mean I'm going to go out and slag Rolex (which would be an exceedingly silly thing to do), or suggest that someone who likes Rolex as a brand -- or who happens to like any particular Rolex model -- somehow lacks discernment. I have actually made surgical strikes at Tourneau for the express purpose of trying on Rolex watches, with an eye to adding one to my collection. But, for me, they just don't stack up. That's simply my own subjective determination about what works for me -- nothing more, nothing less.

While I'm at it, I'm always a bit surprised that the TOC is not more well-known. I think it's one of Breitling's real gems -- and I think someone would be hard-pressed to disparage Breitling if they had a chance to check out a TOC on their wrist. It's a classy piece.

:yeahthat
Author:  Huttfuzz [ Sat Feb 18, 2017 3:05 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Breitling vs Rolex
I like both brands but I never owned a Rolex as of yet. I intend to get a GMT master st some point in time. I have a tudor right now and the finish on the Pelagos is out of the world.

Mat
Author:  Driver8 [ Sat Feb 18, 2017 4:56 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Breitling vs Rolex
These "which brand is better" discussions have been around for ever, and in my honest opinion (after trying, buying and wearing many watches by many different brands both big and small over the years) I can safely say there is very little between any of the major brands in terms of fit and finish, and people who try to claim that (for example) Rolex are infinitely better than (for example) Breitling, or vice versa, are frankly talking garbage as far as I'm concerned. Above a certain level there is literally nothing to tell between the brands in regards to fit and finish..........and (and this will be controversial!) I'm including the likes of Patek and AP in that as well.

For example, I have seen NOTHING to suggest that the case of a PP Aquanaut is somehow finished better than that of a Rolex Submariner or a Breitling Chronomat. I've looked at all 3 under a x10 loupe and there's no appreciable difference in fit and finish. None.

Above a certain point the ONLY deciding factors are aesthetics (i.e. whether you like the look a watch or not), functionality (e.g. simple 3 hander vs chronograph vs QP vs tourbillon...., etc), and crucially, "brand snobbery" and exclusivity (which is obviously the primary driver behind the price, unless you are looking at precious metals).

Sure, something like a Patek Aquanaut or Nautilus may have more perceived brand kudos and exclusivity than a Breitling or Rolex, but don't try to tell me that the PPs case or dial or strap is somehow finished 3 times better or somehow fits 3 times better than the other brands. It doesn't. (In fact as an aside it's worth noting that the Aquanaut's 324SC 3-hand/date movement doesn't even hack, so in that regard I'd say that the Sub's 3135 functionality is better.)

To me it all comes down to buying and wearing what you like, and not giving a damn about other people's opinions. Not liking a watch, or even an entire brand's design or image is one thing, but claiming huge gulfs in terms of fit and finish is something else...and entirely unjustified IMO past a certain level. Ultimately there is only so much you polish a steel case, or bevel an edge, or engrave a rotor, before the whole discussion becomes moot.
Author:  Huttfuzz [ Sun Feb 19, 2017 7:56 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Breitling vs Rolex
Driver8 wrote:
These "which brand is better" discussions have been around for ever, and in my honest opinion (after trying, buying and wearing many watches by many different brands both big and small over the years) I can safely say there is very little between any of the major brands in terms of fit and finish, and people who try to claim that (for example) Rolex are infinitely better than (for example) Breitling, or vice versa, are frankly talking garbage as far as I'm concerned. Above a certain level there is literally nothing to tell between the brands in regards to fit and finish..........and (and this will be controversial!) I'm including the likes of Patek and AP in that as well.

For example, I have seen NOTHING to suggest that the case of a PP Aquanaut is somehow finished better than that of a Rolex Submariner or a Breitling Chronomat. I've looked at all 3 under a x10 loupe and there's no appreciable difference in fit and finish. None.

Above a certain point the ONLY deciding factors are aesthetics (i.e. whether you like the look a watch or not), functionality (e.g. simple 3 hander vs chronograph vs QP vs tourbillon...., etc), and crucially, "brand snobbery" and exclusivity (which is obviously the primary driver behind the price, unless you are looking at precious metals).

Sure, something like a Patek Aquanaut or Nautilus may have more perceived brand kudos and exclusivity than a Breitling or Rolex, but don't try to tell me that the PPs case or dial or strap is somehow finished 3 times better or somehow fits 3 times better than the other brands. It doesn't. (In fact as an aside it's worth noting that the Aquanaut's 324SC 3-hand/date movement doesn't even hack, so in that regard I'd say that the Sub's 3135 functionality is better.)

To me it all comes down to buying and wearing what you like, and not giving a damn about other people's opinions. Not liking a watch, or even an entire brand's design or image is one thing, but claiming huge gulfs in terms of fit and finish is something else...and entirely unjustified IMO past a certain level. Ultimately there is only so much you polish a steel case, or bevel an edge, or engrave a rotor, before the whole discussion becomes moot.

This sums it all pretty well!

Mat
Page 1 of 2 All times are UTC - 8 hours
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
https://www.phpbb.com/