The Breitling Watch Source Forums

Try the 8500 planet ocean I just got a 45.5 size and it's the most accurate watch (automatic) I have ever had. Try one if I was you

I think that's exactly it Driver. Compared to the weight and heft of modern chunky bracelets on bigger watch heads, those Oysters do feel tinny and cheap, but they do seem to have been very reliable.

Interesting thoughts, they do sound all too familiar. As it happens, I did find a solution that worked for me though... Incidentally one I did not really expect to end up at, but love now. Here it is:



Skickat från min iPhone med Tapatalk

_________________
Cheers from Switzerland,

Fred

I have the old 16570 Exp II and find it gets more wrist time than anything else. [Though that's partly because Breitling are taking 12 weeks to service my Aerospace...]

I think with the new Explorer [I] Rolex, have really got it right. When they grew it from 36mm to 39mm they didn't really grow the hands, which many thought too short. The new one has slightly longer hands, and lume on the numerals. It looks pretty perfect to me:

http://www.rolex.com/watches/baselworld ... -0003.html
http://www.ablogtowatch.com/rolex-explo ... atch-2016/

The sub is amazing. It is by far the most comfortable watch I've ever worn. The clasp alone is a total masterpiece. Let us know what you wind up with.

_________________
--
sco
Breitling Chrono Superocean
Omega Aqua Terra 8500
Rolex Submariner Date Ceramic

Hello Driver8, been a while since I posted on the forum; however, I have lurked from time to time. I find myself more or less in the same predicament as you – however, I am not looking for the perfect watch but for the perfect Rolex for a mere mortal. I want to buy my last watch. I have other likes too, I also love collecting vintage fans but I find I cannot serve two masters (budget just wont allow it). The fan you see below is an Emerson Trojan Model 5310 Circa 1906 and fully functional, it is "on" as I type this post.



I hate to say this but as much as I love my IWC Big Pilot, I find the Rolex Explore II fit like a glove and very difficult to take off each time I wear it. From the watches in my current collection or past the Explore II is the most comfortable watch I have ever owned. The only problem with the Explore II is that it is not the quintessential Rolex; therefore as mentioned above I need (lol) the perfect Rolex. I have been considering the SD4K but still not really floating my boat as it should – 1st the price, 2nd a little top heavy (which is one of the things I dislike of my Aquatimer) 3rd it just doesn’t excite me as a new watch should – maybe due to the first two concerns not sure. As a result I am leaning towards a vintage Rolex 5513 or 5512 no date obviously with acrylic crystal. I had one, it was my father’s and soon after his death (nearly twenty years ago) I sold it to help finance a Breitling Navitimer. I am about to start rambling so I am ending the post with these final words: Perhaps you may want to consider a vintage Rolex too, in the end I may just close my eyes and buy the SD4K but the vintage piece sure sounds sweet to me. Please let me know what you think???

Cheers,

Enezdez

_________________
IWC - Big Pilot 5002 - 01
IWC - Pilot Chrono 3717 - 04
Panerai - 183
Omega - Speedmaster 145.012 / 67
Rolex - Explore II (Black Dial) - 216570
Rolex - Explore I 114270
Blancpain FF 5015

I too thought the SD4K would be perfect but I never went through with it. Maybe that has something to do with the price difference down here.

Anyhow, D8, your preferences might not be the same as mine but, unless you have a particular problem with the ceramic Sub, eg the cyclops, I think it's still a serious contender. I got mine almost 5 years ago (the post is here somewhere) and I still have it, never thought of flipping it for a moment. That hasn't happened before in my (relatively) short experience of watch appreciation.

(You can get the ceramic Sub in non-cyclops, of course.)

True, I forgot the ND Sub momentarily

I know you expressed disdain for the old style Rolex bracelet, and while I had the same initial reaction, over time I've grown to appreciate the simple light weight design. As far as perfect goes, here is what I've settled on. In order, of course.

_________________
Current:
14060m 2 liner
16570 polar
16710 Pepsi
Aerospace EVO
Navitimer 50th anniversary

Thanks for all your input on this guys.

I still think that if I go for a Rolex at all, then it'll be the Sub No-Date at the moment as it combines just the right amount of classic heritage, coupled with modern technology. The vintage Rolex option is (for me at least) better on paper than it is in person. As I say, I owned a 16610 LV for a while, and I just can't get past the bracelet and clasp : it's just too anachronistic IMO in terms of design.

As an aside, I find myself really really wanting to like the Explorer II as it's the perfect Rolex size IMO at 42mm, and it fits me like a glove.....but I don't want the white dial version, and there is something very odd about the handset on the black dial version. The way they've retained the classic "floating hands" look of the vintage version by painting the hands black towards the centre of the dial really compresses the lumed section on the hour hand. (Yes I KNOW this is a minor gripe, but we're talking about "perfect" watches here folks! )

So, my current thinking is a Sub No-Date, plus I'm still leaning very strongly towards a Panerai 233..... which is the only TRULY perfect watch I think I've ever come across. (All IMO of course!)

_________________
Driver8

Site Moderator

I've been reading this thread with interest. I've never owned a Rolex, nor seriously checked them out, but I have to agree that the sub no-date is a very nice looking watch Driver. Just a true classic in looks and style.

I'm with you too in that I'm not a fan of the white dial on the Explorer II but I like the look and size of the watch.

It's definitely challenging to fine the 'perfect' watch. What makes the 233 perfect for you?

_________________
Happines is Good Health and a Bad Memory.
"Ingrid Bergman"

Driver;
The Submariner is a fine choice.
Be sure to let us know how you like it. I'm holding out for the new Daytona.

_________________
Current:
14060m 2 liner
16570 polar
16710 Pepsi
Aerospace EVO
Navitimer 50th anniversary

Everything about it makes it perfect, or else it wouldn't be perfect, Tim!

No, in all seriousness I genuinely do believe it's a perfect watch (for me at least). I owned a Panerai 253 until fairly recently, and I absolutely loved it...apart from the ETA movement in a £7,700 watch. The 233 obviously fixes that as it's got an in-house movement, but everything else about it is perfect too - the 1950's case, the 44mm size, the domed crystal, the brushed case with polished bezel, the dial layout, the sandwich dial, the size of the 12 and 6, the display back, the 8 day movement, the "fang" power reserve......everything. When it first came out I was a little put off by the fact that it's a manual wind, but I didn't like the look of the automatic 270's dial (and thickness) quite as much. But over time I've come to appreciate manual-wind watches more and more, and now I couldn't imagine the 233 with anything else inside it.

I'm just waiting for one at the perfect price!

_________________
Driver8

Site Moderator

(On the Exp-II, I think the white looks better than the black on the previous 16570, and the black looks better than the white on the current 216570.)