The Breitling Watch Source Forums

What are some of your pet peeves when it comes to watches? What are some things that immediately turn you off?

For me, I really don't like it when a watch has numeral hour markers that are cut off by chronograph subdials. It makes the dial look incomplete to me. One of the main reasons I'm not crazy over the ROO.

I also don't like any yellow gold on watches. I am a young guy and I personally feel that yellow gold should be reserved for the post retirement New york to Florida transplants. (Rose gold is a different story.)

Non-screw down chrono pushers on a "dive watch". Do I even need to explain this?

Digital.

Watches that have an aperture to show off a piece of the movement to make it look like a tourbillon when it is not. Baume and Mercier, I am looking in your direction.

Dive style watches that are water resistant to a max depth of 100m/300ft.

_________________
"Don't Touch The Watch." - Patrick Bateman

Hmmmm interesting topic.

Just off the top of my head...(this is JMO)
-square/rectangular watches
-any chronograph pushers that are not circular(not quite sure why)
-nice watches that have ugly bracelets.... Aquatimer(to name one off the top of my head)

And many more that I either cant describe or just cant think of off the top of my head

_________________
Past: BlackBird, Navi World, SA, Rolex DJII, IWC Yacht Club
Present: CE, DSSD
Future: Changes daily

Ridiculously easy for me - the stupid cyclops magnifier over the date. Turns me completely off of all the Rolex, Panerai, and Ulysse watches that have it (among others obviously, those just came to mind).

_________________
Breitling Superocean ('09)

This is like a little group therapy thread. I'll check in once the nurses get the thorazine dosage right.

_________________
SHARKMAN

- Straps and bracelets that leave gaps where the ends meet the case. If it's just with the strap, and not the bracelet, OK - I just won't wear the watch on a strap. But if the bracelet leaves gaps, then it's almost always an automatic DQ for me for any watch. I know some people aren't bothered by it, but it drives me nuts.

- Thick, chunky, heavy watches. It's hard to know exactly how to define this in absolute terms since some thick watches look and feel better than others. But the big watch trend in general leaves me cold. If a watch is over 42mm, it had better have a lot else going for it if I'm going to consider it. There are some that do - the Crosswind, for example. Also, if the watch is titanium, then I'm more forgiving of its size.

- The helium escape valve. If it's unobtrusive, like on the Steelfish, it doesn't bother me too much, but the second crown on the Omega SMP and PO is really an affectation. I like those watches anyway, and just try to look at the valve as a little quirk that makes the watches unique; but if I think about them for any length of time, I really do think they're silly. The vast, vast majority of owners will have zero use for them.

- Screw down chrono pushers. As the OP stated, they make sense on a dive watch, but in general, they piss me off. My Evo and CSO had them, and any time I wanted to use my chronograph, I had to take the time to unscrew those little, unwieldy rings. Sometimes they were merely a minor inconvenience, but they became enough of a pain in may ass that I ended up using my chronograph less. I would think, "Is what I want to time really worth the annoyance of unscrewing those damn things?" I have truly come to dislike them, and if I ever do buy another chronograph, the presence of screw-down pushers will be a strike against whatever model I'm looking at. Of course, it's worth noting that I'm not a diver.

- Excessive WR ratings. Like the helium escape valves, they're pointless. Also, like the helium escape valves, I'm willing to overlook them if I like the watch enough for other reasons, but to the extent they result in a thicker, chunkier case, they annoy me. Personally, I think 300m WR is as much as most people could ever reasonably need, and even 100m would be perfectly serviceable in most instances. Most recreational dives occur at a depth of 60 feet or less, since most coral and marine life exist above that depth. Most dive certification agencies limit depth certification to 100 feet, although some certify as deep as 130 feet. The world record for an open-circuit SCUBA dive is 330m. The dive required over 8 hours of decompression, and was performed by a professional with a full crew on hand. That diver, assuming he even wanted an analog watch on him, probably would have been better off with a WR of 500M or so. But for the rest of us, the WR ratings of 600m (Planet Ocean), 2000m (Aquatimer), or 3,900m (Deepsea) are purely absurd. It is physically impossible to dive to those depths outside of a diving bell, or some other external protective structure.

Very cathartic thread this! We're a nit-picky bunch aren't we!

For me, it's (generally) all about the bracelet -

- Lack of micro-adjustment of the clasp is an instant turn-off for me, unless I can try it properly sized before buying. I'm very particular about getting a good fit, and no micro-adjustment means a good fit is just pure chance. Far too big a gamble on a several thousand pound watch IMO.

- While it's not a complete show-stopper for me, I'm not a fan of pin-link bracelets these days. Yes I know they are probably even less likely to come loose than a screw link, but the convenience of screws is a major plus for me. Too many times I've struggled with my link removal tool and watchmaker's hammer, and ended up with bent pins. I also personally just hate taking a hammer (no matter how small) to my watch!

- On the flip side of point two, I hate screw-links where the screw has been so drowned in threadlock at the factory that it's nigh on impossible to remove. Yep, I'm talking to you here Doxa! I have ruined two Bergeon screwdrivers trying to undo them in the past, and then Doxa very kindly hard-deleted my post on the Doxa forum when I asked for advice. (For anyone interested, you have to heat the link to melt the threadlock before you can remove the screws).

- Hollow centre and end links. OK, so this is not generally a problem these days as watch manufacturers are taking much more care over their bracelets, but when I see them it's just a sign of cheapness IMO.

- Linked to the last point, I can't stand older style Rolex bracelets - i.e. hollow centre links and folded tin-foil clasp. Yes I know they never seem to actually fail, but the feel and look is frankly just comedic on watches with such a high standing (and price tag). I'm also not a fan of the way they used to emboss the clasp with a faux link pattern to "blend in" with the rest of the bracelet - just looks a bit cack to me.

And non-bracelet issues aside, I just want to go on record (again!) and say that I hate -

- The overabundance of DLC on everything these days. Once was original ; twice was just about OK ; but when almost every single damn model comes in a standard and DLC version, it's just desperate.

- Rubber bezels. Simply, why? Looks cheap (IMO), and there's just got to be question marks over wear long term.

- No pearl on "diver's" watch bezels. Sure, no diver relies just on their wrist-watch these days, but let's at least pretend you could!

- And lastly (and this will be highly controversial on here!), I really just don't like the concept of high-end quartz where quartz models cost the same as a high-end automatic. I've flirted with expensive(ish) quartz in the past myself, but I really can't help thinking that quartz is ideally suited to tough, rugged and more importantly cheap tool watches, not expensive and exquisitely finished higher-end pieces. For me, higher-end watches are all about mechanics, not circuitboards. Just a personal opinion, and not one that every Breitling fan will share!

_________________
Driver8

Site Moderator

Conflicting dial features/shapes driver me up the wall. Kind of like this little gem...

_________________
Steelfish GMT LE (white)

Wanted to see some other replies because while there are a lot of things that I don't personally like, there aren't too many that really annoy me.

The above the crystal cyclops is annoying to me, put it under the crystal and it's fine. Flat out copies of other watches also annoy me, the worst that I can think of at the moment is the Ocean 7 LM-7 PloProf. Not only do they steal the name of the PloProf and make the watch almost identical, they then compare theirs to the original in some of their advertising.

Pet peeves? Every watch I covet that I cannot presently afford.

_________________
SHARKMAN

Bracelets with screws on each end, what a pain the ass to unscrew.

The ridiclious use of LE's by Breitling. 2,000 pieces is not LIMITED.

Rider Tabs.

Cheap deployments on high end watches....Breguet and AP immediately come to mind.

Guilloche dials. If I was 70 it would look awesome!

Super Quartz.. WHY???

_________________
"I don't own any watches, I just lease them"

INVICTA watches ALL OF THEM!!!!! I cant tell you how much I hate this company, I't rather wear a stuffed animal beanie baby watch , than wear INVICTA.

_________________
One Watch At A Time.

Why didn't I see this coming...

As my peeves go...watches with GMT function... I have no use for it... just another "setting" I have to look after... considering I have a rotation to follow... for travellers and pilots and such, no problem...one example... as much as I think the GMT Master is a great looking watch, can't get past the extra hand...

_________________
"I don't got the bright watch I got the right watch" -Jay Z

GMT hands are very functional. I check out what time it is in Belgium, set the GMT hand accordingly, and then just wait for someone to ask what time it is in Belgium. It's usually the same guy who asks for my Grey Poupon.

_________________
SHARKMAN

I can see how a GMT complication would seem superfluous to someone who doesn't care about what time it is in other time zones. For me, especially when I travel, it is crucial and very nice to have.

My pet peeves:

Watches that are too big - a matter of opinion, and it's all relative, but my largest is 43mm and it seems to kind of walk the line for me

Tachymeter scales on a watch without a chronograph function, or with a chrono hand that is not the center hand

Dials that lack symmetry - Orient seems to corner the market on these, although I think they do have some nice models

Open dials that clutter things so much you can't see the time

Hands that are too short - I like the hour hand to touch the end of the hour markers and the minute hand to reach to the edge of the dial

Bad Lume - if it's going to be there, please make sure it works more than a few minutes

_________________
Greg

The main one that comes to mind for me is when the date is positioned at an angle at 4 or 5 o'clock. Makes it look like an afterthought. This completely ruins a lot of otherwise very nice watches for me.

I agree with a few others above too: screw-down pushers, hands that are too short, cheap deployants, fake dive watches.

Also when there are 4 or 5 different clashing fonts on the dial and bezel (certain newer model Breitlings, I'm looking at you).