Best all round watches

[willy]

Stenstrup Skrev:

willy Skrev:Men i dag er der mindre forskel på kvaliteten mellem Rolex og Omega end for 30 år siden.

Very true indeed . It was 30-40 years ago Rolex built their reputation . I think it was the Oyster case more than any other factor that made Rolex what they are today . Omega have always considered Rolex to be their competitor and benchmark . But Rolex have a unique position in the Swiss watch industry , and it is very difficult for other brands to compete with them on equal footing .

Rolex are dependent on no one , they are a fund . They have almost unlimited funds , and a world wide service system that is unique . I cannot see any brand in this segment who have even a ghost of a chance to challange the position of Rolex .

All this talk about one caliber being as good as another etc etc . It can be a endless discussion especially today where we have thousands of different calibers . But 30-40 years ago there were not so many . Rolex have had a policy that is so different to say brands like Omega .

Omega put glass backs on their watches today , and use more resources on finishing calibers . Rolex use their resources to make very service friendly and strong calibers , and do not waste money by the extreme polishing of a caliber in a tool watch .

Omega are trying to appeal to a different kind of public today , than they did 40 years ago .And good luck to them .

Rolex and Omega have been compaired with one another for about 60 years at least. by watch people . Any discussion on any blogg involving these two brands always gets feelings running high . It is a never ending story and lots of fun .

I really like both brands and i can see good and bad things with them both . One thing is for sure they can all learn from one another , competition is very healthy. I have read nothing yet that can change my opinion on the all round ability of Rolex watches . But as usual i have learnt something from this debate . But Rolex still make the best all round watch in my humble opinion Willy

Hi Willy
Only 2 brands comes to mind of better long time service than Rolex comes to mind with me, and that is some of IWC´s model. The highend and complicationwathes have a sparepartpolici og minimum 70 years after model has been disconected, and then Patek Phillipe, that gives you a spereparts guarenty unlimmited. They simply just build a new commonent/part for you whenever needed. Some of there 90 - 120 years watches runs today with new parts in them and can run anouther 90 years if the company excist at that time.
Regards
Nicholas

I know that in many complications they just have to change a module in the watch every 110 years And i have read that IWC can supply these parts to the customer when they buy the watch . Nice to know the bloody thing can work for 500 years <!-- s:lol: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_lol.gif" alt=":lol:" title="Laughing" /><!-- s:lol: --> <!-- s:lol: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_lol.gif" alt=":lol:" title="Laughing" /><!-- s:lol: --> <!-- s:lol: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_lol.gif" alt=":lol:" title="Laughing" /><!-- s:lol: --> . Nicholas do know anything about the reliability of multi complication watches ? I read somewhere that IWC have a good reputation in that field . Willy

[Stenstrup]

willy Skrev:

Stenstrup Skrev:

willy Skrev:Men i dag er der mindre forskel på kvaliteten mellem Rolex og Omega end for 30 år siden.

Very true indeed . It was 30-40 years ago Rolex built their reputation . I think it was the Oyster case more than any other factor that made Rolex what they are today . Omega have always considered Rolex to be their competitor and benchmark . But Rolex have a unique position in the Swiss watch industry , and it is very difficult for other brands to compete with them on equal footing .

Rolex are dependent on no one , they are a fund . They have almost unlimited funds , and a world wide service system that is unique . I cannot see any brand in this segment who have even a ghost of a chance to challange the position of Rolex .

All this talk about one caliber being as good as another etc etc . It can be a endless discussion especially today where we have thousands of different calibers . But 30-40 years ago there were not so many . Rolex have had a policy that is so different to say brands like Omega .

Omega put glass backs on their watches today , and use more resources on finishing calibers . Rolex use their resources to make very service friendly and strong calibers , and do not waste money by the extreme polishing of a caliber in a tool watch .

Omega are trying to appeal to a different kind of public today , than they did 40 years ago .And good luck to them .

Rolex and Omega have been compaired with one another for about 60 years at least. by watch people . Any discussion on any blogg involving these two brands always gets feelings running high . It is a never ending story and lots of fun .

I really like both brands and i can see good and bad things with them both . One thing is for sure they can all learn from one another , competition is very healthy. I have read nothing yet that can change my opinion on the all round ability of Rolex watches . But as usual i have learnt something from this debate . But Rolex still make the best all round watch in my humble opinion Willy

Hi Willy
Only 2 brands comes to mind of better long time service than Rolex comes to mind with me, and that is some of IWC´s model. The highend and complicationwathes have a sparepartpolici og minimum 70 years after model has been disconected, and then Patek Phillipe, that gives you a spereparts guarenty unlimmited. They simply just build a new commonent/part for you whenever needed. Some of there 90 - 120 years watches runs today with new parts in them and can run anouther 90 years if the company excist at that time.
Regards
Nicholas

I know that in many complications they just have to change a module in the watch every 110 years And i have read that IWC can supply these parts to the customer when they buy the watch . Nice to know the bloody thing can work for 500 years <!-- s:lol: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_lol.gif" alt=":lol:" title="Laughing" /><!-- s:lol: --> <!-- s:lol: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_lol.gif" alt=":lol:" title="Laughing" /><!-- s:lol: --> <!-- s:lol: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_lol.gif" alt=":lol:" title="Laughing" /><!-- s:lol: --> . Nicholas do know anything about the reliability of multi complication watches ? I read somewhere that IWC have a good reputation in that field . Willy

Hi Willy.
Yes. IWC have a very good reputaion indeed. About reialibility I asumme they are very good. However only very few have IWC watches or PP with leapyear and moonphase, and I am sure it works smootly even though those funktion are not that much in use. The terriible thing about these watches are, that they are very expensive to service becasue so many parts needs to be taken out and put them back together again. These watches are ordinarly shochproof, but is diffenly not toolwatches. The more complicartion, the more sincetive. Rich people who buy these wathes don´t have to work. They have others working for them <!-- s:lol: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_lol.gif" alt=":lol:" title="Laughing" /><!-- s:lol: --> <!-- s:lol: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_lol.gif" alt=":lol:" title="Laughing" /><!-- s:lol: --> Anyway some of the parts that needs to be replaced every 20 - 50 years are already in the padget, (as you mensioned), when you buy the watch, so if the company goes bandrob in 50 years, you will still have the parts for the next generation. That is what I called feauteresecured ha,ha.
Regards
Nick

[hannover_dk]

himmel dog stenstrup og willy hvor i misbruger citer funktionen i alle indlæg

[Stenstrup]

hannover_dk Skrev:himmel dog stenstrup og willy hvor i misbruger citer funktionen i alle indlæg

Jeg skal lige høre. Er det meneingen at man kun citer det vigtige og sletter resten ?
VH
Nicholas

[willy]

hannover_dk Skrev:himmel dog stenstrup og willy hvor i misbruger citer funktionen i alle indlæg

I have always been a missuser of alcohol- cigarettes-drugs and women . And now i have reached new hights ,by my missuse of the quote function . I will make a new year resolution never to repeat this mistake <!-- s:lol: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_lol.gif" alt=":lol:" title="Laughing" /><!-- s:lol: --> <!-- s:lol: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_lol.gif" alt=":lol:" title="Laughing" /><!-- s:lol: --> <!-- s:lol: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_lol.gif" alt=":lol:" title="Laughing" /><!-- s:lol: --> Willy

[hannover_dk]

Stenstrup Skrev:

hannover_dk Skrev:himmel dog stenstrup og willy hvor i misbruger citer funktionen i alle indlæg

Jeg skal lige høre. Er det meneingen at man kun citer det vigtige og sletter resten ?
VH
Nicholas

Generelt behøver man slet ikke citere med mindre det er afgørende og man sletter som minimum billeder og irreleant stof i citatet jep

[Stenstrup]

hannover_dk Skrev:

Stenstrup Skrev:

hannover_dk Skrev:himmel dog stenstrup og willy hvor i misbruger citer funktionen i alle indlæg

Jeg skal lige høre. Er det meneingen at man kun citer det vigtige og sletter resten ?
VH
Nicholas

Ok

[khbk]

khbk Skrev:"Best all round watches"?
What about the square ones?

- beklager, det er ikke kvadratisk

[baun]

khbk Skrev:

khbk Skrev:"Best all round watches"?
What about the square ones?

- beklager, det er ikke kvadratisk

Men det er jo heller ikke allround så det illustrerer vel din pointe godt nok <!-- s:lol: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_lol.gif" alt=":lol:" title="Laughing" /><!-- s:lol: -->

vh Baun

[khbk]

"All right" - ikke "all round"!
Undskyld trådafsporingen, men jeg måtte benytte lejligheden til at vise mit nyindkøb!