Under the radar watch

[samson66]

Originally Posted by Goose 104

How about the Black Bay 58? It is a completely different fit and feel to GMT being much smaller at 39mm. I think it pretty much goes with anything. Being dark I would say it is under the radar and the gold markers on the dial are pretty subtle in person.

Agree with this. For a smaller wrist this is a perfect under-the-radar watch. Great looking watch but not blingy at all.

I have the GMT and love it and it does a good job of flying under the radar, I just don't know how it would work on a smaller wrist. 41mm is not huge but the lug-to-lug distance (top to bottom) is significant.

[Ihatecheese]

To a non watch nerd then either model can work. If you actually want to go low key then go matt/brushed, or black and small. And wear the fancy one when at home.

It's the shiny factor and size we have to take into account as also mentioned above. No one actually gets near enough to see the logo, unless they're really trying to catch it.

I have a Nomos Minimatik for when i want a low key super light comfy watch. Not that it fits your specfic requirements, but many watches do.
Noone has ever noticed it as it's so uninteresting unless you pay real attention. But for me. I enjoy wearing something so nicely engineered.

Saying that, my friends never notice what watch i'm wearing which is usually an exporer or sub as i don't focus on it. It's given as much attention as their watch, which isn't very much.

[mountainjogger]

Hands on the BB GMT pops. So, if you want under radar pick another.

[tbk]

I had the Snowflake, and while it's a nice watch I found I just don't wear dressy watches. I liked it, but it did have some downsides for me personally. First, the bracelet isn't very good looking, so I put it on a strap immediately. I had a problem with the titanium in several ways. I didn't like the way it looked, felt, or how easily it scratched. I know they say it's specifically hardened or what not, but it doesn't help. It scratches very easily. Also, overall I just felt like there wasn't much "wow" factor in real life vs in pictures. If you want a Grand Seiko, I'd recommend the Peacock instead. I had one of those as well, and that would be my pick over the Snowflake easily.

[watchwatcher]

Originally Posted by HogwldFLTR

I believe the Seiko will be more eye catching than the Tudor. The Tudor isn't bright or shiny; the Seiko is both bright and shiny.

Originally Posted by brandrea

I like both but if low key is what you’re going fir the Tudor has my vote

Originally Posted by travisb

Both are great in looks, build and quality . I prefer the look of the Tudor though.

As usual, I'll go along with what these guys say.

However, I'll add this: I've found, over the years, if I find a watch attractive, odds are, someone else will too. Which pretty much nullifies the concept of under the radar for me, if I'm looking for watches that nobody will notice.

[huggie49]

One person, a friend, notices my watch. I change them out every few days. Absolutely no one else looks at my wrist. So, in my experience, they’re all under the radar.

[brandrea]

Originally Posted by watchwatcher

As usual, I'll go along with what these guys say.



However, I'll add this: I've found, over the years, if I find a watch attractive, odds are, someone else will too. Which pretty much nullifies the concept of under the radar for me, if I'm looking for watches that nobody will notice.

Very True my friend, very true

Sent from my SM-G960W using Tapatalk

[nighthawk77]

Of the two I vote Tudor - the finishing is a little more subdued and therefore more 'under the radar' compared to the polishing on the Snowflake.

If the Tudor is not to your liking, then one watch which springs to my mind is the Omega Seamaster Aquaterra. Similar to the GS coming in at 41mm, it offers 150m water resistance, available on a bracelet, includes a date complication and is available in several colour options.

[Watcheroo]

I’d suggest the Grand Seiko SBGM221. It’s a beautiful watch and although I don’t own one, I’ve often considered it.

Here’s a pic from the GS website:



Edit: I read one of your conditions as strap not bracelet, when in fact it’s the other way around! Ignore this suggestion in that case. The BB GMT is an awesome watch

[Rolex_AG]

My vote would also go to Grand Seiko. The snowflake dial is something else. It does wear differently, though, as others above have mentioned.

I know you are not thinking Rolex, but the ND sub 114060 is one of the most under the radar watches you can get. Very few if any people will notice it

[vicsdca]

None quite frankly.

[101031-28]

Tudor if i really had to pick between the two

[MSchu]

Out of those two OP, the Grand Seiko is the better watch BY FAR. Out of those two, I would just hold off and save up more capital for an even better watch.

-------------------------------

As mentioned above, the two two one is a fantastic piece and it's movement is insanely accurate.

[Dr.Stu]

Completely echo the comments re: the GS being too large, too light, too much dial- though the dials are gorgeous. Really wanted to like the watch, but I think it needs to be 1-2mm smaller for my wrist and probably in stainless- for more weight.

Surprised that the Reverso flies under the radar. When I wear mine, more often than not I get a comment about it (especially if I casually flip it over in order to break the ice to start one.)

I think you should definitely look at the Omega Seamaster Aqua Terra lines. Fits all your criteria, wears well- can get a date in 38/38.5/41.5/ or even an annual calendar (in a 38.5).

Also love the new Cartier Santos (the large one has a 6 o'clock date) at 39.8mm. Blue dial, of course, is one I would look at- but might not be as under-the radar as a Seamaster.