Nautilus, Royal Oak and Overseas

[EdwardC]

I'm sure there are millions people chimed in this topic. For the current generation, do you feel each of these 3 have enough features and character that make them great watches? Like, is oversea still worst of the 3?

[GB-man]

While I commend the modernization of the VC, it’s design will likely never resonate with me. It’s beyond in last place for me. It’s not even on the list.

The royal oak is the original. AP have bastardized it much like omega has the speedy, but thankfully they still make some compelling renditions, just like omega.

The Patek is the odd ball. A derivative design completely devoid of modern upgrades but fortunate to be part of the second strongest brand in watches. Hot as they come right now and enjoying it’s long awaited limelight.

[codecow]

VC is definitely the worst.

[GB-man]

Originally Posted by codecow

VC is definitely the worst.

Please find the cliff notes to my rambling above.

[Ichiran]

VC has recently added a new black dial to the Overseas line-up, and a reversed panda on the Chrono. I'm personally not a big fan of the chrono as I feel it is too big and thick for a manufacturer that is part of the holy trinity.

Quite fancy the simple date in the black dial though.

2018-04-27_12-26-36.pngChrono.png

[tyler1980]

i actually like the new overseas the same as a RO. I don't own one (yet) mostly because of resale not because i don't like the watch. Eventually i would probably move it, and its a concern.

Overseas chrono is a more elegant ROO. Its not really a RO substitute. Its big and chunky and i would get it 10 times out of 10 vs another offshore.

[dmash]

Originally Posted by Ichiran

VC has recently added a new black dial to the Overseas line-up, and a reversed panda on the Chrono. I'm personally not a big fan of the chrono as I feel it is too big and thick for a manufacturer that is part of the holy trinity.

Quite fancy the simple date in the black dial though.

Attachment 946784Attachment 946785

Have you ever seen a Royal Oak Offshore?

[EdwardC]

For a plain 3 hander, I think Royal Oak is the best of the 3. For a chrono, I think the latest Oversea is the best of the 3. For other complications I think Nautilus? Maybe I am just not catching the Nautilus bug

[Ichiran]

Originally Posted by dmash

Have you ever seen a Royal Oak Offshore?

I was comparing the VC Overseas Chrono to the AP RO Chrono. The RO Chrono is just 11mm thick, although it is not an in-house movement.

For the ROO, it is technically 2 stacked movements in the case. Was it intentional by AP to have a watch with such a bulk in a more sporty line? I'm not too sure about that.

[SC11]

I struggle with the ROO being in this equation!

For me I’ve never been a fan of the VC Overseas mainly down to the case/bracelet style which just isn’t to my taste, they however make some gorgeous dials I loved the grey previous gen dual time and PC.

I like the simple RO like the 15407st or the 15202st, but in regards to a complication I prefer the chrono and PC offerings from AP.

Patek to me has to be a complication piece, against the grain I’m not a fan of the 5711, the contrast on the white dial is nice but really I would want my PP to be more then a time/date watch, with my preference in the Nautilus range being the 5990a.

[tyler1980]

Originally Posted by SC11

I struggle with the ROO being in this equation!

For me I’ve never been a fan of the VC Overseas mainly down to the case/bracelet style which just isn’t to my taste, they however make some gorgeous dials I loved the grey previous gen dual time and PC.

I like the simple RO like the 15407st or the 15202st, but in regards to a complication I prefer the chrono and PC offerings from AP.

Patek to me has to be a complication piece, against the grain I’m not a fan of the 5711, the contrast on the white dial is nice but really I would want my PP to be more then a time/date watch, with my preference in the Nautilus range being the 5990a.

i don't only because i am really surprised that people are not seeing that the VC overseas chrono and the 42mm ROO are the comparison pieces in this equation. Its not a VC overseas Chrono vs a ROC. At least to me it isnt.

[EdwardC]

Originally Posted by tyler1980

i don't only because i am really surprised that people are not seeing that the VC overseas chrono and the 42mm ROO are the comparison pieces in this equation. Its not a VC overseas Chrono vs a ROC.

I agree. The regular ROC is more like a sporty watch that pretends to be classic too. The ROO is more like in the league of a true sporty Chrono from AP

[SC11]

Originally Posted by tyler1980

i don't only because i am really surprised that people are not seeing that the VC overseas chrono and the 42mm ROO are the comparison pieces in this equation. Its not a VC overseas Chrono vs a ROC. At least to me it isnt.

Really, why? Granted I’ve never handled the VC overseas chrono but would say it carries on the classics Overseas lines and is sized only marginally bigger then the ROC has the same chrono layout plus like the ROC looks more complete on a bracelet.

[tyler1980]

Originally Posted by SC11

Really, why? Granted I’ve never handled the VC overseas chrono but would say it carries on the classics Overseas lines and is sized only marginally bigger then the ROC has the same chrono layout plus like the ROC looks more complete on a bracelet.

if you try on a overseas chrono and compare it to a ROC then its big and bulky and chunky and seems a bit out of proportion if looking for a ROC type of watch.

If you try it on and are looking for a 42mm ROO type of watch then all of a sudden it makes more sense. IMO its a smarter looking version of a 42MM ROO and especially so with a bracelet.

On size and wrist presence it just seems like the offshore customer is the appropriate market for it. Its not a negative on either brand, i just think the comparisons are sometimes not comparing the most similar watches to each other.

[LAFLARE]

I have seen people recommend a VC line, talk about how they like a VC line, yet not many people on this forum owns a modern VC watch. I understand the heritage and also, the contrary, loss of value in resale, but I think VC is quite dated in terms of modern pieces. There are way too many watches to choose from before a VC, at least for my personal taste.

[tyler1980]

Originally Posted by LAFLARE

I have seen people recommend a VC line, talk about how they like a VC line, yet not many people on this forum owns a modern VC watch. I understand the heritage and also, the contrary, loss of value in resale, but I think VC is quite dated in terms of modern pieces. There are way too many watches to choose from before a VC, at least for my personal taste.

VC is weak in the sports line vs AP for sure. They are not independent vs AP and Patek and their resale is weak. I think all of those are factors (for me at least) but i really do like the overseas line, and especially the current generation.

[LAFLARE]

Originally Posted by tyler1980

VC is weak in the sports line vs AP for sure. They are not independent vs AP and Patek and their resale is weak. I think all of those are factors (for me at least) but i really do like the overseas line, and especially the current generation.

I feel like it is easy to like a watch, but when it comes down to pulling the trigger, there is always an alternative to replace said watch unless the desire is strong enough.

[tyler1980]

Originally Posted by LAFLARE

I feel like it is easy to like a watch, but when it comes down to pulling the trigger, there is always an alternative to replace said watch unless the desire is strong enough.

UK retail for a VC chrono is like $7k more in the UK vs the US in USD terms so that is a huge turnoff for me. US pricing and a discount then its a different equation for me.

[LAFLARE]

Originally Posted by tyler1980

UK retail for a VC chrono is like $7k more in the UK vs the US in USD terms so that is a huge turnoff for me. US pricing and a discount then its a different equation for me.

I haven't gotten far enough with VC to follow much of the pricing. That is a huge difference, why is the cost so significant in the UK? I would not have imagined there to be such a big gap in sticker price for a SS watch in VC tiered pricing

[tyler1980]

Originally Posted by LAFLARE

I haven't gotten far enough with VC to follow much of the pricing. That is a huge difference, why is the cost so significant in the UK? I would not have imagined there to be such a big gap in sticker price for a SS watch in VC tiered pricing

Richemont is mostly higher in the UK vs the US. I suspect they are keeping their margins consistent across the world even if that means end prices are not similar.

The UK price includes a 20% tax and the US price is without sales tax. A lot of brands seem ok with lower margins in high tax countries to make the end price (inclusive of taxes) similar, not the case with Richemont. Both are close to 30K without taxes, so if both countries AD's buy wholesale at the same margin then VC is selling the watch for the same price to every AD around the world even if the effective end customer sales price is skewed.

[SC11]

Originally Posted by tyler1980

On size and wrist presence it just seems like the offshore customer is the appropriate market for it. Its not a negative on either brand, i just think the comparisons are sometimes not comparing the most similar watches to each other.

When I hear these three mentioned together I feel some retention of the original designs cues to be present, hence why I struggle maybe comparing the overseas to a ROO but guess you are right on asthetics the VC Chrono is better Vs the 42mm RO.

[tyler1980]

Originally Posted by SC11

When I hear these three mentioned together I feel some retention of the original designs cues to be present, hence why I struggle maybe comparing the overseas to a ROO but guess you are right on asthetics the VC Chrono is better Vs the 42mm RO.

i have no idea what the brands intent was, i just wouldn't buy the VC chrono if i wanted something like a ROC as its just too chunky. Maybe the similarity to the ROO is an accident and that isnt what they were going for at all but its always how i am comparing them.

[SC11]

Originally Posted by tyler1980

i have no idea what the brands intent was, i just wouldn't buy the VC chrono if i wanted something like a ROC as its just too chunky. Maybe the similarity to the ROO is an accident and that isnt what they were going for at all but its always how i am comparing them.

Who knows!

I really liked the previous gen dual time but think the redesign is no where near as nice, plus they dropped the best dial option as they make such a lovely grey dial.

[dannyp]

Of the three, I think the Nautilus vs. RO is largely a matter of taste; I personally like the RO design a little better, but think the PP is probably a bit less delicate feeling.

I also like the idea of the Overseas, but I just can't get past the bracelet; the integration of the logo into every link is a turn-off. To me, it's like a huge, gold Gucci belt buckle and I think they could have done a lot better.

[Abdullasaif]

I owned a 5712 and a 15202 never a vacheron OS due to the price depreciation. The new series 3 is super nice and its justifiable if you buy one used to not lose money on it comparing it to the series 2 which is the hublot of depreciation in this category, quality and aesthetics is on par with AP and Patek but i never owned one same thing with most of the people commenting in this thread

[kaiserphoenix]

The issue with the overseas is the fact that it hasn’t stood the test of time. Both the nautilus and RO have basically stayed the same but the OS has just kept on changing and it doesn’t give you the peace of mind.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[benlee]

Nautilus and RO are Genta original design. Overseas is not. In terms of heritage, looks, class, hard to choose the latter over the former two. Yet Overseas does have some attractiveness. The recent version with the ability to quickly swap bracelet and strap is a welcome feature for me.

That said, I really like the RG version of the new dual time. However, the excessive thickness is a turn off.

[AK797]

Originally Posted by tyler1980

if you try on a overseas chrono and compare it to a ROC then its big and bulky and chunky and seems a bit out of proportion if looking for a ROC type of watch.

If you try it on and are looking for a 42mm ROO type of watch then all of a sudden it makes more sense. IMO its a smarter looking version of a 42MM ROO and especially so with a bracelet.

On size and wrist presence it just seems like the offshore customer is the appropriate market for it. Its not a negative on either brand, i just think the comparisons are sometimes not comparing the most similar watches to each other.

I can't agree with that, the ROC and VCOC are the comparable watches clearly, the ROO is a different beast and a pure sports watch with presence and on a strap and comparable with RM etc .

[AK797]

I do like all three brands and their take on sports watches altho I accept all have unorthodox designs and take some getting used to. I personally like the squared octagon shape of the Nautilus the most, more than the pure octagon of the RO, and the more intricate yet slightly fussy design of the VC with its MC accents. All are finished superbly and have a high quality feel.

[tonupbklyn]

i went to try on the overseas 4500 blue dial. it looks fantastic, but on wrist it just felt way too big. i think it actually wore bigger than the AP 15400. which is too bad, cuz i wanted it to fit slimmer...the price point is quite attractive as it can be had below retail via resellers.

i think the ultra thin model is the way to go here, instead of the 4500. to me, this one is the more direct competitor to the 5711 and 15202. it's too bad they only offer it in white gold and platinum (not SS version), and that it doesn't have either a date or a constant seconds hand. shame...as the fit is exactly where i'd want it to be.