ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

CRM114 · 17 January 2018, 07:32 PM

Spending money on complications or capabilities one never uses degrades the real-world "bang" in the bang for the buck equation. It's just pricey excess. Subs/Dwellers/SDDSs that never go deeper than a swimming pool. GMTs that are never set to more than one time zone. Daytonas that may as well have non-functioning chrono-pushers...people love them and Rolex successfully markets the ideas attached to each when it comes to capabilities, but for most the reality of use falls severely short. The silly-deep WR ratings of divers are probably the worst example of un-needed, wasted capability (that comes at a cost) for 99.9% of wearers.

Most people want to tell the time (I'm excluding Daytona wearers since doing that is a chore), and of those a large percentage would like to also know the date. My vote for best bang for the buck in function and fashion form/versatility are those that hit the sweet spot and aren't loaded down largely-unused extras. New, the OP/Explorer, and if used, the Datejust.

My answer to "Best bang for the buck" is based on the notion that someone buys a watch to wear and use, not flip, and that is tough enough for everyday knocks, water resistant enough for normal people doing normal things (as all Oysters are), and has versatile good looks. It's not based on "Investment", which is an entirely different question.

mountainjogger · 17 January 2018, 08:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duke of Dulwich

The 2016 Air King. Same case and anti-magnetic qualities as the Milgauss, however much cheaper.

x2!!!

francksuperbaby · 27 January 2018, 08:01 PM

Explorer II 16570 Polar 3186 random or g with thin frame dial.

MCO1 · 28 January 2018, 07:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WatchOut4It

In the current line up I think the Explorer I 39mm 214270 is packing a lot of goodness for the price. It's both sporty and elegant, making it quite a flexible timepiece.

This one has my vote too!

RossHetherington · 28 January 2018, 07:51 AM

Explorer I. Enough said.

17 January 2018, 07:32 PM	#181
CRM114 "TRF" Member Join Date: Sep 2015 Location: HK & USA Watch: GMTs,1803, 16610LV Posts: 2,001	Spending money on complications or capabilities one never uses degrades the real-world "bang" in the bang for the buck equation. It's just pricey excess. Subs/Dwellers/SDDSs that never go deeper than a swimming pool. GMTs that are never set to more than one time zone. Daytonas that may as well have non-functioning chrono-pushers...people love them and Rolex successfully markets the ideas attached to each when it comes to capabilities, but for most the reality of use falls severely short. The silly-deep WR ratings of divers are probably the worst example of un-needed, wasted capability (that comes at a cost) for 99.9% of wearers. Most people want to tell the time (I'm excluding Daytona wearers since doing that is a chore), and of those a large percentage would like to also know the date. My vote for best bang for the buck in function and fashion form/versatility are those that hit the sweet spot and aren't loaded down largely-unused extras. New, the OP/Explorer, and if used, the Datejust. My answer to "Best bang for the buck" is based on the notion that someone buys a watch to wear and use, not flip, and that is tough enough for everyday knocks, water resistant enough for normal people doing normal things (as all Oysters are), and has versatile good looks. It's not based on "Investment", which is an entirely different question.

27 January 2018, 08:01 PM	#183
francksuperbaby "TRF" Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: PARIS Posts: 41	Explorer II 16570 Polar 3186 random or g with thin frame dial.

28 January 2018, 07:51 AM	#185
RossHetherington "TRF" Member Join Date: Nov 2017 Location: UK Posts: 87	Explorer I. Enough said.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)