|
Post by Ben on Nov 26, 2007 23:43:47 GMT -5
As many people have said, it depends on one's definition of "best" doesn't it. I suppose that I will define "best" as: to the highest degree or the most superlative. When I contemplate what watch may be "the best," I think about watches that go beyond efficiency...beyond utility...and beyond the machinery. I've always thought that the concept of time is one of man's greatest ideas and the watch is one of man's greatest mechanical inventions. And to be honest, mechanical watches haven't changed all that much in a couple of hundred years. So I would have to pick a watch that refines and elevates the machinery into art. For me, a candidate, if not the candidate, for "best watch" has to be Philippe Dufour - any model he makes. The aesthetics are classic and the mechanicals are breathtaking. dufourwatches.free.fr/I know that barring some financial windfall, I will never own one. But that's OK. Many watch companies make superlative watches, but not many can elevate them into art. For me, that's what defines best. -Ben
|
|
|
Post by koimaster on Nov 27, 2007 12:00:20 GMT -5
@ Ben..... He does make some superb watches and for the most part, they are out of reach of the normal WIS. I have come around to the opinion that many very high end watches are not really for the true WIS but for the person who can afford something to show off at a party or gathering. JMHO.
|
|
|
Post by Ben on Nov 27, 2007 12:57:38 GMT -5
@ Ben..... He does make some superb watches and for the most part, they are out of reach of the normal WIS. I have come around to the opinion that many very high end watches are not really for the true WIS but for the person who can afford something to show off at a party or gathering. JMHO. I suspect that "very high end watches" don't get shown off at parties because the people at those parties that are impressed by stuff like that, or influenced by bragging, wouldn't know what it was in the first place. But...just because there are only a few of them available and one has to be savvy enough to appreciate them, and wealthy enough to obtain one, doesn't mean it isn't the best. It's been my experience that the "best" of pretty much anything (using my definition) is available to only a limited number of people anyway. I suppose now there should be a thread asking, "What constitutes a true WIS?" -Ben
|
|
|
Post by JBHII on Nov 27, 2007 13:18:56 GMT -5
"Best" is a pretty subjective term. Best at what?
Using my own definition, Rolex is hard to beat.
|
|
|
Post by AutoMovement on Nov 27, 2007 13:34:31 GMT -5
What ever brand it is I will never know, but for the price range I play in Invicta wins hands down. I know there many great quality watch companies in my price range but few push design like the Cheeze Box Co.
|
|
|
Post by Ben on Nov 27, 2007 13:35:55 GMT -5
"Best" is a pretty subjective term. Best at what? Using my own definition, Rolex is hard to beat. Subjective, indeed. -Ben
|
|
|
Post by floridagary on Nov 27, 2007 17:14:36 GMT -5
Hi Boscoe: This is a great question and one that really makes you think. Obviously the responses are subjective because we are all influenced by one or more elements of a timepiece, real or perceived. Even if we had the ingredients that make up the finer timepieces such as, Breguet, Patek, Audemars Piguet, Ulysse Nardin, Glashutte, Girard-Perregaux....well, you get the picture, it would still be hard to determine the best. If these makers are using some of the highest quality components available, for me it would come down to the overall look and feel. Trust me, I can find one model from each brand mentioned above and consider each one the best. As always, your thread brings out interesting opinions and discussions. Hey, it got me off my butt to finally respond!! Gary
|
|
|
Post by eddie on Nov 27, 2007 20:34:13 GMT -5
Patek lead the pack
|
|
|
Post by foghorn on Nov 27, 2007 20:55:52 GMT -5
I guess its all up to interpretation. My vote will, therefore, goes to Casio . They manufacture watches that need no batteries,are radio-controlled so they never have to be set. Perpetual Calendar so no date changes. Adjust to DST Have multiple timezones And they last forever!! If you want a watch then you can't go wrong with a Casio Atomic/Solar. Not a care in the world and spot on!!
(Geez-I sound like a commercial!!)
|
|
|
Post by gradyphilpott on Nov 28, 2007 22:57:35 GMT -5
Edit: HAHA. I didn't read foghorn's post above until now, but I'm glad someone is in agreement with me and it sounds like we're even talking abot the same watch.I have to plead ignorance. I don't even know how to define the best. I own a Bulova, two Wengers, six Timexes, two Casios, a Citizen, a Pulsar, two Invictas, and an ESQ, so as you can see I'm only really familiar with the bottom rung and maybe one or two higher. My Casio G-Shock Tough Solar Waveceptor is rugged, durable, reliable, accurate, sets itself, and never needs to be wound or have the battery changed (almost never), costs less that $200 and looks like it means business. Who can claim much more, other than a more handsome face. I guess I've talked myself into a vote for Casio, though, tomorrow I might change my mind. I guess I'll put my helmet and flak jacket on and head for the bunker now.
|
|
|
Post by Thomas Carey on Nov 29, 2007 5:05:58 GMT -5
I for sure would have had A. Lange&Sohne in the list. =)
|
|
|
Post by popeye on Nov 29, 2007 11:22:00 GMT -5
Best Watch? I think this is a big picture question, after all a timepiece is composed of more than one single item. So to group this into a general question is questionable. So with this in mind, I prefer Omega, why you may ask. Because of Dr George Daniels.
|
|