It's 18k gold but all right. my mom likes the black one too. reverse racism imo

they make watches out of copper now?

I do not understand this, ladies watches are supposed to be more bling right? Especially in the 5k+ range, most of these have diamonds or are nowhere near classic.

I personally love a daytona for a girl (although I wouldn't mind having one myself either)



For a semi classic watch you could take a look at a cartier quartz with white gold or something, but I'm more a fan of their pasha watch series.

The Hublot She Bang?

+1

Hidden Brag - if any1 is thinking bout these watches (Rolex Submariner/GMT2/Breitling Bentley Series) I looked at all of them and ended up gettin the Rolex GMT2 and couldn't be happier w/ my decision. (But the Breitlings r seriously sik esp the Bentley GT series it was really b/w those 2 at the end).

what about?

I actually stood for the same decision 2 days ago, tried on:
rolex submariner date and ND, gmtiic, milgaus gv, iwc portuguese and a jlc master hometime.

While the gmtii c seemed like the most bang for the buck as in it got the new bracelet, lunette etc... I ended up leaving with a submariner no date. I wasn't that big a fan of the magnifier on the date and the gmt iic just seemed too shiny to me.

None the less the gmtiic is a beatiful watch, just a bit too much bling for my taste.

I probably should add that I didn't even try on any of the breitlings, they just don't appeal to me (see the bling factor). Some people can easily pull it off though, but I would feel goofy walking around with such a watch around my wrist.

I don't care so much about spending $x on a watch. The thing I don't get is saying "I will spend x but not on a quartz" -- especially when we're talking about a gift for someone who doesn't understand the difference and will probably complain about the auto winding down all the time.

I can sort of see the mentality that says the movement in my watch is a status symbol, sort of. But the type of movement in your girlfriend's watch? If there were any practical advantage I might understand, but when we're talking about watches over about $200 we're already way outside the realm of practicality.

There's a black one that sammy farha sports on HSP can't remember the episode....anyone know what watch that is? I've been lookin for it

are these watches different years or something?

I know what you mean, if they did a GMT2 w/o a magnifier I would have taken that. The Sub is a super nice watch but part of the reason I didn't get it was cos my friend has 1 so I didn't want the same. Did u get the steel 1? Yeh I really liked the Breitlings but I thought they were a bit too flashy.

Wow.

Yes, I know a great deal about watches and the cost of movements. However, there an art and beauty to automatic movements that I very much appreciate that make me understand spending $5k or more for them. Quartzes in my opinion lack this art and beauty.

Now, a better question... why all the hostility about a subject that we both quite obviously enjoy? This is a thread for watch lovers. Take the irrational anger to the politics forum please.

Yeah I am not a fan of the two tone/gold rolex watches, so just a basic rolex for me.
I would have picked the gmt if it:
- didn't have the magnifier, I am in my early 20's I can read...
- ditched the shiny bracelet, then again that is something they could have done for me.

Yeh I am turning 21 nxt month so it is an early bday pres from me. I just got the standrd 1 as well, my friend has the semi-gold sub w/ the blue face & i just think its a bit too flash. My other issue w/ the sub is they r gonna be updated in the near future and given the ceramic bezel that the GMT2 has and soe other things r gonna be changed. But i dont know when that is gonna happen, might not even be for a few yrs.

cox i've never owned a rolex but i'd probably buy my gf/wife one, say whatever u want but the brand is timeless and it's on the smaller side...perfect for women. the gmt ceramic is sick and it's on my list, just wish it was a little bigger (42-43mm). the bezel makes up for it some.

hublot is overpriced for what it is (even moreso than all these other overpriced brands for what their watches do )....but the ice bang is cool, i'm not usually a fan of rose gold.

i think i remember seein one of the big name poker players wearin that Hublot? does any1 remember who it is or am i goin mad?

To answer yours and klever's question, i believe the answer to both is Sam Farha wears a Big Bang.

Nobody's helping me

There are many Roadster variants in both mens and womens.

I like the black 1

hmmmm which to get which to get...

Sorry. I love Hublot, and I have the first one, but in Silver. Beautiful watch. I am not as fond of the All Blacks, but I know many people who list it as their favorite. It is all personal preference, so I'm not sure how much help I can be.

My personal view... I dislike gold watches, so I'd go with the All-Black, but there are probably ten watches in the Big Bang line that I'd go with over either of those.

I am sure you will love which ever one you choose. Good luck and post pics when you get it.

this would make sense except for the fact that you don't have to spend $5k for an automatic movement.

As for the hostility, there isn't any. Just confusion since you're obviously not clear on what your purchasing motivations are.

I have never said you had to spend $5k on an automatic movement. What I said what that I wouldn't spend $5k on a quartz movement. Big difference. Reading comprehension can be your friend.

If you are going to argue with me, at least argue with what I say and don't just make stuff up.


No, YOU are not clear on what my purchasing motivations are, and it would be unwise to argue with me about them. I am very clear on what they are.