Greg:
Chris suggested a roundtable discussion about what our favorite watch of the last twelve months would be. I think it is a great starter and would lead to the next obvious topic: what was the worst watch purchase in the last twelve months? But that is for a later date.
Since June 1 of last year I have bought 33 watches, 31 of those were vintage. Two were bought as gifts, so let’s subtract them. Two arrived this week. They can’t be considered. Three were sold or given away. Two I have never worn. (One is at the watchmaker’s, the other is in the increasing long queue to go.) That may suggest that those are not in the running for favorite of the last twelve months. Does 33 seem high? Again, a discussion for another day. I am really choosing from 24 that can or should be worn. I actually keep track of how many times I wear a watch in a given month. It is one of the criteria that I use to determine what stays and what goes. This watch is not my most worn watch. But those numbers are skewed a bit.
I have actually had a good year. My success rate, by my admittedly personal and arbitrary standard, is higher than in past years. A few months ago the answer would have been different. But one of my vintage late comers barely beats out a new watch purchase. To be the “favorite” one must look forward to wearing it and find excuses to wear it before some other watch. Only two are doing that right now. The one that stands alone can be worn with a blue suit, any suit really, and simultaneously looks both modern and vintage. It is not overly small or precious. My favorite for this random twelve month period is my late 1940’s Mido Multifort.
I will get into the glories of the Multifort later, but I pass the baton…
Chris:
I won’t go into my numbers, it would depress me, and possibly instigate a welfare check from the remaining members of the team. Safe to say, I’ve had an interesting 12 months. I have more than cemented what is deemed “my type”, and I just lean into it now. A little backstory – I was lusting after a Benrus 3061, aka a “Bullitt” Benrus, and have been for a while. I did manage to pick up a ex-service 1969 Benrus DTU-2A/P, but the watch Gods did not look upon me favourably and it turned up absolutely mangled. Still reeling from my excommunication, I was sulkingly trawling eBay, as you do, and decided to look at ATP watches, which I have always adored but stayed away from due to inflated prices or terrible condition. A disgusting looking Leonidas recently sold for £700, so that’s always fun. Anyways, I saw an Enicar ATP that looked pretty decent, a small amount of radium burn, but it was recently serviced and belonged to the great grandfather of the seller, engraved, and issued in 1940. I paid a decent chunk of cash, by my standards, but it was definitely one of the best decisions. It wears at 30mm, steel-cased, powered by an AS 984 (which ironically I had only just bought a “Waterproof” branded military jobber powered by the same movement a week before the Enicar). Despite the fixed lugs, it is an incredibly versatile watch, and current sits on an army green Perlon strap. It’s rugged, and cool; it belies an element of sophistication whilst effectively confirming the wearer can definitely handle oneself in the field. The ATPs, unlike the WWWs, are the unsung heroes of the Second World War watch roster, and if you do find a good one, I’d definitely recommend you pick one up.
Kaysia:
Ok… Well I am going to feel like the boring one here!
That Multifort is very beautiful.
Handsets can define the whole feel of a watch to me. They are like the accessories of an outfit.
Brutish rectangles are the no frills option to keep it all about telling time, perhaps with a functional point on the end. They are the leather belt of watches. Functional, but still look good.
The long slender hands on that Multifort are the equivalent of matching necklace and earrings. Classy and elegant and can instantly dress up the rest of the outfit.
The Enicar ATP… I had to Google this, does it have a small seconds? I believe I’ve heard bad things about vintage watches with small seconds (is the hand more likely to detach?? I may be making that up) but I just find a teeny tiny seconds hands very beguiling. I think of them as a subtle reminder of the tiny movements and workings within the watch itself.
A very classy pair of watches you guys have chosen.
What I’m particularly loving about this conversation so far is that you are making my watch buying numbers look incredibly conservative! I would guess I’ve bought a dozen in the past 12 months?
….(No, I’m not going to actually go count, just in case I’m scared by the truth)….
…and my most favourite, but what I also would count as my most boring watch, is my Explorer 1 which I was lucky enough to pick up a few weeks ago.
I would definitely class it as boring because you just see them absolutely everywhere in the watch world.
Going for a ‘normal’ choice of watch isn’t usually my style, but I love the whole slightly shady history of Rolex, and until they shrink the Explorer 2, this was absolutely the model for me.
Now, anyone reading this who knows me knows I am a complete sucker for a good story, and I enjoy the story that comes with this one.
The story of Everest?
No.
The story of how much fun I pestering my AD for the 11 weeks before he gave in and called me. I was almost sad it was over (don’t think he was).
Everyone complains and whines about the Rolex waiting list, but it truly is the most fun watch buying experience I’ve had.
Greg:
I have a soft spot for the Explorer 1. I like it enough that I recently bought what can be considered a homage to it. It has the GADA/Tool watch thing working for it. (Ok, I am not a fan of the Explorer 2, but I will save that for later.) Funny thing is, when the Multifort came out it was every bit the tool watch/GADA that the Explorer was. That little window in the late forties until about 1951 gave it the leaf handset that lets it transition from rough and tumble to elegant. It was the first automatic that was anti-magnetic, shock resistant and waterproof, beating the Oyster Perpetual by about a year.
It is my first bumper automatic. Box checked. I normally am happy when an old watch is within a minute every 18 hours or so. This old bumper is accurate to a minute every 48 hours. I feel like I hit the jackpot.
Related to that point, I think that a lot of vintage watches with acrylic crystals get taken out of service because of the crystals and not any mechanical problem. That watch was unreadable before Polywatch. I thought that it was going to need a new crystal. A few minutes later my opinion changed.
You both have picked favorites that I like very much. I will walk a mile over glass for the right Enicar. Chris has me wearing many more military watches than I ever did before.
Chris:
I have issues with the Explorer, and it stems from the Everest debate with the Smiths. I believe Smiths were the first at the summit, and Rolex sneakily tried to cash in on proximity rather reality. I like the watch though, but as someone with a relative of the A409 and a penchant for the De Luxe range, it’s very clear which mast I pin my colours to.
It is interesting that we have all picked GADA/tool watches, especially those with a field-y leaning. In a world where everyone does not actually know what they want from a watch, and huge misunderstandings as to what a field watch actually is and should be, it is comforting to know that we champion the form at TER. Then again, the military influence on the style, function, and popularity of watches in general is hard to ignore. One could say that I, with my default of military-inspired field watches, am a purist, but that is definitely a discussion for another day.
I have a huge soft spot for Enicar despite my warning others against them: a Sherpa Guide or similar would be something akin to a grail for me (ugh!). I made the foolish mistake of thinking they would keep around the £1-1,500 mark from around 20 years ago and put off buying one numerous times. When I saw one in a vintage shop window about 4 years ago for £3,500 I realised I would never really get the chance to own one anymore. I do admire the homage Sherpa brand, a lot of thought and attention has gone into the modern reimagining, but it is a very expensive love affair at £6-7,000. I have two Enicars I adore, both 1940s, both 30mm and rugged, and that is fine for me.
I apologise for any influence I may have had on you two, and your watch-buying habits.
Kaysia:
Yeah, I get that Rolex used slightly ropey advertising tactics, but it’s just the way the game was played back then, and probably just as much now. Like I’ve heard you say before Chris, Rolex survived and thrived when other watch brands didn’t. I can’t hate on them for making the smart, but shady, decisions.
I would love to add a vintage Smiths to my collection one day, but I will need your guidance on that Chris. The Room needs a ‘How to buy a vintage Smiths’ post!
I guess I could have gone with a ‘new’ Smith’s Everest from Time Factors. I like the design and the fact that it has more than the zero water resistance of a vintage option, but can we say that that watch’s claim to Everest fame is any more legitimate than Rolex’s?
Can you also earn the rights to all of a brand’s history and heritage when you buy the name and designs? I guess that’s a whole other debate too!
(At mention of Time Factors Chris spontaneously exploded, thus ending the conversation.)
The Escapement Room 