WatchUSeek Watch Forums banner

Next watch?

941 views 5 replies 5 participants last post by  tony20009 
#1 ·
Hey, I began collecting luxury timepieces a while ago and I am already looking at my next purchase.
Currently, I have:
Rolex Submariner Date 116613 (Two-Tone, blue dial)
Breitling SuperOcean Heritage 42 (Black dial - metal bracelet & rubber straps)

I'm thinking on getting one more for now, and I'm in between:

Rolex Cosmograph Daytona (Two-tone, black dial w/diamonds)
Hublot Classic Fusion Black Magic Cronograph
Audemars Piguet Royal Oak (Steel case/bracelet, black dial -REF. #15400ST.OO.1220ST)

What I want is a diverse collection, and I really like the Rolex probably due to the diamonds in the hour markings, but I don't know if it is wise to get another Rolex if I already have one. For the same price, I can get the AP basically but it has no gold and such. The Hublot is cheaper and I like the design but I don't know if Hublot has the quality a Rolex or AP has.
 
#2 · (Edited)
Off Topic:
What happened to the "beat St. John's" part of your ID? <winks>

On Topic:
Easy choice: AP Royal Oak.

A Sub and an RO is an outstanding pair of watches that anyone should be more than happy to wear. The RO with its "dress flexible" good looks and flair will do just fine dressy occasions, and the Sub is made for whatever rough and tumble you care to send its way. Sell the B-ling if need be.

If not the RO, then the Hublot Classic Fusion is also nice, and it fills the same stylistic space as does the RO. Plus it'll do so for a whole lot less coin, and finding contentment for less money is never a bad thing; usually it's a good thing.

The Cosmo is an excellent watch, but if you add that in, you've basically just added what amounts to the chronograph version of a Sub. Nothing wrong with that, but then your collection will consist of three squarely sport watches, two of which are Rolexes. So much for diversity....

As for the style element of the diamonds, there's no way around their niftiness. I like stones too. I'd say that since there are so many ways to incorporate stones and since they tend to look best on full on dress watches, you may want to wait until you feel compelled to get such a watch. Easily one of the sweetest implementations of diamonds on a watch dial is the Vacheron Constantin Patrimony shown below. Even if that isn't a watch that thrills you, it'll give you a general idea of how stones can be incorporated into a watch's design without looking like they are just gratuitously there.

In the VC Patrimony, one can see how the elegance of the stones compliments the elegance of the watch. That's in contrast with most gem adorned Rolex Oyster models, and especially the sport ones. On those watches, the gems come off as, well, gratuitous artifice. Sure, oil sheiks, business moguls, other royalty, and Hollywood stars can pull off wearing them, but for "everyday" folks, there are only a few times and places were they fit the character of the event and attire. At least that's my opinion, and, as I said, I like gemstones on watches, a lot actually.





All the best.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hornsup84
#3 ·
Echoing what has already been said. Taking into account your current collection, the Royal Oak does the most for you. I love the Daytona (but it shouldn't have diamonds on it!) and can say you would be very pleased with that as well. But since you've got a Rolex already, add a few more pieces before going back to the same brand UNLESS the Daytona is really the one you like best after strapping them all on.
 
#6 ·
FWIW, I think a fair number of folks on sites like this "poo poo" Hublot watches. In real life and in web reviews I've read of Hublot Classic Fusion watches, I have yet to come across one single person who was not or is not pleased with the watch.

As Romulux noted, a Classic Fusion is a good deal less dear than an AP, and the price difference is even greater if one compares models having comparable functionality. All the same, for bout $5K to $10K less, given the goodness the Hublot provides, in buying it one is arguably well ahead in the game of trade-offs between tangible traits, intangible traits and price.

If intangibles like horological history/pedigree or the merit of elaborate finishing is what one values, the Hublot can't hold a candle to the AP RO. If physical and practical features are what one values, the AP and Hublot CF are very evenly matched. Obviously, on the styling front, to each his own.

Check out this video:



I don't know if the model you're considering is this one, but the video should give you a very good idea of what to expect regardless of which one you have in mind.

All the best.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Biggles3
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top