Christopher Ward C65 Trident GMT (Black) first impressions

I was first attracted to the orange-handed version of this watch purely because of the aesthetics and something tweaked in my mind when I saw it. I suspect it was the below vintage Rolex.

Like so many watches it is hard to be completely unique and without the orange hand, the strangely big orange hand, the Rolex Explorer II would never have entered my mind.

I could buy a vintage Explorer II if I had +£18,000 to spare, but I do not and so I am concentrating on sub £1,000 watches as they offer, in my opinion, far more real world value and practicality.

As you may have read recently in my Tissot Powermatic 80 review a lot can be got for what is considered not much money in the watch world. That watch blew my mind and changed how I view lower-priced watches, and so naturally the next stop is Christopher Ward.

Over time the brand has been growing a reputation for excellent customer service, reasonable pricing and specifications and quality that are way ahead of what many competitors offer. I was going to write ‘what competitors can do’, but that would not be correct because many choose to pad out their pricing in the hope that consumers will not notice. I would add a list of examples at this point, but put simply it is the vast majority with very few exceptions.

Anyway, here are the main specifications you get for your £955 (£1,055 before a widely available promo code)-

On these specs alone the value proposition stood out for me when I compared it to my Oris Divers 65. The movement is the most prominent upgrade in a watch that costs £600 less than my SW200 powered Oris. The GMT function is the other main difference between the two specs wise aside from the dimensions etc. and so I remain scratching my head asking why one is so much more expensive than the other. The Oris is +£1,600 retail.

Now before I start the actual review I thought it best to get the logo placement out of the way early on. My 17 year old daughter has no interest in watches at all and so I showed her a large picture of the Pepsi version of this watch and asked her what she thought of it. She immediately said-

“Why are the words over there?”

She was ambivalent about the watch itself because they all look the same to her, but the logo placement jumped out immediately.

I did this because it is easy for someone like me, who looks at watches often, to notice it more than others, but the fact is that we have many decades of centre-top logos on watches in our subconscious and anything else is hard to adjust to.

It is more than that, however, because I noticed that when the hands are in the bottom half of the dial the empty space feels immense and it gives a ‘homage watch with no logo at all’ feel- that’s not the best look.

I then pondered if the lettering, and the length of the brand name, was too large to sit at the top, but as you can see below (in my badly edited image) it actually does look better in the traditional location.

Sadly the insertion of the clever English Flag / Swiss Flag logo at the top does not offer much because it is invisible in most lighting conditions, but I guess this is a good thing because 2 logos on a dial could get too busy.

I am not sure why the logo is to the left, I am not sure why ‘CW’ is not used instead and I cannot understand what the designers were thinking when they decided to put the large font logo on the left with an invisible flag logo at the top. There is nothing wrong with trying something different because the watch world desperately needs that, but I can’t work out how this design choice came to be.

The thing is I am not saying that I dislike it, I am just having trouble adjusting which is evidenced by the number of paragraphs I have spent on it already. The lockdown thing is having more of an effect on my ability to spend hours thinking about silly things than I thought.

And then it gets weird- the black version looks great with the logo on the left, but not the Pepsi version, in my humble opinion, and I guess this may be down to the visual temperature. The warmness of the lume on the black version and the organge hand compare starkly against the colder Pepsi look. It is just a personal preference on my part so don’t let me sway you.

I have traversed over to the Pepsi version when I am in actual fact reviewing the Black version here, and that makes for a huge difference. I cannot get my head around why one looks perfectly fine and the other feels unbalanced to me. They are the same watch in every single way apart from the colours, but it goes to show just how difficult watch design is; the form, the materials used, the consistency of shading, the sizing in every area and so it goes on. In my limited view it is easy, but it really isn’t and I have to say that CW has nailed the black version for my particular tastes.

What surprised me most about this watch was how it felt on the wrist when I first wore it. For a 41mm watch it feels decidedly small to me and the 47mm lug to lug only adds to this. In comparison to the Tissot Powermatic I struggle to understand the quoted dimensions for either watch. The Tissot feels substantial, solid and heavy whereas the Trident feels light and ultra slim. I say this because the Trident is heavier, higher and wider, and only the lug to lug length is bigger by a mere 0.9mm. It highlights how important design is in a watch and yet I still can’t get my mind around these two when put side by side. The end result is that the Trident actually wears better and is more practical as an everyday wear.

In many ways this is the perfect case design and reminiscent of the Oris Divers 65. What I can say is that the case really is stunning; intricate, beautifully polished and brushed, and so minimal that the watch wraps around the wrist like few others I have worn.

The dial is big because the bezel is thin and so you get a lot of space to view the time and date in. This adds to the openness of the dial because of the logo position, and the (too) small date window. I appreciate that the date window is colour matched with a black background and white text, but why is it so small? This is a GMT watch which makes the date more important and so it should at least be visible in all conditions. I go back to repeating myself regarding date functionality- if you are going to include a date window, don’t be shy and worry that it will disturb the dial, and especially so on a dial with this much space.

The sense of space continues with the cricket bat hands which are pleasingly lumed using a creamy vintage application. With a super thin seconds hand and a relatively thin unidirectional bezel as well the sense of genuine vintage is obvious throughout. As it happens the big GMT hand helps to add personality to the otherwise fairly sparse dial and of course it is extremely useful as well.

I get what Christopher Ward is trying to do here and the brand has succeeded with ease. On wrist it is a joy, even though this is not going to be my watch, and it feels like the Oris I always wanted. Oris watches can tend to be very conservative in terms of their design, especially the Diver’s 65 range, and CW is offering a much cheaper, better specified and more interesting timepiece which is miles ahead in terms of wearability.

The bracelet is also excellent with a considered taper and an on the fly adjustable clasp which is a much bigger convenience than you may imagine. Don’t underestimate how useful it is to be able to make a quick adjustment when the summer arrives and your wrist swells during the day. Also, the quick release mechanism is superb and unlike anything I have seen before- a touch of consideration that is rare elsewhere.

Throw in a 5 year warranty and I am struggling to adjust to what this watch represents.

I recently wrote the following about the Tissot Powermatic-

“It leaves me pondering if the Powermatic 80 is the best watch I have worn under £1,000 and I genuinely believe that it is. For the price it is exceptional, for double the price it would be impressive, but no matter what the cost this is a solid and beautifully understated watch that could easily be my 85% daily wear.”

The Christopher Ward C65 Trident GMT is potentially better than the Tissot and that is a good thing because it is teaching me that if I look outside of the tried and tested brands there is a lot of good out there, and that good is actually better than much of the competition.

This will be my son’s watch and the question remains as to if we need two CWs in the house. I must admit that this is preferable to the excellent Powermatic to me and so I will ponder my next steps. As an introduction to Christopher Ward it is perplexing that so much can be offered at this price point, and more importantly that no area has been missed in terms of the design process that has obviously gone into its creation.

More information here.

Note: we had a blip with the wrong watch being sent initially, but the response from CW proved that there is depth to the customer service as well as the product itself.

Final, final note. Above is the box the watch came in and it’s some of the most considered packaging I have seen. Seriously, Christopher Ward should also make wireless speakers. This design would beat most I have seen.

Tissot Gentleman Powermatic 80 Silicium review

In a world where the vast majority prefer low-end watches that can be replaced after a few years and where the vocal section of the watch community like to dote on and shout about their Rolex, Omega or other luxury timepieces there is this lesser talked about middle ground which just may represent the best compromise, and value, of all.

This watch may be my 50th birthday watch, but I have another contender which may knock it off its perch. To cut a long story short I was given an Oris by my wife and son last year for my 50th, but over time I lost interest in it and it started to feel too big for me. My recent bout with Covid and the subsequent weight loss (my wrist size dropped by 0.25”) made up my mind and so it had to go, but only after I had promised my wife that I would replace it with a similarly valued watch. I felt bad about selling a present, but the Oris was £1,300 and I do not like that amount of money sitting on a shelf doing nothing.

Unusually for someone whose interest and understanding of watches has grown, my taste for expensive timepieces has wained. I tried a Tudor Black Bay 58, a Black Bay GMT and a red Black Bay, but they were all sold after a few months. I have also tried more expensive watches, but I appear to have a psychological issue with luxury watches; for starters I don’t feel that I deserve own a watch that is so expensive and secondly I am still struggling to see the value, and practical benefits, in the extra £1,000’s they require to own.

Ultimately, I want one watch that I will wear 85% of the time and I want to feel that it is a very good quality product, verging on luxury, and I need it to be practical enough and aesthetically conservative enough to never stand out (look like I am trying too hard) no matter what I am wearing.

Lets start with the main specifications-

None of the above stands out for the price and of course they won’t because they are just words. A watch is much more than specs and in this case that is particularly true.

An elephant trots into the room…

This is admittedly a generic and simple design, but it initiates the trick part of my mind as I consider both the Rolex and the Tissot in terms of their form factors.

What I need to do, however, is forget the fact that this watch has a similar design to some other legendary watches and instead consider it for what it is. If I took 50 watches and I had a lot of time I would likely find that 45 of them looked very similar to other watches that came before. A watch is a watch to a point and there is a limit to how much they can be styled to stand out before they look silly, and we have many decades of tradition and design behind us to prove that only so much can be done.

Also, I mentioned that I do not want to stand out and so a traditional design, to a point, will likely work better for me.

When I received the Tissot Gentleman I was initially surprised by how heavy the box was and knew immediately that it was substantial. This is standard for some sports watches, it could easily be classed as a dress watch, and once I picked it up and wore it I discovered that it had presence and a slight sense of heft rather than an annoying top heavy weight to it.

And then I spent some time with it and I was blown away. The finishing is much finer and more detailed than would usually be found in a £600 watch, possibly more than any other model at this price point, and the sense of consistency throughout the case and dial is immediately obvious. The brushing on the sides of the case is a real surprise and the more you look at it the more impressive it is, but ultimately it is dial that takes the prize as the star of the show. There is a negative though- the finishing of the hands could be a ‘lot’ better as you can see below.

From the hours markers (Grand Seiko anyone?) to the bordered date window which is actually big enough to read (hooray!) to the sunburst blue backing, it is such a clean design which is complemented further by the hands which also have a ‘Grand Seiko’ feeling to them in my eyes.

Using the crown is another ‘blown away’ moment; it is buttery smooth, the date clicks audibly and firmly when adjusted and it is not difficult at all to be ultra precise with the minute setting. The only minor setback is that rotating the crown causing the hands to move quite slowly and it may take some time if you are adjusting the time by more than a few hours.

Then again, after 48 hours the Tissot is currently 1 second slow. Yes, 1 second. It could obviously be pure luck, but this is a very good start. It has been difficult to find the recommended service interval for the Powermatic 80 movement and there are discussions online, some heated, regarding the expected durability of these particular movements. The fact that it is a modified ETA 2824-2 movement should mean that any watchmaker can service it, however, and the only question remains as to how this modification will affect longevity and the ability for independent watchmakers to do their thing. I was somewhat surprised by the fairly reasonable servicing pricing available from Tissot, but the potential for extra parts costs leaves a question mark hanging there. The 80 hour power reserve is a big advantage; leave it on the side after work on Friday night and it will still be running on Monday morning which is huge and all that has been done to allow this is a slow down of the movement. The majority would never even notice that change.

I have to say that after 2 hours I was left scratching my head at how beautiful this watch is to look at, how readable the dial is and how bulletproof it feels when worn. I couldn’t understand how this can be done for £600 and truth be told I still can’t when I consider what the competition offers. When I compare it to the Tissot PRX (reviewed here) it feels 4 times the quality for 2 times the price.

The only aspect I would change is the bracelet. It is very well made and it suits the watch perfectly in terms of form, but the polished centre links make it a little too dressy for me. This is a sports watch, in my mind, and it brings back thoughts of the jubilee bracelet on the Rolex GMT Master II- neither quite work as a set. The GMT Master is supposed to be a tool watch, but it is quickly morphing into a dressy overly flashy abomination which is completely inconsistent. The Tissot is obviously far from that, but to me the centre links have quite an impact on the look and so a replacement would be on the agenda for me were I to keep it. Alas, a 21mm lugged replacement. I also suspect that they will scratch quite easily alongside the bezel so be prepared for this watch to look worn at some point in the future. This is rarely a bad thing, but on a watch with a bezel like this one it make look slightly odd. Remember, this is not a tool watch.

The butterfly clasp is excellent and in terms of quality the bracelet only adds to the Tissot, but the inclusion of half-links (while welcome) do not make up for the fact that you will have to wear it a little loose for it to be comfortable. Fortunately, the height of the case is surprisingly low at 11.5mm and on my 7.5” wrist it wears incredibly well, to the point that it could have been made for me and it reminds me of the Hamilton Khaki King in that regard. It is also a world away from all of the Tudors I owned which were top heavy and far too high on the wrist to not be noticeable, for £2,000 more.

And so I come to comparing this watch to others that I have owned in a similar price bracket. The Longines Hydroconquest (automatic) was uncomfortable, inaccurate, sharp edged in the wrong places and generally a poor watch for £1,000. The Tissot kills it in almost every area.

I have also never owned a Seiko even close to this watch for a similar price, and that is after they were checked for misalignments and other factory errors. The fact that the brand is pushing into the higher end and increasing prices on mid-range watches with few discernible improvements doesn’t help. Some Citizens, even though they are mostly quartz, are fantastic when you go above £500 and the sheer consistency of their overall build quality is superb.

Bulova is almost impossible to compare because of the haphazard nature of their range. From cheap, really awful, quartz watches to innovative(?) Case designs to overpriced automatics it is hard to know where to start. The Accutron II range was impressive a few years back and without doubt the new Accutrons are stunning although they are no longer branded Bulova, and they are in the £1,000’s now as well.

The Powermatic 80 is a substantial watch and not in terms of bulk. It catches the eye, it feels solid and there is a sense that it is one block of finely polished metal that just happens to tell the time. As an example of its size here you can see it next to my Mondaine Stop2Go. My son gave me the Mondaine when he left for University and it is an exceptionally comfortable and useful watch. It means a huge amount to me and whenever I see the second hand pause at the top waiting for the hour hand to jump forward I think of him every time. That is why it will be at a minimum my 15% wear to compliment whatever becomes my 50th birthday watch.

The Tissot is the same width and height as the Stop2Go yet feels much more substantial dimensionally.

It leaves me pondering if the Powermatic 80 is the best watch I have worn under £1,000 and I genuinely believe that it is. For the price it is exceptional, for double the price it would be impressive, but no matter what the cost this is a solid and beautifully understated watch that could easily be my 85% daily wear.

More details here.

Tissot PRX review

Quick note: for some reason I still receive emails asking why I cover watches on McGST and not just tech, despite the fact that I mentioned a few times that this is not just a tech site. Well, I do not care much for traffic or to earn money from this site, but I decided to have a quick look at the stats over the past year and the results were surprising; out of the top 10 articles for traffic 8 of them were purely watch related (mechanical or quartz, not smartwatch). The top 5 were watch related with two anomalies appearing at 7 and 9 respectively- the A3 pro quick review and the 1970s Moulinex Electric Carving Knife review. I have no idea why these two were so popular, but the fact remains that watches dominate in terms of traffic on McGST and while I may not post so much as I used to, I will continue to do so now and then.

Gérald Genta

The Tissot PRX caused a minor stir when it was released very recently because of its ‘Genta’ attributes and so I made moves to get the chance to review the T137.410.11.051.00 model in black. Gérald Genta was a Swiss artist and watch designer who created, amongst others, the Audemars Piguet Royal Oak and the Patek Philippe Nautilus. As you can see below the Royal Oak bears more than a passing resemblance to the Tissot PRX, or should that be the other way around?

When it comes to watches the rules do not quite follow what you would see with other products. The fact that they are designated as tools muddies the waters when a watch looks similar to another and from my understanding it is extremely difficult to win a case based on similarity rather than, for example, a fake watch bearing the same logo. This gives brands a lot of flexibility in how they can design their watches and it would be a reasonable argument to say that Tissot has not exactly hidden their inspiration when it comes to the design of the 2021 PRX.

The vintage PRX offers a sense of evolution, but I would argue that the 2021 version is more blatant in terms of what the brand is trying to do.

It would be easy to dismiss the new PRX as a copy of a Royal Oak, as lazy design or as jumping on a financial bandwagon to boost profits, but that is kind of how the watch world works. For example, Timex have had recent success with their Q range and I reviewed the Q Timex HODINKEE Limited Edition here. As you can see it has a similar vibe to the PRX which as discussed is like the Royal Oak which is no doubt like other watches and so it goes on. The answer is to not worry too much about design similarities because a watch is a very small space to fit a lot of parts and design aspects into and unless it is a blatant and poorly made copy just buy what you like and enjoy it.

The PRX certainly ticked the box of ‘like’ the first time I saw it and there are a few reasons for this. The design is something I do like and not just because of the Royal Oak vibe. In a world where so many watches follow very similar circular forms it is good to see something different, even if this difference is technically decades old. At £295 it is not expensive in the wider watch world, even if it appears expensive to anyone who has a more ‘normal’ approach to watches. And it is made by Tissot, a Swiss brand that has been around since 1853. It is now part of the Swatch Group and it sells watches ranging from approximately £150 all the way up to £4,200. These start at simple quartz models and within the range there are varying mechanical movements which has ultimately led me to be confused by the brand and where exactly it sits in the watch brand ladder.

I would put Tissot in the mid-range purely on the basis that such a huge range of models are sold and I am continually perplexed by the term ‘luxury’ which is often used to describe the brand. As it happens, my first watch costing more than £200 was a Tissot quartz and I was impressed by the box, the included books and the overall packaging that came with it. It felt impressive to me and this was, bizarrely, enhanced when I called Tissot to ask about a leather strap replacement because mine was uncomfortable. The snotty attitude I got back and the crazy price for a replacement strap made me presume that this was how ‘luxury’ watch brands worked. It was only over time and following many other watch purchases that I realised Tissot was some way lower down the ladder than the presentation of the watch may indicate.

And when I opened the box that came with the PRX and saw the same book (a history of Tissot) included many years later alongside the exact same packaging it was a negative experience for me. It almost feels deceptive and an attempt to make mass produced mediocrity feel special, but I suspect it works on many new customers every year just as it did for me once. The thing is that the packaging and extras are actually well made and a nice touch for watches that are at the lower end, but when you know more about the industry it is easy to become cynical about such things.

Anyway, the box will sit on a shelf somewhere and so it does not really matter. The watch is what counts and that is what I will concentrate on. I will cover the technical bits first to see if they add up to £295 in terms of value.

Tissot lists the movement in the PRX as a Swiss Quartz ETA F06.115 with EOL functionality, which signifies ‘end of life’ and means that the second hand will skip when the battery is running out. It uses a Renata 371 battery running at 40.0 mAH which according to the ETA site gives a life of 68 months before it needs to be replaced. The ETA F06.115 part signifies the exact movement powering the watch and this appears to run at about £40 standalone. To some of you this will seem cheap in a watch costing just shy of £300 and if that is the case you will not want to know the price of a quartz movement running in many fashion watches. Below £10 is far from uncommon.

A sapphire crystal is a decent addition and not always present at this price point and the 316L stainless steel case should withstand life most of the time. What is surprising is not the 100m of water resistance, but the fact that this is achieved with a push crown rather than a screw down crown. No matter though because 100m is more than enough for most people.

The dimensions feel right for me (7.25″ wrist) at 40mm diameter and a depth of only 10.4mm. Tissot claims that the lug to lug is also 40mm, or rather the length is detailed with this measurement, but that is not the case. The way the integrated bracelet is attached to the watch means that they do not slope straight down and with my callipers I measured a true lug to lug length of 51.2mm. This is big when compared to most watches and on my wrist it is at the outer limit of what would work. It does work for me because there is some slope on the top links and so I would suspect the real world lug to lug to be approx 48mm. It should be easy to work this out, but strangely it is not.

With the specifications above it does seem as though Tissot is not overpricing the PRX and the 2 year warranty is also a useful addition, if somewhat standard in the world of watches today. Overall, however, in an industry where it is virtually impossible to understand ‘value’ the PRX feels more simple to guauge and I have no complaints about the pricing here.

The main bonus with the PRX is not the price, but the fact that it manages the trick of looking special without shouting about it. It is different enough to stand out when noticed yet familiar enough to not make you look like you are trying too hard. That may not sound important, but far too many watch brands have trouble with this balance and the further up the ladder you climb the more garish and ‘manly’ some watch designs become. Tissot has got something that even most of the rest of their range cannot achieve; understated, subtle and with a touch of class.

Once sized for my wrist I admit to being much more positive about it than I expected. I was kind of expecting a cheap feel to the watch, but this never happened and on the wrist it looks amazing, it really does. The dial is clean, I chose the black one, and it is extremely easy to read when you need to quickly check the time. The only watch that feels more obvious for time telling is my Mondaine Stop2Go which cannot ever be beaten in this regard.

It is very comfortable, but I would suggest that you spend time fitting it perfectly (half-links are included). You will not be wanting it to be too loose because the occasional hair will be snagged from time to time. The bracelet is very flexible from the start and it tapers starkly from 27mm to 18mm. That is a very steep taper, but it does work here and offers a vintage feel to the overall look with only the widest part at the case occasionally looking slightly dominating. Again, however, I think Tissot got this part right and you simply cannot understate how important the design of an integrated bracelet is on such a watch because it forms one of the two most important aesthetic areas. The clasp at the bottom is almost invisible, but does feel secure enough to avoid accidental drops.

My Omega Geneve from the early 1970’s has an integrated bracelet and it also has a steep taper (26mm down to 16mm), but again it is the bracelet that makes it what it is. I tried to make a leather strap for the Geneve, which came out very well, but when attached the watch lost all of its personality and looked completely ordinary in an instant. Watches like the PRX and Geneve are made by their bracelets and both Tissot and Omega did this very well indeed. Of note is the fact that the Omega bracelet has suffered very little droop compared to Rolex bracelets from the same era. It’s not important, but I like to believe that it means my Omega bracelet is superior to a hugely overpriced Rolex from the same period, and likely the rest of the watch as well. Final side note, I believe that these vintage Omegas will continue to rise in price over time and I am seeing movement already. As an example my Geneve has more than doubled in price over the past 18 months.

The dial is very clean with slim hour markers and a double marker at 12. The 3 o’clock marker has been cut to allow the placement of the date window which is sadly way too small. I see this time and time again with many watches, Citizen is especially bad at this, and it makes the date window close to a pointless addition. I am a firm believer that if you are going to add a function do it properly and in a way that is easy to use. If you are half-hearted about it and spend too much time trying not to dominate the dial you may as well make it as clean as possible and not include a date window at all. A positive is the way the ‘TISSOT 1853’ and ‘PRX’ have been printed. They are often obscured indoors, but you still know they are there. On the black dial they offer the most subtle branding I have seen compared to almost any other watch.

The hands are very simple indeed and add to the clarity of time telling, but there is a sense of cheapness to their appearance. It is not particular noticeable to be fair and I am perhaps being overly critical, but I did notice it. One other thing I noticed was that the crystal is not completely clear, unusual for a sapphire, and I found myself wiping it a few times to remove fingerprints and smudges. This may change over time though.

With a quartz movement you should not need to adjust the time often which is useful because the crown is quite small. This does, to be fair, suit the form of the watch and I would take a more restrained look over size on a quartz movement any day.

Finally, the case back is largely open which means that it can be engraved if given as a gift and this tops off the main aspects of the PRX.


I am in more than two minds about the Tissot PTX, but my overriding feeling is that it is very impressive for the money. You can actually pick it up for £250 with the right promo codes and that makes it even better value for a watch that really does look much more expensive on the wrist.

How expensive a watch looks is not important of course because no one notices what watch you are wearing anyway, but looking down at your wrist to tell the time and feeling a ping of positive emotion most certainly is.

And that is what the PRX does so well. It feels positive throughout and so simple that its core job of telling the time is accomplished with ease. It is likely that I will keep this watch because it has grown on me in a very short space of time and almost feels like the modern successor to my beloved Geneve. I did not expect to be so enamoured by a mid-range quartz watch, but I genuinely am and I am now waiting for a mechanical version to appear because watch guys need to know there is a lot happening under the dial and quartz will always have a sense of compromise about it.

More information at Tissot.

The Rolex Submariner (2020) vs the Bersigar BG-1651

You can buy the 2020 Rolex Submariner for £7,300 if you are looking for a lifetime wrist companion. OK, you can’t really buy one because they are so hard to come by, but some people give up their souls to sit on waiting lists for years on end and so the choice is yours if you have the money.

You can buy the 2020 Bersigar BG-1651 for £79.99 and you do not have to sit on a waiting list forever because Amazon will deliver it to you the next day.

So, we have a watch that is 91 times more expensive than the other and yet for many people (those strange people who do not obsess over watches) they will look largely similar.

In fact there is an argument that the Bersigar looks more relevant than the Submariner, a watch which has barely changed over the decades. It used to be that people viewed a Rolex as a Granddad watch and to some this perception remains, and I don’t think Rolex helps that by making so few aesthetic changes to their most popular models.

The tool watch vibe of many of their watches has been lost in favour of decoration and for many, myself included, the GMT Master and Submariner are now a little too flash to be palatable. The Bersigar looks like a tool watch throughout.

So, for many people they look similar and for most (98%?) that is all that matters. £79 vs £7,300 is a no brainer.

And I must say that the Bersigar has impressed me greatly which I really did not expect at all. Indeed, it is proving to be superior to many watches that have cost £500 and upwards to me.

Some of the specifications are dubious. Synthetic Sapphire is not sapphire, the movement (I think) is from Miyota and it has hacking and hand-winding. Remarkably it is running at approximately 3 seconds fast a day which is really impressive and not far out from your average Rolex.

The actual look of the watch is way beyond what could be expected in a homage watch and there are few reasons for this. While it is definitely a homage watch, some of the design aspects do not site with each other and that is a good thing. The bezel has a Rolex Yacht Master feel to it while the rest of the watch is Submariner all of the way through. I included the measurements in the main image because the size and weight are perfectly Submariner and anyone who knows Rolex, and watches, will know that this specific collection of measurements wears incredibly well on most wrist sizes. The Bersigar obviously wears just as well due to the mimicry at play here.

If there is one area that needs improving it is the bezel which has a wide margin of movement when static. You literally can move it left or right at least two clicks.

This is annoying because the actual feel of the bezel is superb and I would argue to be almost equivalent to the Tudor Black Bay. It is also not very legible so this cannot be classed as a true dive watch. Then again, £79.99.

It is hard to write much more about this watch. We know what it is; a watch that copies Rolex, which is made in China and which has no chance of competing with the most powerful watch brand in the world. The problem is that it is really very good indeed and everything I have learned about watches over the past few years gets turned on its head by models like this.

When I look at watches from Tudor, Rolex, Oris, Omega and so many others at all price ranges a watch like this does not fit in. It sits outside of the value structure we expect to see and on build quality and technical performance alone there is an argument that it should be in the £3-400 sector at a minimum. Fix that bezel and it could sit higher.

We know that facts do not dictate the price of a watch. That little ‘Rolex’ word on the dial is worth the extra £7,220 to some people and I am almost ashamed to say that I kind of feel the same way. For everyone else, this is a fabulous watch for the price. Just fabulous.

The BG-1651 comes on a decent metal bracelet with screw links and solid lugs. I used my own strap for most of the photos.

The Q Timex HODINKEE Limited Edition (received)

When Hodinkee posted details of the new Q Timex I found myself making a purchase within 2 minutes of reading the article.

The real strange part is that I owned a Q Timex a year ago and soon got rid of it because it felt cheap and unworthy of the asking price. 1 year later, $189, £34 of custom charges and I have another one.

It was not a watch for me to wear, my decision came down to sitting it on my ‘may be worth more money one day’ shelf and leaving it as pristine as possible.

It is quartz, not particularly well made (it is a Timex after all) and the bracelet will rip all of the hairs from under it in a second. In terms of materials and indutrialisation it is an £80 watch, if that, but…

The first glance is rediculously emotional for what is still a budget watch. The case shape, the consistency of the bracelet flowing from the case and the simple dial make for an unusual end result. It is undeniably 1970’s, but also 2020’s and this is very unusual in the watch world.

And it has not reached the shelf of potential investments yet which is a real surprise.

Final note: Impressive that it was ordered on Tuesday evening from Philadelphia and that I received it in the UK this morning. Well done Hodinkee.

The differences between the Apple Watch series 6 and the Fears Brunswick Salmon

The title of this article is not a direct comparison of the two watches named because they are incomparable in almost every way. The only place in which they co-exist is in my mind as I continue to ponder the practical benefits of the Apple Watch against the craftsmanship of watches like the Fears Brunswick Salmon.

It has been two months since I started wearing an Apple Watch again. I have owned and worn every Apple Watch since the series zero because I needed to do so to write freelance articles for a variety of publications, but on every occasion it would be dispensed to my shelf of unfavoured novelty products until it was needed for a new article.

This annual routine has become quite annoying if I am honest, but two months ago this changed. I blame Covid-19 for this because my life has changed so much this year that the notion of wearing a luxury watch on my wrist feels at odds with what is happening around me.

I am working from home every day, I have put on weight during lockdown and I am in need of distractions and motivations to make me move and get fitter. And then it hit me, I needed something to help me gain some control over my life. In a world of uncertainty where we cannot know what 2021 will bring, where many of us are pondering a bleak Winter working indoors the majority of the time and where jobs are not secure (mine certainly isn’t) simply being able to control an aspect of my life feels like a big deal. Those three activity rings have become my main personal daily achievement and as such it feels like I have some control over what is happening to me. For the avoidance of doubt, I do consider myself very lucky compared to many at this time.

Why not wear a fitness tracker you say? Maybe, but I have been there and the novelty disperses quickly. I have used them all over the past few years (Fitbit, Garmin and the like) and the soulless nature of the products makes them feel as if they are there to offer statistics and to do little else. They literally are trackers and whilst they offers benefits, they also bring with them an emotional flatline which makes them mere ‘products’ that you happen to wear.

A well-made mechanical watch, such as the Fears Brunswick Salmon, is the polar opposite of a fitness tracker in terms of emotion and I will come on to that in a little while.

In between we have the Apple Watch, a product that some say is not even a watch. That some refer to as a mini-computer with no soul while ironically praising a Casio G-Shock, which is also a collection of silicone. To me an Apple Watch is no less soulless than most digital or quartz watches that have dominated the wider watch market over the past few decades. It just happens to be a lot cleverer even if it remains soulless.

I should note that there are many quartz watches that do have soul of course and these are the ones where great care and time has been spent on the design, the materials and in the overall construction of the pieces.

The Apple Watch series 6

There is no doubt that the series 6 Apple Watch is an iterative update from the series 5 which was iterative from the series 4. This has led to criticism from many people, but I don’t quite understand why this is the case. Too many people appear to believe that they should upgrade their Apple Watch every 12 months and they then criticise Apple for not adding scores of new features. They still upgrade their Apple Watch, but moan about it while doing so…

This leads me to worry a little about the disposable nature of such devices from a conservation point of view and the planned obsolescence built in, but that topic is for another time. It is simply too big to cover in this article.

I picked up the aluminium GPS series 6 for some freelance work that I have been asked to do and must admit to being less than excited when I bought it. It is basically my stainless steel series 4 Apple Watch without the stainless steel or the cellular functionality. It looked and felt like the same watch to me minus the power brick which has been removed to help save the climate. Yes, that’s right, Apple has removed the power brick to help the environment which requires you to purchase one if you do not already own an Apple Watch. Sadly they forgot to lower the price to take account of the missing power brick and in my experience using USB or a standard iPhone brick takes much longer to charge the watch, so the environmental benefits appear to be limited at best. If I was a cynical man I would believe that it is an exercise in increasing the margin on a product that is proving to be more popular every year, but I would never write such a thing.

And then the classic Apple moment occurred. I charged it, paired it to my iPhone (alongside my other Apple Watch) and went about my daily business. Over a couple of days I noticed that it felt different to my series 4 and it was slightly jarring whenever I put the series 4 back on.

The screen is definitely brighter than on previous models which was obvious to me from the first use. Performance now feels like using my iPhone 11 Pro; never a stall, not a moment of hesitation and it flies through every task no matter how much I am pushing it. When I am running with the fitness app tracking my heart rate, pace and a myriad of other numbers it never fails. GPS is on as well and music or a podcast are also playing. On this tiny watch it does what it needs to do and it does it so well. GPS is more accurate with fewer inaccuracies around sharp corners and the heart rate sensor is now much quicker to accurately monitor when the heart rate jumps up through exercise.

I quite like the Blood Oxygen sensor because it is yet another comfort blanket on a device that can undertake an ECG, check your heart rate throughout the day, monitor V02 Max and even detect if you fall and call the emergency services. There are countless stories of people receiving urgent medical care because of alerts given to them by this product and as time goes by you have to wonder at what point it becomes a necessity in the minds of the general public. It reminds me of when I saw a blanket that could detect if a baby stops breathing or moving just before my son, Thomas, was born. My immediate thought was that if something happened and I hadn’t spent the £100 I would never forgive myself. The £100 was quickly spent.

The oxygen results appear to be quite accurate (within 1% of my standard finger Pulse Ox monitor) and this is quite impressive because monitoring oxygen through the wrist is not easy at all. If you place your finger correctly on the underside of the watch you can actually take a blood oxygen measurement this way, but it is much more convenient to just open the app and let it do its stuff as intended. I should also add that background monitoring is done throughout the day which is a killer feature in the age of Covid.

Besides the oxygen testing and extra speed there is not much here above and beyond the series 5. You get 32GB of internal storage, as in the series 5, a speedier overall experience and crucially for some much improved cellular performance. When I go for a run with my series 4 the music or podcast I am playing will pause while the connection moves from my home Wi-Fi to the cellular Apple Watch. By all accounts this does not happen any more and it is now super smooth in use.

If you have a series 5 model you probably do not need to upgrade and likely the same applies to the series 4. Actually, don’t take my advice- if you are happy with your Apple Watch just use it as you want to.

I work with someone who has worn a series zero Apple Watch from when it was released and she doesn’t want to change it. The battery still gets her through the day and she has become somewhat attached to it after five years of daily use. It’s obviously not the same as treasuring a beloved mechanical timepiece, but just maybe the Apple Watch is not quite as temporary as many believe.

To conclude, the series 6 Apple Watch is a phenomenal product which offers a huge number of fitness benefits, much convenience and at times a sense that it is a real watch. To me it is a watch purely because it sits on my wrist and it tells the time, but the nods to traditional watchmaking that Apple employs are very obvious to someone like me who truly appreciates the finer aspects of watchmaking. I suspect there are people within Apple who really do understand watches and who are keeping the product just on the right side of not being garish. It looks like a smartwatch, it feels like a smartwatch and for those who understand, there are some flourishes that watch people will enjoy greatly.

My wife’s vintage Fears watch and the Apple Watch series 6

I simply cannot criticise the new Apple Watch because it offers a lot for the money, when compared to many comparatively priced quartz watches and other smartwatches, and it is becoming more refined every year. The elephant in the room, however, remains the battery life and the need to charge it every day. If Apple could seriously cut down the charging time, to say 30 minutes, that could be more beneficial than giving us three or four days between charges.

Now, if only I could shake my love for mechanical watches and all of the goodness that comes with them I could live with only the Apple Watch.

The Fears Brunswick Salmon

I watched a video the other day in which Nicholas, the Managing Direct of Fears Watches, demonstrated his new collection to Adrian from Bark & Jack.

At one point, at approximately 51 minutes, the new Salmon Brunswick was shown and I immediately stopped what I was doing. It hit me straight away purely because of the dial and how it looked in a particular segment, and this fascination grew as it changed colour slightly depending on the angle it was viewed from.

If you do not have a fascination with watches this must sound ridiculous, but to understand watches is to enjoy the tiny details that come together to make a watch that merits the asking price. Higher-end watches command prices that 98% of people cannot fathom because to them these are watches that tell the time and look a little nicer than other watches. It’s akin to paying £3,000 for a washing machine and hard to justify to the wider world, but in reality it is no different than so many other hobbies such as high-end audio equipment and cameras. The further you dive into a subject the more likely you are to pay for the best you can afford.

Over the past few months I have found myself losing some of the fascination with mechanical watches as my general movements and experiences have lessened due to the Covid situation. I mentioned earlier that I needed something to get my fitness back and to gain some semblance of control in my life, for which the Apple Watch does a good job, but alongside this I found myself not enjoying wearing a watch I truly liked so much sat at a desk in my house all day.

It could be that I have a subconscious ‘showing off’ motive going on and that I am trying to signal something to others, but I tend to wear watches that offer glimpses rather than overt statements of luxury or design values. Statements that only I notice and small touches that enable me to enjoy the watch all day, every day. It has to have something, however, to catch me in the first instance and the Brunswick Salmon dial did just that.

You will need to watch the video above to understand how the dial was made and why it reacts to the environment it is in, but needless to say the attention to detail and thought process behind its creation is impressive to say the least.

And then the story of the hour markers was told (just look at the depth and the styling) and I found myself falling deeper into the process behind this watch, which then led me to check the other design elements. From the cushion case, which is only 11.25mm to the top of the domed crystal, to the hands which almost cost the same as the movement to the lugs and onion crown, there is an extreme level of consistency throughout. It all fits together in a way that never comes off as trying too hard and, crucially, with a sense of uniqueness in today’s world of faux vintage dive watches that offer little above trying to be one of the crowd.

The manual winding ETA 7001 movement will be a source of criticism for some in the watch world who believe that in-house movements are the way to go. They believe this because the more influential watch brands make them believe that this is correct, but the reality is that an in-house movement will do little more than greatly increase the servicing costs due to the lower number of watchmakers who can work on it. When you consider that paying £1,000’s for a watch is done to potentially wear it for more than a decade you have to consider the ongoing costs and aside from very specialist movements, I see little evidence that even lower grade movements cannot be maintained and remain accurate for many years ahead. The 7001 movement feels right to me at this price point (just) and in a strange way it leads me to focus more on the materials and design that make the Brunswick Salmon so special.

So, here I am trying to live with just an Apple Watch, I cannot double wrist two watches, and have been doing so relatively successfully. Nicholas then pops up with the Brunswick Salmon and I find myself falling back into the mechanical watch trap. Thanks a lot Nicholas!

I should be annoyed with him, but it is hard to be when you know the backstory. Joanne and I mentioned him in episode 14 of the McGST Podcast in which we discussed nature vs nurture. I am fascinated by the fact that the Fears Watch Company was in his family historically and that he was unaware of this. Yet he still saved up for an expensive watch at a young age and ended up working for Rolex. How can something as specific as watchmaking be in the blood? Is it merely coincidence because we have inherited personality traits that lead us in specific directions, and Nicholas just happened to land on watches? I really don’t know, but he was unaware of his Fears heritage previously so the story remains fascinating.

Nicholas Bowman-Scargill

Even more fascinating is the way in which Nicholas started up Fears again and the efforts he has put in to making it a success. From working at Asda during lockdown to ensure his staff got paid to paying every single invoice on time to overseeing every last detail of each and every watch, it is hard to not be impressed by what is behind the product he is creating. The man is impressive, of that there is no doubt, and his commitment to the brand is astonishing. It appears that he has researched every single detail of the history of the brand and then somehow managed to create new watches which retain this history while feeling modern in every way. What he has done in a short space of time makes my head spin.

In a world where the Omega Speedmaster is viewed as legendary because it went to the moon, where the Rolex Submariner is seen as ‘the watch’ simply because, well, it just is and where so much of the product on your wrist is high-level marketing, it is refreshing to see a brand doing the right thing and producing watches at reasonable prices, and without all of the fluff that surrounds so much of the industry.

Over the past two years I have gained some experience of the wider watch industry, through the Snowflakes & Shields website, and I didn’t like a lot of what I saw. At times it feels like the mafia is directing the watch media (you be nice and we will send you review products) and that it all exists in a parallel universe. Now and again brands appear that bring it all back to where it should be, there are a few to be fair, and Fears is the perfect British example of how to do things right.

So which is best?

This is a ridiculous question of course because it is like comparing a computer with an abacus. The fact is that the Apple Watch series 6 is a brilliant product that rightly deserves its success and it is likely that it will go on to severely impact the budget watch industry. I have written before about how I believe that we will be left with only smartwatches and luxury timepieces in the near future and I stand by that.

The dilemma for me is that the Brunswick Salmon pulls at my emotions in a way the Apple Watch never could. The Apple Watch is a small computer, it has no soul and it is a mass produced product that is designed to be replaced in short order.

The Fears Brunswick Salmon is a mechanical object that is designed to last a lifetime, to grow with you and to become a part of who you are. That may sound over the top if you have little interest in watches, but imagine wearing the same watch on your wrist for two decades and then letting it go. A watch that can only work because you take the time to wind it every morning, all it needs is you and an occasional service. That is a special thing to behold.

I should also mention that the Brunswick is made in very limited numbers out of necessity whereas the Apple Watch is readily available to anyone, as can be seen by the clone wrist look we see all around us today. The Apple Watch may be brilliant, but it has destroyed any semblance of personality when it comes to what is on your wrist.

All of this leaves me with a dilemma and I think I have worked out the way forward. When life gets back to normal I will go back to a mechanical watch again as the one area of my life that does not need technology. It is a small part of my life in which I can enjoy considerate design, history and a simpler way of functioning.

Until that time I feel that I need the Apple Watch to keep me motivated and to give me something to aim for every day. Damn you Covid!

You can view the Fears Brunswick Salmon and the rest of the collection here.

The Apple Watch and longevity

One criticism if the Apple Watch is that it does not have the same longevity of a real watch and that is a perfectly logical argument. You cannot deny that it is designed to only last for a few years whereas a more expensive mechanical watch is one of few products available today that do not have planned obsolesce built in. To build a reputation in the watch world you need to make an extremely reliable movement, near impenetrable cases and toughness in every area. Two decades later that watch, and the £1,000’s spent, have become a part of you.

So, case closed on this argument, Well, maybe not.

I was speaking to a work colleague yesterday and she wears a Series 1 Apple Watch which was given to her in 2016. She has worn it every day, charges it overnight and it is still running fine for what she needs with decent battery power (enough for a day) still there.

Is that longevity? I would suggest that it is for a smartwatch and potentially many people would not keep a quartz watch for more than 5 years. She fully intends to keep using it for at least 2 more years and if she does want to upgrade she can spend less than £200 to get a new Series 3 model.

Even serious watch people might find that to be impressive. I do.

One week with the Oris Divers 65

My second Divers 65 from Oris has proved to be a much more positive experience than my first, and my first was pretty damn positive.

For whatever reason I am finding myself appreciating it more and more each day, and for a variety of reasons. The accuracy is astonishing for this type of movement; under 0.5 seconds fast per day. The way certain aspects of the dial and markers catch the light makes me stop for a second which may be down to the decent weather we have had in the UK recently. And the sheer comfortable feeling it gives me when on the wrist.

I did my usual trick and tried Natos, leather straps and alternative bracelets, but came back to the stock bracelet and so it has stayed that way for the past few days. It may be that the combination of watches I have bought and worn recently led me to subconsciously see the Divers 65 as the best balance between all of them. The Hamilton Khaki King felt wonderful on the wrist, but the lack of water resistance was a problem. The SARB035 looked fantastic to everyone else, but not to me sadly and the Black Bay red was too big and bulky for me.

The Divers 65 appears to sit in the middle of all of these while also offering a date window, decent lume and practically no faults at all. The only aspect I would change would be the way the bracelet end links do not quite fit the watch case height-wise, but I can live with that. And I suspect I will be living with the 65 for some time to come.

Oris Divers Sixty Five 733 7720 4054MB review (part three)

I have owned the Sixty Five for just over two days now and so far I am feeling positive about it, a feeling that is not uncommon while in the honeymoon period. This, however, feels different because of how much time I spent choosing the exact model for my needs.

I was helped by the fact that I owned a Sixty Five 42mm (in blue) a few years back and so I had some familiarity with the main design aspects of functionality of this model. The problem is that a lot of watches have come since and so my experiences have changed a lot. Some smaller, none larger, some quartz, some more expensive and some cheaper.

As time has passed and my tastes have refined I have tended to look at slimmer watches in recent times and now have an aversion to large and bulky timepieces. There simply is no need to wear a large watch on your wrist unless you are trying to project something to complete strangers.

So I will now look at each part of the Sixty Five Sixty Five 733 7720 4054MB in turn-

How does it wear?

It’s bigger than I remember. The 42mm diameter and near 50mm lug to lug are noticeable on my 7.25” wrist. It is arguably a little too big, but only by a tiny bit which makes me believe that the 42mm was the right choice and that the 40mm may have felt small. This is a tricky area and Oris offers much variety (36mm, 40mm and 42mm) so I am not complaining at all and I do appreciate the relatively slim bezel which makes for a decent sized dial.

To me, the most positive part of the wearing experience comes from the side. This is not a slim watch at 13mm, but the design is just superb. When you view it from the side you get a domed crystal, a super slim bezel and curved sides that make the Tudor Black Bays look more slabby than ever. It is hard to describe, but take a look at the image and you may understand what I mean. Oris appears to understand the visual tricks needed to make something relatively deep feel completely the opposite.

It is also not too heavy, but has just enough weight to make me know it is on my wrist. I am undecided as to if this is a good thing or not, but it is most certainly not uncomfortable.

How practical is it?

In almost every respect the Sixty Five does an excellent job of telling the time. The hour markers stand out and the small minute track is there when you need it without ever getting in the way. Some have criticised the marked for being faux patina, but I would challenge this. They are cream in colour, but do not look like forced vintage to me. Indeed, they perfectly suit the overall design of the dial and add a touch of warmth that still feels modern. The hands are very clean, almost to the point of being boring, and the bezel markers give way to the boldness on the dial in a pleasing manner. There is consistency in every aspect of the design and yet it still remains interesting which is again a hard trick to perform.

The only visual aspect that I am not too keen on is the date window. I have no issue with the unusual shape or the white background which actually works well with the shorted 3 o’clock hour marker, but I would like the date font to be thicker. It is very thin indeed and can be difficult to read in most lighting conditions which is an oversight in my opinion. If you are going to include a date window that is a practical choice and so you may as well make it work on a practical level.

Finally, the bezel is decent enough. The 120-click mechanism has almost zero backplay and feels solid, but there is a somewhat metallic sound when it is turned. It also lines up perfectly which is a must for me because I never actually need to use a watch bezel for any purpose. Let’s be honest, none of us do.

The movement (value?)

This is an area of contention for a watch that costs £1,650 retail. I may have paid £1,320 for it, but it still contains an Oris 733 Automatic (Sellita SW200 base) movement which can be had in much lower priced watches. It can, however, be seen in more expensive models so gauging the value is difficult.

Oris does not regulate the movement as far as I know, but I am getting +4 seconds a day which is not too bad. I had very similar performance on my previous Oris so I suspect some checking is happening before it leaves the factory.

I am perhaps less inclined to be worried about a movement unless it is inaccurate and my experience of the SW200 has been pretty good to date so I can live with it. However, it is the only part of the watch that nags at me when I consider the price.

The bracelet?

Now this is a case of very good and somewhat strange. The bracelet feels fantastic when worn and I really do appreciate the slimness of the links and the fairly aggressive taper which both suit the design of the watch itself. The clasp is also well made with a full five micro-adjustment positions. Add to this half-links either side and you should have no problem sizing it to fit you perfectly.

Resizing the bracelet is not easy at all, however, thanks to the pin and collar system. The collar is quite long and sits in the middle of the link, and the trick is to use some force to get the pin out. A normal link opener does not have a long enough pin to do this so I had to resort to pushing it half way out and then using another tool with my watch hammer to go through the process. Eventually I got there, however, and it now fits perfectly.

My final point on the bracelet is the very odd change between the links with rivets in them (oh how I don’t like unnecessary rivets) and the non-rivets links below them. There is a noticeable difference in width (about half a millimetre either side) which feels lazy to me. While it may not make any difference and is almost impossible to notice in normal use it is an unnecessary quirk.


Overall I am very impressed with this particular Sixty Five and am certain I made the right choice. The black dial and cream markers are why I chose this reference in place of the blue which didn’t quick work for me.

It’s accurate, it’s a subtle and stylish timepiece and most important of all it ticks the boxes that other watches have only managed in specific areas. Some will look down on what they perceive to be budget luxury, but that to me is yet another advantage of this watch. I just hope I can grow to enjoy it over a longer period than I have with so many other watches.

Oris Divers Sixty Five 733 7720 4054MB (part two: justification (again))

So, I wrote about some of my justification for buying this Oris yesterday, but there is a lot more to the story and it involves more thinking than someone who does not love watches could possibly understand.

The overriding motivation for buying this watch was the fact that I wanted something that would fit in terms of pricing. I can afford an Oyster Perpetual 39 in white, if I could find one, but I just know that I would feel uncomfortable wearing it. It isn’t so much the thought of someone trying to steal it from me, but the sense that I am wearing +£4,000 on my wrist. On what planet does that make sense?

Now, before you jump up and shout ‘you don’t understand watches!’ I do understand why they can often cost so much and a big part of me loves the idea of wearing a genuine luxury piece every day. The problem is that my perception of luxury is firmly sat in reality and so £1,320 still feels like a lot of money to spend on a watch, but it ticks a few boxes without causing too much strain in my head.

I am getting a very nice watch that looks great on the wrist and that does exactly what it needs to. It will not cost a fortune to service, it is accurate for an automatic and it is likely that others will not even know who Oris is. Also, it does not stand out in a flashy way, but to me it still has a sense of quality about the way it looks.

In short, it just reaches a level of luxury for me that I am comfortable with and without any guilt or sense that I am wasting my money. Also, I have reached the watch snobbery level that wearing a Seiko or a Citizen does not fulfil me in an emotional sense anymore.

I really do appreciate the sheer consistency of Citizen and the practicality the brand’s watches offer, and I would argue that Citizen is underrated in a big way by far too many people. I also appreciate the myriad of Seiko offerings, but the poor quality control irks me somewhat and in my view lessens the brand a little. I mean the chapter cannot be that difficult to align can it!?!

Anyway, back to Oris. So as I sit here wearing the Oris I feel comfortable with it; the watch fills my need for a slightly vintage looking timepiece that does not feel contrived, it is very well made and it does the job it is supposed to. It has a date window, for some reason I really need a date window, and it still offers that luxurious feel that I want as a person who genuinely enjoys watches and all that comes with them.

I will properly review the Oris tomorrow, but for now it is doing what I expected it to and in this case that is to not overload my emotions, but to tweak them just enough to offer a sense of satisfaction. The mind is a funny thing, it really is.