Watches in the Wild (Quarterly Earnings, Volume 31)

Disclaimer: Tangentially relevant to the post below!

This is the thirty first in a semi-regular digest of cool watches I happened to see this week.

Past posts in this series have been hashtagged to #watchesinthewild and you can click through for  part 17, part 18, part 19, part 20, part 21, part 22, part 23, part 24, part 25, part 26, part 27, part 28,  part 29, and part 30.

As always, my general policy is that I never ask for wrist shots (because approaching strangers and distant acquaintances to talk about watches is already weird enough) so all pictures below are sourced from the internet. People are mostly cool, I try not to annoy them.

One of the odd things that I take for granted in my life is just how ruled my schedule is by the Wall Street quarterly earnings season.  US and European publicly traded companies predominantly report on a fixed schedule, anywhere from 3 to 6 weeks post the end of the quarter.  It is, surpassingly, the busiest and most volatile times of my year with tons of conference calls, meetings with management teams.  It doesn't frankly leave a massive amount of time for watch spotting.

So you'll forgive the quick hits this time around....even with the warmer weather, it's a been a little bit of a drier spell.

Still, your faithful correspondent does see things from time to time, including a couple of unique spots this time around.  Ultimately, I feel pretty optimistic that  this spring is going to offer many more opportunities for watch spotting.  Just gotta get through the busy period.

First, a couple of watches that I've detailed in past editions of #watchesinthewild .

Omega Aqua Terra (black)

Rolex Datejust Blue

Hamilton Khaki Field Automatic

Seiko SKX007

And some longer hits...

Omega DeVille Hour Vision

Seen at a birthday party.  I honestly couldn't find an opening to ask about it.

As regular readers of this watch spotting column will no doubt know, I don't think of watches as particularly serious things.  They're silly little luxury automatons that don't really have a strong historical or functional significance anymore.

And, much to my continuing annoyance, there has been, recently, a strain of watch thought among major watch brands that everything has to have meaning or history or it's not worthy of being invested into.  You see this with Omega's constant investment in things that are worn by fictional British spies or have had distant relations go to the moon and the continuing decline of everything else, chief among them the Omega DeVille and the Hour Vision which has not been updated since 2014 (?).

The Hour Vision is a bit of an odd duck, a sports watch in a line of dress watches, with the 41mm x 13mm x 49mm dimensions and 100M of WR  to match.  The version I saw was a lovely tuxedo dial with a hint of roulette in the orange of the hour pips.  It's handset but what, pray tell, makes this watch interesting?

Well the hour vision has a cool little trick up it's sleeves, it has sapphire windows built into the case walls so that you can actually see the functioning of the movement vertically.  Only peasants brag about their transparent case backs, we got transparent sides too!  It's a gimmick of course, but a fun gimmick and sometimes it's okay to have fun. 

But the Hour Vision is actually notable for a different reason.  It was the first watch that housed the revolutionary Caliber 8500, the first from the ground up movement built with the coaxial escapement.

I'd like to think that some designer was so proud of Omega's new toy, that he thought the world should be able to see what was happening under the hood.  And you know what?  I'm glad he did, because what are watches for except for the marvel of tiny mechanical things.  All the better to see it.

This watch is not particularly rare or uncommon but I do have a bit of personal sadness that I've never managed to try one on.  They never seem to be in the authorized dealers I frequent.  The quest continues.

Hamilton Intramatic Chrono

Seen at a coffee shop in San Francisco.  Didn't get the chance to talk to the owner as he rushed out the door with his cortado.  I approve; of both his coffee choices and his watch.

I am often reminded of how shrouded in mystery some aspects of watch history are.  It started with a simple question.  What is the earliest watch with a panda dial?  This is a more complex question to answer than it initially sounds.  

Most sources point towards the first iteration of the Rolex Cosmograph ref 6239 introduced in 1963, when they were confused over whether to call it the Daytona or the Le Mans.  

While there is some evidence that Universal Geneve might have beaten them to the punch with the ref 22523 which had a panda with a darker dial (perhaps a scruffy panda?) and the 222102 which was most certainly a panda and was produced from 1963 to 1967, I think it's as reasonable a place to start as any and in the years afterwards, there was a veritable explosion of Heuers, Breitlings, Seikos and Citizens that followed.  As I've mentioned before, the originator of the idea is less important than the execution and there have been many wonderful executions of the panda dial over the years.

What is most curious however is that, there are 100% watches earlier than the Rolex Cosmograph Daytona OR the Universal Geneve, that have REVERSE panda dials (most notably the 1957 Breitling SuperOcean but also Heuers, UGs and others).  

It was at this point that I cracked open a bottle of Irish whiskey and called it a night.  Some mysteries are not meant to be uncovered.

Anyway Hamilton was one of those post Daytona panda chronograph makers that had a pretty notable bi compax chronograph called 1968 Chronograph A (these 60s names man.....).  They eventually released a modernized limited edition underneath their 60s vintage inspired line, Intramatic, and then a broader production of a very similar watch in 2021.  Anyway.

The Intramatic Panda is one of those watches that I love seeing on other people's wrists.  I, like many others, am pretty basic.  Panda dials are contrasty coolness with high marks for visibility, legibility and style.  Also, I love chronographs!  Forget dive bezels, clicky buttons are my idea of a great fidget spinnery time.  And I love even more that there are so many options up and down the price range sporting excellent looks, finishing and function.  

This Hamilton is near top of the bucket in the price range.  There's something pleasing about simple high polish finishing on a racing style chronograph.  It is deeply retro in styling and substance with a  stunning dial.  The chronograph buttons are incredibly snappy and satisfying and they even managed to keep the infamous rotor noise of the 7750 movement down.  The size is actually pretty great too; 40mmx 14.5mm x 49mmish?  On paper, brilliant dimensions (if a touch thick but you know, chronographs).  

But when I tried it on I couldn't, for the life of me, figure out a way to get this to sit comfortably on the wrist.  Maybe it was the weight (which I remember being like 100+ grams) or the long lugs or maybe the fact that I have an unusually round wrist.  I even got the AD to pull out the mesh bracelet  (which has a great on the fly deployant adjustment)  reverse panda version to try to figure out if that was it. Tragedy.

I often tell people to go try watches on in person if they are able.  While the internet has made buying a breeze, it is impossible to replicate the experience of walking into an AD and figuring out if the stupid thing fits your wrist.

I really do love this watch.  If it fit comfortably, I'd own one today.  It's a truly stunning watch.  Maybe you're luckier than I am.

Frederique Constant Slimline Moonphase

Seen at a restaurant during a business meeting.  No conversation (even I don't stop in the middle of my meetings to talk to watches with strangers) but I wish I had.

Frederique Constant is one of those brands that, for the vast majority of watch folks, provokes no strong feelings.  They are known more for exceptional value than innovative design (that's not a dig, I promise).    In many ways, they are the Swiss reflection of their parent (Citizen Holdings).  The designs, by and large, don't do a ton for me but they are solid as the earth beneath you (and more solid than that if you happen to be Californian like me).

That's for most watch folks.  For a select few, they provoke outrage, being the assigned  the  great pejorative of being a maker of Patek Phillippe and Breguet homages.  I suppose that's a fair enough characterization....though I have to say, if we're identifying Patek Phillippe and Breguet homages, you might have to consider almost every dress watch out there an homage.  

I am reminded of a conversation I once had with the owner of a Smiths Everest and his great disdain for people who wore what he deemed homages.  And while I have zero issues with the Everest (aside from the hoops people have to jump through to get one).....

ಠ_ಠ

(╯'□')╯︵ ┻━┻

You do you man, but as a watch community, I believe we have to chill out about this sort of stuff.  Some designs are classics and rightfully so.  But by the nature of being a classic, some level of design transfer is going to happen.  Good ideas are going to be used again and again.  Design is important but execution is everything. 

And on that, Frederique Constant does pretty well.  I last encountered the Frederique Constant Moonphase at a used watch shop in NYC and I rather enjoyed it.  To the extent that you care, the FC moonphase is reminiscent of the JLC master ultra thin moonphase, but I think it stands on its own pretty well (if only because the JLC dress watch aesthetic has veered into archetype versus unique design).  The JLC is a very very good version of a steel moonphase dress watch with modern sizing.  The FC is another.  I can dig it.

That said, the FC is not a watch without flaws. I'd like to see a 38mm version of  this watch with 19mm or 20mm lugs, versus the 42mm and 21mm which is a little big for a dress watch. The case is a little circular for my tastes and I would have loved a bit of texture aside from a full high polish, I'm not sure how I feel about an onion crown on a dress watch, and I tend to think the hour markers are a little small relative to the size of the dial.  

***Beginneth Aside*** Does anyone else have strong opinions on this?  Like I think size of indices relative to dial is a seriously underrated design element.  A lot of watch lines get this weirdly wrong (looking at you Mido Multifort).  ***Endeth Aside***

But it wears well due to a super short lug to lug and thin height, the movement is beautifully decorated and I think the leaf hands are a nice touch.  The dial is very restrained and very refined and the silver dial version that I saw has a life of its own in the sunlight.  

If you have a hankering for the aesthetic, I'd encourage you to seek this out in person.  It's a lovely watch overall.

What cool watches did you see this week?