Are we getting thinnest watch fatigue?

Yes, it's all very clever but rather pointless.

But I do love the not-so-subtle "01-UPing" they're doing 😂

I'd care if I could actually afford to buy one. They should have a "thinnest watch under $1,000" award.

No one except for the people making them and the few thousand people who can afford them have ever cared 🤷🏾‍♂️

These watches aren’t made for general consumption. I think the point is - and I applaud them for it - is horological invention and friendly competition. These watches are clearly not practical. But we can’t complain about this…and at the same time complain other companies didn’t have anything interesting at W&W

I get it. You all want a cheap Coke GMT and want them mass produced so we can all get one without a waitlist.

I lose my shit every time. I love the ultra thin watch battle

Bueno, ¡pero tiene impreso el caballito de Ferrari! 😅

Es lo más bonito del reloj

¡Y combina con un ferrari! 😂

I’m enjoying it, even more so when it upsets people, and when people still don’t think Bvlgari is a proper watch brand. Richard Mille joining the party was equally delicious. If Hublot submitted an entry I’d probably wet myself laughing, having some of the most hated brands at the forefront of watchmaking capabilities, but I’ll settle for RM and Bvlgari. I feel for Piaget at the moment, but you never know, they might be working on an update to the Altiplano.

It was big for brands to do this in the 80s and nobody cared then either lol.

I appreciate it from the technical mastery/engineering standpoint, but the extremes of RM etc. don't much interest me. The last few years have seen case size and L2L moving back towards more traditional sizing but watches still tend to be relatively thick. For me, as a man who could list 'smacking timepieces off door jambs' as a hobby, I certainly appreciate anything and everything that can be done to keep a watch at ~10mm thick (hand wound movements, closed case backs, etc. Extra points for under 10mm (take a bow, GS, for their recent effort) but I think any thinner than 7mm and I start to panic for the wellbeing of that watch long term.

Edit: on a not unrelated note, I'm wearing my Hamilton KFM today. Doesn't get discussed much but I think a huge part of the appeal and longevity of this watch comes from how slim and easy it is to wear. Not a lot of competition at this price for something well under 10mm.

Haha, you pee.

Seriously though, I like a super slim watch, doesn't have to be the thinnest, something 4mm like the Concord Mariner is the sweet spot for me

Stuff like this, or those chunky divers that can go 5 million meters under water, or those zany urwerk type stuff are just sort of fun projects that perhaps a few mega-rich will buy. People like us, at least what I imagine the average watch cruncher, are not the target demographic here.

I like seeing some of the machines these guys can make. Hublot, MB&F, etc, they’re super cool even if I won’t ever own one, or even really want to own one. They remind me of some of the crazier concept cars and things of that nature.

It’s important to have these types of innovations as they tend to trickle technology into mass market products one way or another, and they often look pretty too.

Oh my god, please Hublot, create the Thin Bang Unico

That would be ahmahzing!

These new watches are horrendously impractical and at this point hardly easier to read than a bare movement. As technically impressive as it is, I am not sure I consider the RM UP-01 to be an actual watch. There seem to be no rules and without rules or definitions there is no competition.

I would prefer a battle for watch movement with fewest parts. Or most accurate watch.

I think it is a tremendous feat of engineering and watchmaker problem-solving, but from a practicality standpoint it seems rather strange. It eliminates all aspects of depth, which I personally enjoy immensely. A. Lange & Sohne 1815 Chronograph for example appears as a small intricate city of gears. Perfection.