If you ever get a chance to wear one of these, they wear very much like older watches in the 2000s - visually. Especially Panarai. There is a sense of large masculine Italian ethos in the design. I think these watches are a modern reincarnation of the chunky look from the 2000s without the thickness. Honestly, it makes sense on the rest of the Rock and Sylvester Stallone - these guys are the archetype of the old school Panarai wearers

Someone brought up the idea if the line is still in production. Like a five digit sub has heritage today. A memovox from the same time period has very different design languages

Having held three out of four of these pieces I would choose Czapek. There's something ethereal to me about this that is lacking in trilobe and the RO. Don't get me wrong, those two are great, but the Czapek is just a complete package that has a certain specialness about it in terms of quality.

Flipping it all over, the Czapek really does deal the deal.

The only one I can't speak to is Moser.

Recently added one to the collection. It's an amazing watch with the perfect amount of presence.

Grand Seiko sbgw231 - dress watch 4,300k

Gshock DW-H5600 at

So this is extremely nuanced and maybe about a long read. Is a lot to talk about on a subject like this.

Allow me to first go over the big talking points and then address everything in between. The usual consideration is going to be designed, fit, finish, material used, hand feel, wrist feel, cultural weight.

And with many things for consideration, I have to distinguish whether or not it is the cart before the horse - that is to say whether culturally, we find it important, or whether it is important enough to be recognized culturally.

With things such as fit and finish we look at the way that the bracelet mores to the case as well as the first link after the end link. This type of tight tolerance is something that Rolex does very well. A good fit and finish talks about the way the watch is refined from a piece of metal into its ability to forward the design given.

If you look at AP and their bracelet, usually talked about as one of the best bracelets in the world, the design is iconic. Culturally aside, the design is also really well made with very tight tolerances given the multitude of moving parts in parts of the bracelet that are not duplicative. Because of this, it is a rather complicated bracelet.

But often, complication for complications sake means very little if it cannot be worn with comfort. If the eye and wrist does not enjoy the bracelet, then someone could say that a bracelet is bad.

Finally, it comes down to taste. Someone could say the vintage jubilee bracelet from Rolex is a bad bracelet, but I have to say that is one of the most comfortable things to grace my wrist even though it is terrible in the hand.

With many things, it comes down to experience. Please use the talking point that I have mentioned today to be a divining fork towards what you deem to be good and bad.

It's so easy and unassuming to wear~