A collection-defining (or ruining) watch

A bit over two years into my watch-collecting journey, and I find myself constantly making calculations. Is this watch worth the money? Do I care more about accuracy or artistry? Will x watch fill x hole in my collection? Dollar-for-dollar, what's this watch's value compared to its price/utility?

We all make these calculations, or micro calculations...

Walt Odets, writing about a Lange Saxonia , said it felt so substantial that, "... in five minutes I suddenly felt that there was something shabby about all my other watches ..." (see https://www.hodinkee.com/articles/citizen-eco-drive-caliber-0100-review for more context)

As I'm saving for my 30th birthday watch (384 days and counting), I've been thinking about the quote above. What watch would "define" my collection? What watch would make all my other watches feel "insignificant" or "shabby" in comparison? 

I'm curious what other watch crunchers think... Can one watch define a collection (and is it currently in your collection?) Do you ever worry about bringing a watch into your collection that would render other watches in your collection "shabby" or obsolete? Is there danger in having a "grail?"

I'll go first...I'm currently considering making the SMP300m my "collection-defining" watch. However, one of my micro calculations is that it might render my SPB143 obsolete. I know they're apples-to-oranges when it comes to accuracy, finishing, and history, but I wonder if I should air on the side of dressy (looking at you, Glashütte Original PanoMaticLunar). I'm not so much looking for advice, as I'm interested in whether you have a collection-defining (or ruining) watch--or have your eyes on one!

I welcome your thoughts!

Reply
·

If I were to get the One, I would still need a beater. But I could settle for 2 watch combo 🤔 But I have decided that if I ever get a true luxury watch that it will be my daily watch and not something I only pull out for special occations. Spend a lot = wear a lot

·
mjosamannen

If I were to get the One, I would still need a beater. But I could settle for 2 watch combo 🤔 But I have decided that if I ever get a true luxury watch that it will be my daily watch and not something I only pull out for special occations. Spend a lot = wear a lot

Fair enough--so you don't have an "affordable" watch that knocks your other watches out?

·

I don’t anyone would know until the moment just before they’d died (sorry to get existential). Tastes change (and if yours never has, could you ever rule it out?). 

A watch might define a collection for that particular moment/period in/of time, I suppose and it may be fun to look back your ‘collection defining’ watches.  It could be that I’m too much of a wrist slut to elevate one watch to that degree….

·

Three ways to look at it. How does the sum of the parts stack up against their competitors. How does the the watch brand stack up for value and resale value retention. How much you like it despite quality, brand or value. The movement is the watch so find out where it is on the quality pecking order. Usually Swiss is superior quality, Japanese is quality and Chinese is low quality. Swiss even use a jewel in their cheapest quartz movements where Japanese and Chinese use none. 

·

You know, my concern about adding "the One," as @mjosamannen so aptly put it, to my collection does not raise that particular fear in me. I love the bargains in my collection as much as the nicer pieces I have. Granted I do not have "the One" in my watch collection, but I do have grail pieces in other collections, and one specifically is akin to this article.

Here is the majority of my collection of J.R.R. Tolkien books.

Image

These five below are worth far more than the rest of my Tolkien book collection combined. In fact, they may hold more value than my entire watch collection.

Image

I could probably sell these and get a grail watch pretty easily. The fact that these are limited edition, hand-bound, gilt-edged, bound in Nigerian goat leather, and honestly the nicest books in my entire book collection, not just my Tolkien collection means they have never been read. 😂 I fear it would be the same with a grail watch; I would never wear it. Having it in my collection really wouldn't affect my view of my other watches, but it would sit and collect dust rather than be worn. That is my fear about adding a grail to my collection; it would be essentially an expensive knick-knack. I would still enjoy it, as I do my Folio Society Tolkien books, but the enjoyment would be based solely on ownership and not based on usage. 🤣

·
KyleC93

Fair enough--so you don't have an "affordable" watch that knocks your other watches out?

It's been the Blue Baby Alpinist on a president bracelet for a couple of months now. I didn't want to wear anything else until I got my new vintage Omega yesterday 🤭 Btw: I have been looking a lot at that Seamaster you got, but think I need it in 36mm. Love the look of the silver dial in 36 👌👌

·

I've been collecting for years and enjoy a wide rage of watches both expensive and inexpensive.  It is about enjoying each watch and what makes it special to you.  Draw from what attracted you to that watch when you purchased it.  IMHO, is absolutely not about comparing apples to oranges.  Savor the throne, but don't mind the stool.

·

For me, there is no "one".  I could have the most beautiful dress watch in the world, but I'd still need to know when to get out of the pool.  I'm not doing yard work in the ultimate diver, but I may still need to know when the game starts.  Or what if I want to see multiple timezones?  Or know how long my run took me?  There just isn't a watch that does everything.  I get that a watch could be of such high quality that it would be nicer or "better" than anything else you have, but it won't negate the usefulness of other watches.  

The other thing is that no matter what you get, there will always be other watches out there.  There will be newer ones with better specs or a little shinier case.  The greatness of one watch doesn't negate the greatness of another.  This is why I don't like the term "grail".  Because if we're being honest, few if any of us would just stop looking at watches after getting our grail piece.

The point of watch collecting isn't finding the single best watch.  It's a journey, not a destination.

·

In my mind there are two categories to my collection, dress and sports. Unfortunately (or fortunately) all my sports watches were acquired below USD 1k, and pales in comparison to the dress watch in my rotation, Cle de Cartier. However, the Cartier's quite situation specific, so I do spend more time wearing my other watches.

I would say the Cartier is still my defining piece because, I like modern watches with classic designs or motifs. My Citizen is an outlier though 😂

·

I like the idea of leap frogging my collection.  Get a nice piece and then add something much better.  Rinse and repeat. I wish every watch could be an attainable grail.

I wear my watches without regard to their price tag so I think I’d still get full use out of even the priciest addition to my collection. 

·

As other said, there is no one for me. As has been discussed a couple times today, leading to good discussion, you may find yourself researching the next one once you get the SMP 300. 
 

PS, as an owner of both the watches you referenced, the GO, will undoubtedly ruin any other movement in your collection short of $10k plus watches. It is truly something special.

·

Looking at what I actually wear, I think the "one" definitive watch certainly applies in my situation. I have 10 watches, of which I actively wear 7 of them. Of the 7, the Omega Aqua Terra gets 50-60% of the wrist time. My Oris Big Crown Pointer Date is a distant second. The Omega is my most expensive watch, I think the one that looks the coolest, is the most versatile and is the most comfortable on wrist. I also haven't bought a single watch since buying this piece 18 months ago. I don't wear other watches because they are less durable, good looking and comfortable than this one and I don't buy any other watches because I always say "when would I wear this over my AT?" So, the AT has both cost me a lot of money and saved me a lot of money at the same time! I'm sure I'll get another watch at some point, but if I do, it might make the AT obsolete. I doubt my wearing stats will change much. I suspect one watch will typically dominate my wrist time.

·

I always been more interested in a collection rather than a single watch. I own one really expensive watch, a dress watch. That one is alone in it’s cathegory. I could imagine that one singular watch within a cathegory, like divers, in the collection could ruin the interest for others but I’m not there yet. Generally it’s not the price that defines what I like and wear.

·

All of my watches, from light and plastic, heavy and cumbersome, naggingly uncomfortable, or turn-on-a-dime terrific...they all have something unique to offer. 'Grail' is a made-up word. There is no 'perfect anything'. But there is always 'something perfect' in everything. 

·

Due to the way I collect watches it is hard to make the comparison.  I try to acquire different complications so I guess to anyone viewing my collection, the defining piece would be that of your favorite complication represented.  

·

Since I started collecting watches about 6 years ago, I've acquired a few "grail" pieces such as a Blancpain Villeret, a Zenith Elite, Girard Perregaux Classique and most recently a Baume & Mercier Clifton Baumatic. Despite those watches having a much higher level of finish and unique in-house movements, I still enjoy my "cheaper" watches. I buy a watch for multiple reasons, but all of those reasons connect to one. To paraphrase Marie Kondo, "does it bring me joy?"

·

Yes if you’re lucky enough, one watch can define a collection!

·

I'm not sure what 'collection defining' means in this context, but I have experienced new watches that have made existing (and loved) watches seem obsolete. The most obvious example of this for me was getting my Tudor BB36.

At the time, I had three field watches, the most loved of which was the Smiths PRS29-A. All three were sold because I simply never reached for them, always going for the BB36. I have other watches that survived the BB36's arrival, but they were significantly different in terms of function or style. However, even there I have shed watches due to this ones arrival. I found that I was almost forcing myself to rotate, even though I really liked the watches involved, because I just wanted to wear the BB36 or my Junghans (my first decent watch and only grail).

The net result of this is that I reduced my collection from 32 watches to 8 over the course of a couple of years, and may well reduce still further. I think I am likely to end up with a 3 watch collection, but I have taken my time with this whole process because I have experienced seller's remorse in the past too (Brew HP-1), and don't want to end up there again.

Overall, I am grateful to the BB36 as it has helped me focus on things I really like. It is less a case of watches being obsolete, more a case of them needing a new home where they will be appreciated and worn more frequently. This enables me to wear the watch I really want to wear without a weird guilt I was beginning to feel for spurning other beautiful pieces (what a strange hobby this is!).

The key thing for me: I no longer tend to hold on to watches I don't wear (which certainly used to be the case, with lots of slots in my box admired only when I opened the lid). Worryingly, I have bought other watches since getting the BB36, and they may not survive a final cut. This suggests that part of me has failed to learn the lesson, but that's pretty predictable with this hobby, right?

·

If you dated multiple people and then found "the one," would you keep dating others?

When it comes to watches, I find it difficult to commit to just one... 😂

·

NOT FOR SALE?