Is it really that bad? Hublot Classic Fusion Chronograph micro review
Here's another result of my recent watch browsing experience in Sandton. I was let loose in that mall like a rabid dog in heat. So, of all watches to try on in a decent-size boutique, why a Hublot?
I don't know. I know the majority of enthusiasts like you or I look at Hublot in the same way as we would look at an infected wound, which made me want to try it. There's some sort of sick pleasure I derived from embracing the forbidden that day.
I'm a nonconformist in a way. I love the underdog and the left-field choice… says the guy who owns no microbrands and loves his Seiko 5 to bits. I'm also the type to do exactly the opposite of what you tell me to do out of spite. It's impossible to teach me sex-ed, because after every lesson, I come closer to clearance sale and Black Friday prostitutes. When someone points at an open parking spot, I don't park there, I instead leave the car in the middle of the road and do whatever it is I need to do.
The good: It's not half bad looking. I actually think the Classic Fusion is (although not the best looking) a fairly handsome watch. I also like how the alligator band suits the titanium case. Dark titanium, a black dial, and a black alligator leather band gives a sinister look like a dystopian science fiction villain, which is undeniably cool. It also has the best clasp I've experienced on a leather strap. It looks like a buckle, but it's deployant. If there's one thing about this watch I want to see on other brands, it's this. Well done, Hublot, full marks on the clasp from me. Classic Fusion is also a nice name. It probably refers to a "fusion of classic and modern style," but it reminds me of nuclear fusion, which is also undeniably cool.
The bad: Notice how almost all of my good points involve aesthetics? Yep, that's all that's good about it, and it's unfortunate that those are subjective. I hate the 45mm case size. I want to find whoever decided to greenlight that and bludgeon them to death with it. Titanium isn't normally a material used for tools meant to brutally murder corporate executives, because it's light and expensive. Light? LIGHT? Not a chance. I would have sworn it was lead on my wrist. I have never seen a thicker watch in my life, at least not in person. If 45mm wasn't big enough, the lug to lug is about the same as the diameter of Jupiter. The lug tips hung off of my wrist like long metal pipes hang out of an overly confident light pickup owner. If you were within a metre of me you would have been impaled by a lug tip. And then there's the movement. A modified ETA 2892-A2, er… HUB1143. It's by no means a bad movement, quite the opposite in fact. But for the same money as a Breitling Premier B25 Datora (even though that watch doesn't have an in-house movement itself) you'd expect a little more spice. Movement finishing wasn't really special either. If you have OCD, the Classic Fusion is going to be your Kryptonite. The screws on the bezel aren't aligned. I could live with this for maybe two weeks before I'd be put in one of those white jackets that do up at the back, mouth frothing and hair pulled out.
The verdict: It's a pass from me. I can't see myself wearing one, not in 45mm satin finished lead, at least. The 42mm model seems more doable, but that's only solving one of the niggles. Hublot conjures up images of relentless steering wheel shots of C-list Instagram celebrities wearing a gold Classic Fusion and driving a Lamborghini Urus. I hate the Urus, I see it as an Audi Q8 for posers. I dislike the Audi Q8, I see it as a Volkswagen Touareg for show-offs. I detailed this outing to a friend, who likes watches, but isn't the type like me who bites his nails worrying about movement finishing and the nitty gritty nonsense. He said, and I quote, "Hublot is ass." Seeing as most of the unstable celebs who buy these do it to impress other people, this is a major weak point. I will go against the grain and say that there isn't as much wrong with Hublot as many others would have you believe. Value is for nerds who like numbers and stuff. This hobby is emotion, and if Hublot plays with those heart strings, you can't make a better choice. I can't say that it plays with mine though, so, on the basis of the cons, it's the first watch I've reviewed that I cannot truly recommend.
All pictures are from Hublot
Is it really that bad? Hublot Classic Fusion Chronograph micro review
Yes
No
- Unique design
- Feels decently solid
- Love the black dial and strap with the titanium case
- 45mm can only be pulled off by The Hulk and Mr Olympia
- Movement finishing is lackluster at best
- A movement like this doesn't belong in a watch at this price point
- Titanium doesn't aid lightness: it feels as nimble as a decapitated rhino
- Dial, although a nice colour, remains slightly uninteresting
- 5 Atmospheres of water resistantce
A famous Dutch saying: “𝘕𝘦𝘦 𝘩𝘦𝘣 𝘫𝘦, 𝘫𝘢 𝘬𝘶𝘯 𝘫𝘦 𝘬𝘳𝘪𝘫𝘨𝘦𝘯.”
As much as I enjoy clowning on most of the watches Hublot makes, I actually like their classic designs. The giant case size and price are instant deal breakers, though.
As much as I enjoy clowning on most of the watches Hublot makes, I actually like their classic designs. The giant case size and price are instant deal breakers, though.
I agree. They aren't the best made and aren't the best value and making fun of them is such an enjoyable pastime. But I think everyone clowns on them a bit too hard and makes them sound bad without any redeemable features. If their sizing was better and some better movements were featured in the "lower end" models, I wouldn't see anything wrong with them.
A 4/5 on quality and design? Not a chance
Although quality may prove to be dubious in the long run, it felt solid on my wrist and not half bad put together. Design is subjective, and I rather like the look of the Classic Fusion. It's not elegant or classy or timeless, but I think it matches what a sports watch looks like.
Sounds like they are the Swiss Invicta clone watch company.
Sounds like they are the Swiss Invicta clone watch company.
I think you put it perfectly. A few times the quality of an Invicta with the same design ethos (at least in 45mm guise) but a hundred times the price.
It's funny to read all the hate about Hublot. Some of their watches aren't half bad, they are just very expensive for the sake of being very expensive (which is not a very good reason if you ask me 😉 of course nobody actually does ask me).
I quite like the 40mm Integrated time only (or whatever the hell it is called), they just forgot to put a dial for some reason. That would look 🔥🔥🔥 with a smoked sapphire in front of it 😎👌... and it has the Zenith movement 😬 which is way cooler.
It's funny to read all the hate about Hublot. Some of their watches aren't half bad, they are just very expensive for the sake of being very expensive (which is not a very good reason if you ask me 😉 of course nobody actually does ask me).
I quite like the 40mm Integrated time only (or whatever the hell it is called), they just forgot to put a dial for some reason. That would look 🔥🔥🔥 with a smoked sapphire in front of it 😎👌... and it has the Zenith movement 😬 which is way cooler.
Although I'm not in a position to not care about money (I am honestly slightly broke) I don't usually consider price in watches. If I like it and want it, I'll either buy it or save up and buy it later, but being expensive just for the sake of being expensive is annoying. If this chronograph was priced at 2000 to 3000 USD, it wouldn't get a significant portion of the hate it gets now.
Some of their offerings are really not that bad from a horology standpoint. They've got many bases covered with precious metals, skeletons, etc. Design is subjective, even though most of us can agree Hublot's ethos is far from perfect. So all that's really wrong with it is the price and brand image. Will they change? No. They will continue being the brand that drives watch nerds insane because that's how they've sold everything. It's like the Lamborghini Urus I mentioned before. Your money is better spent on a kitted out VW Touareg, but the badge and some performance is why the Urus sells. Same with Hublot: flexing, nothing more, nothing less.
While it sure can be fun to pick on the brand I'm not religiously anti-Hublot, and although their years of unabashedly copying the APRO do deserve all the scorn they receive, the Classic Fusion line is their one saving grace.
While it sure can be fun to pick on the brand I'm not religiously anti-Hublot, and although their years of unabashedly copying the APRO do deserve all the scorn they receive, the Classic Fusion line is their one saving grace.
This comment tells a lot about my thoughts when writing this. I wanted to remain impartial, because I too am also not anti-Hublot or anti any watch brand. Some brands are better than others, but they all deserve a fair trial. The Classic Fusion has some good in it, it's just grossly overshadowed by the bad. Blindly hating it is a sheep move, which is what I wanted to steer clear from most of all.
Their design is good, but that might just be because it takes heavy inspiration from the Royal Oak and other 70s Gérald Genta designs.
While it sure can be fun to pick on the brand I'm not religiously anti-Hublot, and although their years of unabashedly copying the APRO do deserve all the scorn they receive, the Classic Fusion line is their one saving grace.
Are they though?
I mean yeah the watch looks like a porthole,
not surprising as Hublot literally means porthole in French, but Hublot was first with the rubber that is now ubiquitous on AP Offshores and they were first with colored ceramics which are now found in some of the most popular variants of Royal Oaks. The initial Hublot watch, at least to me, looks a lot more like a Movado Museum watch than an AP Royal Oak to be honest. They recently re-issued them.
where I think much of the initial inspiration came from...
I honestly don't think Hublot copies AP more than the other way around. Now I am in trouble 😮
Misalignment on functional bezel screws are inevitable, unless they are purely decorative like on an AP Royal Oak. Even the Cartier Santos has this throughout the case and bracelet. It's the effect of an honest design, but maybe an OCD trigger for some.
I love the OP's writing style as much as his take. I similarly have a non-conformist affinity for Hublot, as it has become banal to clown on them and it is largely a bad rap. However, there are subjective issues and I fall on the same side as the reviewer on most of these despite not actually having gotten around to trying one on yet.
But yeah, despite Hublot not really being my style, I do like the design language and insouciance. That the brand has become a bandwagon whipping boy further endears me to them. None of this is making me get some giant-ass watch that is not exactly an appealing value proposition, but at least they are not Rolex.
Misalignment on functional bezel screws are inevitable, unless they are purely decorative like on an AP Royal Oak. Even the Cartier Santos has this throughout the case and bracelet. It's the effect of an honest design, but maybe an OCD trigger for some.
This. I actually appreciate the design aesthetic of Hublot. They are definitely overpriced for the sum of the parts, but they do make appealing-looking watches, however, I can never get over the misaligned screws. For example, this 38mm Fusion is nice looking (to me), but I am immediately out of the market because of OCD.
Are they though?
I mean yeah the watch looks like a porthole,
not surprising as Hublot literally means porthole in French, but Hublot was first with the rubber that is now ubiquitous on AP Offshores and they were first with colored ceramics which are now found in some of the most popular variants of Royal Oaks. The initial Hublot watch, at least to me, looks a lot more like a Movado Museum watch than an AP Royal Oak to be honest. They recently re-issued them.
where I think much of the initial inspiration came from...
I honestly don't think Hublot copies AP more than the other way around. Now I am in trouble 😮
You said it as it is. A while back I researched this and saw something about the whole porthole thing. Definitely similar to a Royal Oak, but that's just because of the nature of these objects. A diving helmet (what inspired much of the RO design) is meant to be water resistant but still, you know, transparent, hence eight screws over the glass. Does a porthole not have the same function to be transparent and water resistant? That's why they both have a similar shape and eight screws.
Misalignment on functional bezel screws are inevitable, unless they are purely decorative like on an AP Royal Oak. Even the Cartier Santos has this throughout the case and bracelet. It's the effect of an honest design, but maybe an OCD trigger for some.
Yep. Screws being screwed in. That's just how it is. I think there is a way, looking at the thread profile of the screw and the hole, to get them all to align somewhat, but I think attention to detail like that isn't something Hublot (or just about any other brand) would go through.
I love the OP's writing style as much as his take. I similarly have a non-conformist affinity for Hublot, as it has become banal to clown on them and it is largely a bad rap. However, there are subjective issues and I fall on the same side as the reviewer on most of these despite not actually having gotten around to trying one on yet.
But yeah, despite Hublot not really being my style, I do like the design language and insouciance. That the brand has become a bandwagon whipping boy further endears me to them. None of this is making me get some giant-ass watch that is not exactly an appealing value proposition, but at least they are not Rolex.
Thank you! My writing style is discount Jeremy Clarkson and Andrew Morgan smashed into one. It's far too easy to clown on Hublot now, so I wrote it as I felt it in the boutique that day. Is it the best built? Likely not, but in the few minutes I had it, it felt solid and decently made. It's easy to hate on a watch having never even put one on the wrist or seeing it in the flesh.
Yep. Screws being screwed in. That's just how it is. I think there is a way, looking at the thread profile of the screw and the hole, to get them all to align somewhat, but I think attention to detail like that isn't something Hublot (or just about any other brand) would go through.
I think aligning them somewhat would be even worse than not aligning them at all. No matter what you do, unless you make the screw and thread out of some indestructible material that never wears and use a perfectly calibrated driver that applies exactly the same amount of torque every time it will eventually misalign, just a little but it will... and people will inevitably start screaming. And that ignores how much a (bespoke) replacement screw would cost which is of course irrelevant as it must be indestructible to begin with 😬
I don't think Hublot is the problem here, the problem is the consumer. I'd like to think that I am a pretty anal individual but I could not care less about the alignment of screws within a bezel.. makes me feel quite good, not gonna lie 😉 But the OCD consumer is also holding the money which makes the problem a relevant one, maybe they should just switch to bolts...
They are good watches, but not worth the asking price. The issue is that many - not all - people who buy a Hublot do it to show off how rich they are. That is shallow and IMO unfulfilling.
They are good watches, but not worth the asking price. The issue is that many - not all - people who buy a Hublot do it to show off how rich they are. That is shallow and IMO unfulfilling.
The Lamborghini Urus of watches...
Thanks for your review and I agree. We have to make up our own minds and I know there is a lot of hate for Hublot but always willing to get in for a closer look if the watch has looks decent. Not a bad looking watch, but I guess it's a niche market for those who "need" a 46mm watch!!! I wish some of these companies would at least consider making watches with sizing that fits a normal wrist, or at least has some size options.
Misalignment on functional bezel screws are inevitable, unless they are purely decorative like on an AP Royal Oak. Even the Cartier Santos has this throughout the case and bracelet. It's the effect of an honest design, but maybe an OCD trigger for some.
The RO bezel "bolts" are functional, the threaded female sleeves are screwed over them from the backside and they hold bezel to the case with the rubber gasket in-between.
I like this watch, I think I'm going to buy one.
I like this watch, I think I'm going to buy one.
Go for it!