What’s so great about an integrated bracelet?
I don’t see how watches with integrated bracelets are superior in any way to those without one. I am genuinely curious—what’s the deal with integrated bracelets?? Open to learning and to being convinced!
75 comments
Sort by
Gerald Genta liked designing around them back in the 70's. And that's about it actually...
I'm probably in the minority here, but the integrated bracelet design just doesn't appeal to me at all. It just makes what would otherwise be an elegant watch look chunky and ungainly.
The only exception to this for me is a G-Shock, where the integrated band is an integral part of the shock proofing design, and thus, functional and purposeful.
I'm sure others will have many other counterpoint that are equally as valid though :-)
Don’t think it’s superior at all. It’s just what is trendy.
I think it's just a design aesthetic some people appreciate. It's like the Seconde Seconde collaborations for me, I don't get the appeal but clearly others do. Not my wallet, not my wrist: not my problem.
Just another flavor
Gerald Genta liked designing around them back in the 70's. And that's about it actually...
I'm probably in the minority here, but the integrated bracelet design just doesn't appeal to me at all. It just makes what would otherwise be an elegant watch look chunky and ungainly.
The only exception to this for me is a G-Shock, where the integrated band is an integral part of the shock proofing design, and thus, functional and purposeful.
I'm sure others will have many other counterpoint that are equally as valid though :-)
Integrated bracelets are supposed to be a part of the watch as a whole. If it fails to do so, it's sloppily done
They are meant to finish the watch; to make it look like one fluid design. And that's fair enough. But in practice, they are a pain in the arse, constrict individuality, etc.
It's just a trend. I think that the novelty of a metal bracelet that blends in with the case without any gaps was what drew in the attention in the 70's.
Not my style, but then no one is forcing me to buy them.
Gerald Genta liked designing around them back in the 70's. And that's about it actually...
I'm probably in the minority here, but the integrated bracelet design just doesn't appeal to me at all. It just makes what would otherwise be an elegant watch look chunky and ungainly.
The only exception to this for me is a G-Shock, where the integrated band is an integral part of the shock proofing design, and thus, functional and purposeful.
I'm sure others will have many other counterpoint that are equally as valid though :-)
I'll go one further and say that Gerald Genta is overrated. There are very few of his designs I like, I don't get the love everyone gives him. "Ooo, he's so cool, he made a simple stainless steel watch that's shaped differently and costs way more than it should! What a genius!"
As observed, another style. I’ll own one sometime for the sake of variety, but I don’t think there’s any advantage beyond devotion to a particular design/marque aesthetic.
They create a design that is continuous, so the watch head and the bracelet act as one piece, instead of 2~3 seperate pieces that are connected together. Unfortunately, because each bracelet has to be unique to the watch, this inherently means that the watch is unfriendly to long-term ownership. Online, you will find many posts of people with watches from the early 2000s—back when that style came back into fashion—, asking if they can get their bracelets fixed or replaced, with the answer often being “no” and “unless you have a leather strap customized for it”.
It’s a big reason that i was and am very against people recommending PRXes left and right and to people as their first serious watch. Unless Tissot or 3rd party manufacturers keep making straps and bracelets—or at least adapters—for it, then it’s bad pick for a newbie.
Ok….. please don’t shoot me.
But I’m really not a big fan of the PRX….. at all!!!
I don't think any style of watch is superior, it's all about how I feel that day 😅. I have a couple integrated bracelets and I enjoy them very much. I will say in my personal opinion I think they suit people with larger wrists better but that's also subjective.
The only watch I like with an integrated bracelet is/are the VC Overseas, speaking of them loosely. Some of those wear beautifully (thanks Tim Mosso for demonstrating).
I think the Nautilus 🤮, PRX, etc. are plug-ugly.
That’s just me.
For some reason I really like this (above),
and find the below unbearably ugly. I am quite aware that the PRX bears an uncanny resemblance (yuh think?!) to the Overseas. I feel a big difference.
Ick!
(Yes. I am an opinionated beggar.)
They create a design that is continuous, so the watch head and the bracelet act as one piece, instead of 2~3 seperate pieces that are connected together. Unfortunately, because each bracelet has to be unique to the watch, this inherently means that the watch is unfriendly to long-term ownership. Online, you will find many posts of people with watches from the early 2000s—back when that style came back into fashion—, asking if they can get their bracelets fixed or replaced, with the answer often being “no” and “unless you have a leather strap customized for it”.
It’s a big reason that i was and am very against people recommending PRXes left and right and to people as their first serious watch. Unless Tissot or 3rd party manufacturers keep making straps and bracelets—or at least adapters—for it, then it’s bad pick for a newbie.
That’s my issue right now with my ‘89 Omega Seamaster.
It can have a seamless fit and design integration with the watch and that’s about it
They're not. It's a subjective design
Does it not depend on the design?
Superior no, a subjective esthetic choice that appeals to many yes.
I think they look pleasing on some watches BUT I will say only in cases where it integrates well with the overall watch design (Chopard Alpine Eagle, Baume & Mercier Riviera, Vacheron Overseas). Integrated bracelets on their own don't make or break imo
I can take them or leave them it's all on the watch .
When they are thin and beautifully finished, yes, I get the appeal (I have a couple of watches in this category) otherwise they are nothing to write home about. However water resistant they may be I'm still not going to do the washing up wearing it, and get every last crevice filled with greasy water, so as with even the most delicate dress watch they get taken off. As for they idiots showering with their Rolex, well they need their tiny heads examined. Those seals weren't designed for that scenario, however much you try to kid yourself.
I don't care for integrated bracelets. I own 1 watch with an integrated bracelet. I didn't think about it at the time I bought it but I hate the fact I am stuck with no strap options. The bracelet is very scratched up now and unless I find an original bracelet I have no options. Personally I will never buy another watch with an integrated bracelet. I can love the watch but if it has an integrated bracelet it is a no for me.
I guess the clue is in the title, it’s integrated. I.e. a complete design aesthetic. Where as a strap is added to the design. I’m not a huge fan of then and the ones I do like tend to be more slim and not so chunky…..although I really like this, and while it looks huge in pictures wears very well. The only thing stopping me is the WR is a tad low.
You’re kidding!? The Octofinissimo isn’t a dive watch or even an ‘ordinary’ watch. It’s an extremely rare high horology piece.
Water resistance? With that baby it could be barely wind-resistant and I’d still rate the thing!
😮
There is nothing inferior or superior. The superior watch is the one you love and want to wear.
What's unfortunate today is that most are convinced, and/or convince themselves that superior means the most likes/hype/social media gratification.
Not exclusive to wacthes
You’re kidding!? The Octofinissimo isn’t a dive watch or even an ‘ordinary’ watch. It’s an extremely rare high horology piece.
Water resistance? With that baby it could be barely wind-resistant and I’d still rate the thing!
😮
I know. I would have preferred 100mtrs not because it isn’t a dive watch but as you say it high horology so it would protect the movement a bit more. 30mts is low and remember the first time I saw it in Disney Springs whilst running from an epic shower. I remember thinking that at 30mts I defo would not own it in Florida. In Scotland not the same issue, where I live it’s dryer. My Monaco is 30mts as well and I have not had the same issue but that is a standard movement. This puppy your taking bigger buck to service, i do love it though! and I still might get it as the price is getting more attractive.
Ok….. please don’t shoot me.
But I’m really not a big fan of the PRX….. at all!!!
fully agree…
They’re not superior. They’re just different.
The only two integrated bracelet watches that have appealed to me from a design standpoint are the Romain Gauthier Continuum, and the H Moser Streamliner. Unfortunately both are way out of reach for me so I'll carry on with regular straps!
Very true. Although hype and popular opinion does determine the market price.
It isn't superior but it does mean that the bracelet is specifically designed for that watch making a more cohesive design, but if they don't also offer integrated straps then it's a massive fail.
From a design standpoint, integrated bracelets can be superior - not always --but can be. From a practical standpoint they are limiting in the options to replace or change to a new strap. I don't tend to like them because a new strap color or strap material can make a whole new watch- dress it up or dress it down. Having said that I own a few integrated bracelets (like the prx) that did it right.