And the OG was never intended as a true dive watch. Was specifically for bearded special "contractor" types to track DC and other important timezones so they didn't miss check in time in the Jungles.
And the OG was never intended as a true dive watch. Was specifically for bearded special "contractor" types to track DC and other important timezones so they didn't miss check in time in the Jungles.
Or so the story goes ๐.
That is all well and good but it has "minute marks" for the first ... 4h. Or 12 minute marks (edit: initially I wrote 20 minutes, that's how confused I am by this ๐) I should say. WTF ๐ it's so weird I almost like it.
And the OG was never intended as a true dive watch. Was specifically for bearded special "contractor" types to track DC and other important timezones so they didn't miss check in time in the Jungles.
Or so the story goes ๐.
I am angry itโs true to reference - what are they thinking. We will all be calling WWWs from Vertex derivative nextโฆ oh, wait
That is all well and good but it has "minute marks" for the first ... 4h. Or 12 minute marks (edit: initially I wrote 20 minutes, that's how confused I am by this ๐) I should say. WTF ๐ it's so weird I almost like it.
That is all well and good but it has "minute marks" for the first ... 4h. Or 12 minute marks (edit: initially I wrote 20 minutes, that's how confused I am by this ๐) I should say. WTF ๐ it's so weird I almost like it.
Yup, the OG did too. I like a 12hr, think the extra hashes were to use it in a pinch for elapsed time.
Or doing the kind of mission set those crazy LRRP'S and MACV-SOG's did.
And I like the difference, makes it stand out. YMMV of course. ๐
I'm not doubting that it's true to original. That isn't really my "point". It is more a matter of who thought that this was a "good idea" to begin with.
If the original one looks the same, it doesn't explain utility. It just means that someone thought it was, for one reason or another, a good idea on two separate occasions. If I have to keep track of the day/night offset (because 12h and not 24h) AND whether I used it for timing and messed up the time zone that way, then I might be better off just remembering it. It feels very quirky, especially for something that is/was supposed to be used "for real".
I'm not doubting that it's true to original. That isn't really my "point". It is more a matter of who thought that this was a "good idea" to begin with.
If the original one looks the same, it doesn't explain utility. It just means that someone thought it was, for one reason or another, a good idea on two separate occasions. If I have to keep track of the day/night offset (because 12h and not 24h) AND whether I used it for timing and messed up the time zone that way, then I might be better off just remembering it. It feels very quirky, especially for something that is/was supposed to be used "for real".
The Type 1 and 2 were definitely used for real. The combination of a 12-hour display with a 20-minute graduated scale on the bezel is an underrated design choice that adds to the their multi- purpose functionality โ you can use the bezel to track elapsed time by the hour or the minute, and even track a second time-zone if needed. These were not solely dive watches, but used by various military personnel across the Army, Navy, and Air Force. It was all specified by the US military in a ~5000 word document outlining exactly what they wanted the watches to look like and have for specifications. All this said - if you donโt like the look of it, then you donโt like it (which is totally cool).
The Type 1 and 2 were definitely used for real. The combination of a 12-hour display with a 20-minute graduated scale on the bezel is an underrated design choice that adds to the their multi- purpose functionality โ you can use the bezel to track elapsed time by the hour or the minute, and even track a second time-zone if needed. These were not solely dive watches, but used by various military personnel across the Army, Navy, and Air Force. It was all specified by the US military in a ~5000 word document outlining exactly what they wanted the watches to look like and have for specifications. All this said - if you donโt like the look of it, then you donโt like it (which is totally cool).
I actually think these look quite nice, especially the white one. It's just not how I would have set up the bezel (of any watch). Does that document state intended use cases for these or is it just a specification? Maybe I am weird, but "historically accurate" doesn't mean much to me per se. Some things from the past were great, some were mistakes. I try to understand things and this specification just doesn't make much sense to me. I am probably missing something, which is fine.
At the end of the day I suppose it's a matter of getting used to it and being mentally a bit quicker than I am ๐ pretty sure it would confuse the hell out of me which obviously doesn't mean much.
We use cookies (and other similar technologies) for many purposes, including to improve your experience on
our
site and measure analytics. Click "Accept all" to accept these uses. Read more in ourย Cookie Policy.
This account is verified. WatchCrunch has confirmed that this account is the
authentic presence for this person or brand.
๐ โโ๏ธ 12h bezels.
๐ โโ๏ธ 12h bezels.
Lol, it is like the OG though.
And the OG was never intended as a true dive watch. Was specifically for bearded special "contractor" types to track DC and other important timezones so they didn't miss check in time in the Jungles.
Or so the story goes ๐.
Lol, it is like the OG though.
And the OG was never intended as a true dive watch. Was specifically for bearded special "contractor" types to track DC and other important timezones so they didn't miss check in time in the Jungles.
Or so the story goes ๐.
That is all well and good but it has "minute marks" for the first ... 4h. Or 12 minute marks (edit: initially I wrote 20 minutes, that's how confused I am by this ๐) I should say. WTF ๐ it's so weird I almost like it.
Lol, it is like the OG though.
And the OG was never intended as a true dive watch. Was specifically for bearded special "contractor" types to track DC and other important timezones so they didn't miss check in time in the Jungles.
Or so the story goes ๐.
I am angry itโs true to reference - what are they thinking. We will all be calling WWWs from Vertex derivative nextโฆ oh, wait
That is all well and good but it has "minute marks" for the first ... 4h. Or 12 minute marks (edit: initially I wrote 20 minutes, that's how confused I am by this ๐) I should say. WTF ๐ it's so weird I almost like it.
It is correct for a Type I. My 1973 Type I below.
That is all well and good but it has "minute marks" for the first ... 4h. Or 12 minute marks (edit: initially I wrote 20 minutes, that's how confused I am by this ๐) I should say. WTF ๐ it's so weird I almost like it.
Yup, the OG did too. I like a 12hr, think the extra hashes were to use it in a pinch for elapsed time.
Or doing the kind of mission set those crazy LRRP'S and MACV-SOG's did.
And I like the difference, makes it stand out. YMMV of course. ๐
I am angry itโs true to reference - what are they thinking. We will all be calling WWWs from Vertex derivative nextโฆ oh, wait
Yup, the OG did too. I like a 12hr, think the extra hashes were to use it in a pinch for elapsed time.
Or doing the kind of mission set those crazy LRRP'S and MACV-SOG's did.
And I like the difference, makes it stand out. YMMV of course. ๐
Why remake a watch to look exactly like the original?
๐
Why remake a watch to look exactly like the original?
๐
I think because the OG costs 8-10k for a good one and 5-7k for a bad one. So a re-issue opens the design up to a lot more folks.
I think because the OG costs 8-10k for a good one and 5-7k for a bad one. So a re-issue opens the design up to a lot more folks.
I guess Iโm being too subtleโฆ
I guess Iโm being too subtleโฆ
Ahhh, or I am too dense ๐
It is correct for a Type I. My 1973 Type I below.
I'm not doubting that it's true to original. That isn't really my "point". It is more a matter of who thought that this was a "good idea" to begin with.
If the original one looks the same, it doesn't explain utility. It just means that someone thought it was, for one reason or another, a good idea on two separate occasions. If I have to keep track of the day/night offset (because 12h and not 24h) AND whether I used it for timing and messed up the time zone that way, then I might be better off just remembering it. It feels very quirky, especially for something that is/was supposed to be used "for real".
I'm not doubting that it's true to original. That isn't really my "point". It is more a matter of who thought that this was a "good idea" to begin with.
If the original one looks the same, it doesn't explain utility. It just means that someone thought it was, for one reason or another, a good idea on two separate occasions. If I have to keep track of the day/night offset (because 12h and not 24h) AND whether I used it for timing and messed up the time zone that way, then I might be better off just remembering it. It feels very quirky, especially for something that is/was supposed to be used "for real".
The Type 1 and 2 were definitely used for real. The combination of a 12-hour display with a 20-minute graduated scale on the bezel is an underrated design choice that adds to the their multi- purpose functionality โ you can use the bezel to track elapsed time by the hour or the minute, and even track a second time-zone if needed. These were not solely dive watches, but used by various military personnel across the Army, Navy, and Air Force. It was all specified by the US military in a ~5000 word document outlining exactly what they wanted the watches to look like and have for specifications. All this said - if you donโt like the look of it, then you donโt like it (which is totally cool).
The Type 1 and 2 were definitely used for real. The combination of a 12-hour display with a 20-minute graduated scale on the bezel is an underrated design choice that adds to the their multi- purpose functionality โ you can use the bezel to track elapsed time by the hour or the minute, and even track a second time-zone if needed. These were not solely dive watches, but used by various military personnel across the Army, Navy, and Air Force. It was all specified by the US military in a ~5000 word document outlining exactly what they wanted the watches to look like and have for specifications. All this said - if you donโt like the look of it, then you donโt like it (which is totally cool).
I actually think these look quite nice, especially the white one. It's just not how I would have set up the bezel (of any watch). Does that document state intended use cases for these or is it just a specification? Maybe I am weird, but "historically accurate" doesn't mean much to me per se. Some things from the past were great, some were mistakes. I try to understand things and this specification just doesn't make much sense to me. I am probably missing something, which is fine.
At the end of the day I suppose it's a matter of getting used to it and being mentally a bit quicker than I am ๐ pretty sure it would confuse the hell out of me which obviously doesn't mean much.
I understand why #benrus released the type 1 in different colors but Iโd still choose to go with the OG black ๐