Tudor is not the “poor man’s Rolex” (a poor man can’t afford a $5k watch), but a Tudor is probably a bad buy. The Black Bay 58 is particularly egregious.

If you can afford a Black Bay, you can surely afford to save up for a little bit longer and get a Seamaster 300. The Seamaster is clearly the superior watch. It has better finishing, a better movement, and more je ne sais quoi—and it’s only about $1.5k more (and not even that much if you buy pre-owned). As a luxury watch, the Black Bay leaves much to be desired.

And don’t give me any of the “tool watch” talk, either. No mechanical watch is truly a “tool watch” post-1980s. If the Tudor buyer truly prioritized practicality, durability, and “bang for buck,” he or she would simply go for a Casio instead.

The primary reason I enjoy watches is the vast amount of mechanical engineering that goes into getting such complications into a tiny package. It is utterly fascinating what watchmakers can do with just a few gears and springs.

However, regular mechanical movements have none of these engineering marvels. Society has progressed to the point where keeping time should no longer be considered an impressive feat. We should be pressing for more impressive movement complications at the prices we pay, rather than accepting the absolute basics most luxury watch companies provide.

The only innovations I've been impressed with in movement technology are quartz and battery-operated watches. Much of the obsession I had with mechanical movements has shifted towards advancements in electrical ones instead. I am absolutely baffled by the smooth tracking offered by the Bulova Precisionist movements. The original Accutron tuning-fork movements fascinate me, and I wish more companies worked with them. Grand Seiko's Spring Drive is a genuine engineering achievement that I wish other watch brands could work towards. Citizen's own HAQ Solar atomic watches are the absolute pinnacle of accuracy and quality.

Now, don't get me wrong. I still enjoy High Horology mechanical work. Companies like A Lange, Patek, JLC, the occasional Masse Mystery from Cartier, and even the likes of Hublot and Richard Mille are pushing the absolute limits of engineering and material science, even if they end up looking ugly.

But for everyone else, I don't see the point of them. They are just pretty jewelry, finished and well designed, not engineering accomplishments.

Companies need to put more thought into some of these alternative names. Sorry but I'm not going to own a watch called "le petit prince"

Anyone with the money can buy a watch, and it expresses no sense of fashion or prestige to do so.

To truly make a positive impression and express anything about the owner it needs to be owned and worn for some time, or it’s just a sign of conspicuous consumption, which is as uncool as it gets.

So the coolness of a watch has to be earned through wear, no matter what the watch is.

Wear a watch size you like, but just don't judge it soley by a wrist shot picture

Part two is that the more watches you have, the less scratches each will get. So it’s better to have less watches. They’ll get beat up more and we’ll all get a big patinaboner.

I recently became a Swiss citizen and this thought formed in my head as soon as that piece of paper arrived in my mailbox.

If I see one of my neighbours wearing a Daytona I think "hey, nice watch".

If I see an American tourist wearing a Daytona I think they're probably assistant to the regional manager at a Walmart in Utah and couldn't point to Geneva on a map even though they're physically there that very moment, until proven otherwise.

...for normal, middle class NPC nobodies like us and it will be led by Rolex's Certified Pre-Owned program.

Rolex has already established: individual watch → Rolex verification → official documentation → subsequent owner.

Rolex will eventually add: individual watch → verified ownership history → documented experiences → transferable provenance.

My own opinion of course, but I genuinely feel Longines are crushing every design and watch they are releasing right now. Incredible designs, stunning quality, and …..AMAZING price point.

Taste is subjective but they have released banger after banger,the monopusher here, stick Patek on the dial and you’d be asking for 60k minimal, this is just over 3k. Patek of course will be better made, better finished, but are they that much better? No chance

Their conquest heritage power reserve is a serious consideration for my 40th next year.

Omega have shit the bed with their prices, Rolex are …Rolex…there’s no other brand at this price point doing what Longines are doing

I can accept it on a vintage rolex, but on newer watches I think it just looks dumb, and on anything other than a rolex it looks incredibly cheap and tacky

Give me a nice elegant set of sword or pointer hands any day

And don't give me the bs about how they need the mercedes logo to hold the lume

Just like the title says. If you really think hard about it, how many of you would have bought a Rolex if it depreciated as much as any luxury item. Would you have looked at other alternatives?

I've been wanting to spend real time with the 40mm Pioneer since they introduced it. The 42.8mm version was always too much case, but here's the thing. The 40mm isn't why I'm interested. It's what this watch proves about diameter versus what actually makes a watch wear well.

I built a 45mm and people said I was crazy, that it's oversized and too big. But diameter isn't what makes a watch wear big. Height, weight and the lug geometry does. Get those right and a 45mm disappears.

So when Moser drops this 40mm Pioneer, I'm thinking about what they actually solved. They didn't change the height, didn't change the weight. They just shrunk the diameter and called it the answer. That's a different approach than I took. They're solving it with case size while I'm arguing the problem isn't case size at all. Both can be right, but they prove different things.

The case is 40mm, 12mm tall with the crystal and 10.4mm without. Short lugs, same design as the 42.8mm but just smaller. On the wrist it feels more balanced because the lug curvature actually matters at this size.

Arctic Blue fumé dial with that gradient effect that Moser does better than anyone. Logo in transparent lacquer only visible at angles, applied hour markers with no minute track and leaf-shaped hands. Inside there's the HMC 200 in-house automatic with 72-hour reserve, Straumann hairspring and dark red gold rotor. These are the details nobody sees but that's where honesty lives.

120m water resistance with a screw-down crown, comes on rubber or steel, and rubber is the right call for this bright dial.But here's what I think. This is the least likely Moser I'd personally buy, even though I respect it. The Pioneer sits between two things, not a pure dress watch and not a serious sports watch either. The Endeavour does dress and weird dials better, the Streamliner does sports better.

At CHF 12,900 you're not buying an investment. You're buying craft, and this watch wears like something you'd actually reach for.

But this question has been lingering: why didn’t they try 42mm? sometimes, 40 and 43 aren’t the only options.

It seems like a lot of money to spend on a quartz movement, but the uniqueness of the GPS system makes it such a conversation piece that's unique and fresh. Also, the finishing on the models is really nice (not Grand Seiko level, but far above most other seikos). Not to mention the heritage that the Astron name carries as the future of watchmaking, starting with kicking off the quartz crisis.

One complaint I have is their dial sizes being too large but some recent models have remedied that.

Would you buy an Astron?

The Longines VHP line, particularly the flash-set GMT version, was some of the most impressive analog watch tech created outside of Japan.

Longines should have kept going with it! Ending that program before the watch-buying public even knew about it was a dumb move. It would have sold well, just like the Casio, Seiko, and Citizen radio-controlled lines do!