Even the standards of Swiss watches The Nautilus is just so unbelievably overpriced. I think that its main attraction is that it is overpriced. The Nautilus is a steel watch with an awkward looking bezel, but everyone pretends that it is some kind of sacred object, because it is really expensive and Patek makes them hard to buy on purpose. If Patek were not printed on it, then it would be an odd curiosity from the 70s, that almost everyone would ignore.
The Milgauss is an amazing piece. Between the orange lightning hand and the green crystal it has some of the most unique features of any Rolex. I also daily wear one. It will come back. They have too much of a cult following.
I was lucky enough to purchase a Milgauss in Z Blue in 2022 and I'm over the moon with it. Makes me smile every day and is the perfect combination for the office, leisure and sports. Never looks out of place and for those who know, it always gets positive comments. In a world full of Submariners, be a Milgauss.
I just bought a Milguass and absolutely love it. I don’t get why people hate it so much. I think it’s such a cool spin on a very serious brand. Not to crazy but just crazy enough
Considering price and hype, I’d have to agree with the Jug Ear Nautilus. I think it is the attempt at symmetry, which makes the ears. The celebrity hype has made that watch. It’s bracelet looks nice, just redesign the watch!
I agree. I believe the patek nautilus is the most overrated watch. The wings don't look good and the bezel has always looked too thick imo. It's like a donut is surrounding the dial.
WF did a video on the Milgauss a while back. The problem with it is it’s basically an OP - same case, same movement - with a green crystal and a wacky second hand, for an extra $3000.
@@matthewbrotman2907 The Milgauss uses a completely different case with an inner soft iron faraday cage with a second inner case back. It's 40mm vs the OP39. It's also considerably thicker. It shares the 3131 with the Air King not the 3132 in the OP.
Hello Andrew and Tom! Have you guys considered forming a list of the 'brightest' watches that use tritium tubes and/or the super-luminova paint? I'm curious what glowing timepieces you guys would pick out.
I must be one of the rare people who actually liked the Rolex Milgauss. As for the Patek Nautilus, I think it would not be that bad if they ripped the wings off and made it a simple designed dial that tells the time and date. But it's pretty much a moot point for me, since I don't have even a remote chance of ever having to decide to buy one or pass on it!
I hated the Nautilus until I saw that the bezel opens up like a porthole on a ship. The left side is a hinge. After that I don’t mind the design that much.
I just got my Casio GSHOCK GA-B001 and it’s great. You can keep your “upper level” watches, I look for functionality, tough protection and use ability. ANY Casioak /GSHOCK is a perfect piece to go through the Apocalypse with. 👌🇨🇦👍
I wear a caravelle devil diver. It’ll go through a war and come out fine and it’s a chronograph and it tells day date and it can do everything my g shock can for the same price almost. Oh and it doesn’t need a new battery when the old one dies. It just winds itself. Oh and my g shock is only waterproof to 660 feet my devil diver can go to 666 feet
They never actually said the moonswatch would be online. I don't know how people came to that conclusion. I was pointing it out at the time. All they said was that they would be more widely available at swatch stores.
I feel roasted. I WAS supposed to go get that GS SBGC253 this weekend at the Hollywood boutique. I guess I'll just check their version of the Submariner.
it is a great watch. The submariner is good and nice. But for the opportunity of what you can get with that money, it is for people without their own sense of style, so choose to stay safe and stick with a safe choice. Because they cannot discern past the fact that the submariner appeals to mass taste and cant go wrong. But give them a blank piece of paper, they cannot even draw out what they like.
I actually agree with the Nautilus (just not more than Hublot haha), for me though, what I wish I could ask Genta is why the bezel shape is so indecisive? I want to know what was the inspiration behind what looks like a rounded rectangle but with jagged edges and not smooth… maybe smooth would make it too simple and a little too much like their Elipse… in fact I suspect that’s where the idea must have come from, but for sure the other 2 designs among that trio are much better…
I am going to say the Grand Seiko Majestic White Birch. I just makes me think a hyperactive kid, who has eaten all the E numbers, has been let loose with a lino cutter, whilst their parent is drunkenly passed out after drinking too much wine.
I can appreciate Hublot for what it is. It's fun to be different - nice materials, industrial Genta-esque design in the Classic Fusion, expensive rubber straps are cool in the way wearing sneakers with a suit is cool. I happen to love Breguet too for what it's worth - don't have to have a one-note taste.
I love timex watches , the Waterbury's are really good lookin and the movements are also good...but i don't know why timex is not popular than any other watches in the same price category like casio
The Milgauss (Z Blue version) is by far my favourite Rolex. Sad it got discontinued, but I was expecting it for the last couple of years. Anything Iced-out is horrendous.
@@edhalson3154 would be perfect show... Just finding a watch you find ugly from invicta is easy but trying to find a watch from same brand that looks is nice is a challenge. That means they need to go thru invicta brands all model of 20 000 different watches... Also I want to see their pain... Specially his friend
@@edhalson3154 yaa those shaq watches are too big they are between 52mm to 60 depending on model ... But if you want invicta monster then look up sea Hunter series Google : invicta 32650 Invicta 31465 However invicta does normal sizes watches too : between 38mm to 44mm 44mm Invicta 27499 38 mm Invicta 35761 But yes i wish more of their watches was smaller size specialy if they gonna go path of mass Produce cheaper watches
I'll never own one, but I think the Nautlius has an amazing case shape, evoking something from Jules Verne. Tastes vary, but there's no shortage of people online being controversial just to seem edgy.
The irony here, is that over 99% of the human population can give 2 $&@!s about what kind of watch anybody wears. Which makes any “judgments” about what is or isn’t a “good” watch asinine and moot
The Milgauss is beautiful. It grows on you. At first I didn't care for the Nautilus, until I actually saw it and tried it on my wrist. It was absolutely gorgeous.
Definitely agree. Loathed the nautilus and the hype. Then a saw a white faced 31mm in a shop window and it was actually rather lovely in person. A weird feeling.
The problem with Richard Mille is that they are too expensive, the Nautilus is the most overhyped watch out there and jewelled Rolex are just for footballers which leads us to assume that the worst watches are for rich people with no taste!☹️
I think I must be the only person that doesn't like the Royal Oak. I do like the Casioak though. I will probably get a half metal one with a positive lcd when I'm feeling flush.
I vocally agree that the nautilus is not an attractive design, though it still exudes class. If I wanted an integrated bracelet watch, I’d take a VC Overseas any day of the week. I’m also not a Royal Oak fan though.
I'll defend the SBGC253 (as someone who owns the 249) lol. It's quite a lot, but it's also the ultimate watch of practicality, and it's surprisingly ultra legible in person. It's also one of the most comfortable watches I own. It's...an acquired taste. But it's not bad!
Nautilus’ bezel shape makes me uncomfortable to the point of infuriation. Angles are barely noticeable, but just enough to produce a feeling that something’s not right. I get that they tried to strike a balance between jagged and smooth, but to me it looks like an obviously failed attempt somehow got into production. I don’t know, maybe it’s one of those watches that look weird in photos but are absolutely charming in person.
i hate ap royal oak offshore . i thing the octogonal shape with pins only kills with sleak metallic finish. it is suppoesed to be a classic looking watch. to me in specific it is not made for quirky sport look
I was gifted a Stauer watch (because I did someone a favor) and I appreciate the gesture, but it has to be the worst value for money you can get. It cost about $100, is quartz, has 3 functional sub dials, and yet, it's worse than those $10 printed-dial dress watches they have at the discount clothing store. It's offensively poorly made. The brand tries hard to look legit, judging by their website and brochure, but it's absolute crap. I'd rather have a gaudy Invicta, I think, at least they tried something new.
My only problem with Hublot are the unaligned bezel screws. It's all I can think about when I look at one of their watches, and for the models that aren't too gaudy for my taste they just end up overshadowing everything else.
I don't think invicta watches have any designer's. I think it's a bunch of people who sit around watching the most horrible horror films, and an invicta watch is born. Not only are they hideous, but they're so poorly made that I'm surprised anyone even owns one. I saw an advert where you could buy two invicta watches and get four free, I rest my case.
nautilus looks better than the oak... the royal oak is just next level hublot designwise. the only watch that can rock 'screws' on the be bezel is the cartier santos.
At 11:53, when the commentator says the word "always" - he sounds identical to Monthy Pyton's Always look on the bright side of life. Can I request that he sings just a couple of lines from the song?
I think the nautilus looks nicer than the royal oak. I actually really don't like the royal oak, it's too industrial, exposed screws are outdated, it's just not my thing. The Nautilus is all the desirable elements but more timeless. No exposed screws, a clean taper and a simplistic but uniform bracelet.
The Nautilus is a very intricately designed case, and with a bracelet that's smooth as butter. It doesn't pop anywhere as much as the Royal oak, but the Royal Oak feels rough and industrial in comparison.
Honestly, probably a controversial opinion, but I think the exact opposite to the last point, I never used to like either design, but the Nautilus has definitely grown on me, the Royal Oak on the other hand, definitely not my cup of tea
Yea, im also a GS stan and i share the same opinion about that particular GS. It feels like the antithesis of what makes a GS a GS in terms of aesthetics.
The Grand Seiko would look absolutely fine if everything wasn't out of place and wonky. The GS logo being over towards 11 rather than dead center is very weird! Shift everything to more traditional chronograph location and it'd be so much better
Completely agree about the Nautilus. As a designer, I feel it is just a status watch where people want to overlook the design. I do disagree with the Milgauss as I'm not, particularly a fan of most Rolex watches. I appreciate the Milgaussand other perpetuals like a 1908
Also never liked the nautilus. It always looked like a 50’s tv screen to me. I appreciate it’s importance in the watch world, but it’s grossly overhyped in my opinion.
I won't lie. I love the moonswatch. I had a vacation to Germany and bought one at a boutique but I have to completely agree that it is a tough love from beginning your research on it to actually using it. The ticks from the second hand are so loud it's Timex weekender level and quality is not enough for the price. Mine has a chip in it or something and a smudge on the crystal probably more scratch but smudge appearing and the like velcro strap is cool on some of them and I got the mission to mars but still on the fence about it visually. I still love it honestly but I would never argue in saying it is too expensive and not good enough in it's current state. I really think a mechaquartz or hi frequency quartz or just a different material would have elevated it to being amazing or just a lower price tag. Imagine a stainless steel version of it in the same exact way it is now and maybe not acrylic but mineral or sapphire. I'd even pay somewhere around 300-350 euro even with the quartz movement. At least my one issue with the movement noise would be helped by a different material.
I think you're spot on about a mechaquartz movement being a good idea in the Moonswatch. I was in Georgia (the country) over New Years, and the Swatch shop in Tblisi had tons of them. But after holding one, it really is a cheap watch. It just felt like it came in one of those gumball machine plastic bubbles. And the ticking was just horrible. That being said, I was truly on the fence about it, for the novelty of owning a sort-of Omega. And if they had had one of the more muted colors that I prefer instead of the very bright models, I might have pulled the trigger. And maybe I should have just to put it on Ebay. But I went home without one. I will be back in Europe in early May (Germany, Czechia, and Slovenia), so I may change my mind and grab one if they are available somewhere.
They are jewelry. Factory Diamond watches are usually beautiful examples of the jewellers art. On the other hand Richard Mille look a lot like a lot of INVICTAS.
Have to admit, as someone who would raid the Grand Seiko catalogue if my lottery number came up, that chronograph looked more Invicta than it did Grand Seiko.
Nautilus is the Omega to Rolex. Everybody wants a Rolex Sub (Royal Oak) but some people don’t want to be like everybody so they get the alternative. The one that’s like it… but not.
I have to say I don't like the Nautilus from the beginning; it is not circular nor octagonal and therefore a bit odd to look at. It took me 5 years at least and now I actually find the 5726 good looking, perfectly balanced, great display layout and an annual calendar. Definitely my grail watch there.
As someone who dresses a little Avant Garde when I don't have to wear a goddamn uniform, I may be bias, but it seems these watch fans only want conservative design. It took 50 years for an octagon to gain any mainstream traction, heaven forbid playing with symmetry to the point date windows are contentious
I think that's a bit rough on the poor old Milguass, I'd prefer one to an Air-King... but each to their own. As for the Nautilus... I personally prefer it to the Royal Oak! All fun & games as I'll never own either, but the Nautilus definitely shouldn't be on this list. Where would the fun be in this hobby if we all just loved the exact same design language though, keeps things interesting for sure. Although Nautilus gang for life baby!!
Hamilton khaki Below Zero Chronograph. Minutes counter was replaced with branding text. So it times seconds and after many many seconds, hours. But not the elapsed minutes. A useless chronograph.
I will never buy a Lowrex, I own two identical OOZOO watches now, I bought both at the thrift shop for 3€ all together, bought two NATOs to go with them and new batteries, took out the stitching out of the NATO, because as usually they were way too short, restitched them, Now I got two white faced, with black indicators, silvery-metal watches with date even, new that watch is 50€ lucky me :) I looked them up.. They are quartz watches so they tell time perfectly. How about doing a show about affordable watches for people with no money to spend???
The Nautilus is supposed to look like an old school diver's helmet from the Jules Verne novel 20,000 "Leagues under the Sea". I don't find it hideous but I think that Gerald Genta missed the mark a bit. No comparison to the Royal Oak, which is perfectly designed and also has a nice backstory.
As I agree about the milgauss in a in a technically way. The resistance to a magnetic field rating of 1000 is by far more than any normal person would not need. More because they push it out about how good it is. While Omega can withstand 15000 and actually probably more. In response to companies like Invicta. Not pushing the envelope, is trend I see especially in the Microbrand community. I'm hoping that my Microbrand company I own and design for, buck the trend by my current watch design. I'm attempting to add a 5 hrz movement along with the first Microbrand to bring a minute repeater to the table. A truly lofty goal. 👍
After seeing an acquaintance's fake Nautilus, it's frankly grown on me. I think the case shape works better in person. Worst watch? Definitely not. Still probably prefer the Royal Oak myself, though neither would be my pick if either were in my price range.
I love the Milgauss and hate the Breitling Chronomat and IWC Ingenieur. The modern iterations are slightly better, but still hate them, especially for the price. Don't @ me.
😂😂😂 that purple Invicta is a great example of a bad watch. The other watches on this list, even the Milgauss, I think have a place because they do follow a concept, which means they include an honest message and therefore have restraint. But bad design, like the purple Invicta, dont carry any coherent message, are created by lunatic individuals, probably drug-addicts and are therefore basically the equivalent of finger-painting in watch form. The purple invicta is like listening to a homeless person tell a story with sounds for about 5 minutes.
I think the RM watches are cool mechanically but hideous, the nautilus is boring, the invictas are gawdy. Don’t get me going on the moonswatch and the ridiculous colors and price tag
I've tried on a 5711 before, and wasn't really that impressed or blown away, very thin and well made, but didn't strike me in any way. For 100k i'd go with a Tourbillion or some other impressive complication watch.
What about doing a review on the Cyrus brand of watches they are very stylish and innovative also hard to come by in North America 1-2 dealers I think not 100% sure on that. If I could afford to buy an expensive watch this is what I’d spend my money on. The Cyrus Klepcys Vertical Skeleton Tourbillon Watch 👍😊😘
