Three On Three: Dress Watches Under $20,000 

They really meant it in this vid when they said if they had $20K, that they would "invest" in a Chronometre Bleu.

I came back to this video laughing too lol

😭

This is a strong contender for comment of the year.

Fusion ha

Lmao

it really is

+Abhishek Srivastava its just on another level really

Delage Eric hipsters are people too, i think :D

Delage Eric Delage my dear foe... How do you do ?

Fletcher DeMaine Why Yes, that's correct! They're all based on the Milhouse Van Houten fambly.

Sweater + glasses = watch expert. Bonus points for selvedge jeans and killer collection of vinyl. :)

you glassist

It's a $100k watch now.

I noticed that as well. Being a 'watch aficionado' he should have known better

Amen.

That should have no negative affects on the staff (so long as you aren't on an African Safari, roller coaster, or participating in another vigorous activity) If anything you MIGHT break the stem (which could have been what you meant).

Karson Barnes Then, you should contact Patek Philippe and explain them to take off this comment from their manuals.

LackadaisicalE they're not on the same level of what these guys are talking about tho. They make a point to show what the best options are with a decent but not crazy amount of budget-$20k.

The watches in the video are on a level on which look of the watch is an smaller factor compared to the pure mechanics of the watch, of course at that price everything is a consideration, and of course they are also limiting to what it can be buy new at the time of the video

mepicaeltrasero I understand that, but any list of suggested dress watches under 20k or so, has to include ATLEAST Omega. An Omega dress watch from the 40-50s is better looking than most, comparable to Vacheron Contantin dress watches in looks ( they actually look better than any VC, Patek, JlC etc dress watch, but ofc not in value of precious metals or finish in mechanics. But then again, you wont find a Vacheron Constantin dress watch for that price.) For a dress watch, you can never beat small, super simple, and super thin. A large dial, gaudy colours, an abundance of details, metal bracelet, any of that is a mistake in a classic dress watch. With dress watches, it is 'less is more'. So, if you want to spend 20K on a used dress watch, I think you have to include Omega from back in the day. The restoration will cost you a lot less, they hardly ever need maintainance, and you will still have your colleague in his Breitling, Rolex or other ask you to have a peek and envy its simple, classy design.

lol

LordDavid04 how about another zero?

Timex makes great watches for $50. You can also buy a car for less than a grand. There are price points for everything.

Hamilton makes amazing watches for just under 2K

Longines are the best for under 2k

vai

lol

Because 40mm doesnt make sense for a dresswatch. Dresswatches cant be as large as sportswatches or dive watches. It is ment to be elegant.

kapullas just because you are not a watch geek, it doesn't mean some of us aren't c; I've been saving for 1 year and that constantin looks nice!

The double barrels on the FPJ is for consistent power dispersion, not for maximum power reserve.

F.P.Journe has a LOT of 5 day power reserve automatic models, while Lange has a norm around 70 hours with an exception of 30 day power reserve one but that is a manual winding model and insanely expensive. Does that impair ur "noble German blood" perception?

I know it has been 5 years but the F.P. Journe in this video is going for $40K now.

Wow… I was certainly right about the Journe being worth far more (I see $115k today). So I’ll update my assessment and say the Lange is now the best at this price point.

Exactly!!! Finally someone who understands

+bighands69 The JL is great and I think Chopard LUC is worth considering as well.

JLC pretty high end to me

You need a flux capacitor

Presently 1320€ VAT included in Paris, including case polishing and a new leather strap.

Agreed

Zenih Ultra Thin will beat JLC too for about the same :reason:

fastcougar3200 Not quite as elegant as the JLC. Also, I don't like the 9 o'clock subsecond or the 40mm width. Now if they'd reduce the size to 38mm and moved the subsecond to 6 o'clock, it would still not be as elegant and thin as the JLC.

Noraddin Ghafel Yes, also people in Middle Ages have worn small panties and large boleros around their necks. If you wear those today one's might think you're a clown. Same with the watches or anything related to fashion. Now, who made this rule that a dress watch must be under 40mm? A dwarf? What dress you best is something perfectly proportioned for your wrist so a 44mm Pam will dress for a 8" wrist. A 40mm will have a chance too but for sure no big ones should wear a 37mm dresser in this century.

fastcougar3200 While I do agree on your point made about watches fitting different sized wrists, there are watches that are big for a reason. A diver is big because it's supposed to withstand dings and the likes (that you don't expose your dress watch to), and a bigger/thicker watch will distribute the force of the pressure under water better than a small thin watch. When you make a dresswatch 40mm+ wide, and that's a 3 hand watch that maybe has a date complication, the watch will just look like a dinner plate. This is why I PERSONALLY would never wear a 39mm+ dresswatch, unless it's a chronograph or if it's complicated, (or just really special and unique in its design). Watches aren't fashion, nor are watches classed under jewelry. A watch is an instrument that tells you the time, therefore, function is more important that "what is in". Besides, watches became large in the late 90s/early noughties, and I really believe (and hope) that the craze for oversized time-pieces will eventually die.