It’s only a colour…

Some time ago, I decided that I was going to add a red Submariner to my collection. I commenced my search, and indeed sold a lovely white 1680 in order to bolster my funds in readiness. I came very, very close to snagging one on a few occasions, but each time there was something preventing me from completing.

I’ve come to realise that The Hunt for Red Submariner may in fact take some time. In the interim, I’ve been missing the 1680 that I let go, so when I inadvertently stumbled across an absolute beauty across the pond I had to buy it.

My first non-date Sub

I’ve had loads of Submariners, but for some reason never a non-date. I came across this 5513 from 1978 and thought it was about time to put that right!

Speedmaster Mk II racing dial

Just because it’s beautiful.

If Carlsberg made watches…

I think this may be the nicest watch I’ve owned. No, it is the nicest.

The ONLY Breitling…

I find the general love of all things Breitling a bit mystifying, if I’m honest. Whilst I don’t doubt their quality for a moment, I really haven’t seen many that I like and most are simply far too blingy for an old fart/traditionalist like me.

That said, there’s always been one exception, or if not always then for the last few months at least, and that’s the Navitimer. Within the iconic watch hierarchy I believe it holds a place very near the top, and some time ago I decided that I needed to get my hands on a vintage 806 variant that would fill my Breitling void absolutely perfectly.

This is an absolute beauty – a 2nd Generation 806 from 1966/7. Not really the best photos as I broke a light just before shooting them, but with a couple more en-route further and better pictures will follow! Naturally…

Playing with light

One completely dark room. One spotlight. Four watches.

Tick tock…

There are those who feel that to add a battery to the intricate assembly of springs and cogs of which a watch movement is comprised is to somehow dilute the magic. To lessen the art of the watchmaker. I understand that feeling, but am also able to embrace the hybrid technology of HEQ – the High End Quartz. When it’s wrapped up in the kind of package that Rolex produced as their one and only quartz offering, embracing it becomes rather easy, in fact.

This is the second quartz watch in my collection, the other being an Omega Megaquartz from the mid-seventies. Both somehow manage to span the decades quite easily, seeming both period and contemporary at the same time. Whenever I get a new watch I find myself saying “I love it”… but I love it!

Guest post by Mark McArthur-Christie

Slow Bikes, Old Watches and Soul

It had been quite a day. We’d only ridden just over 160 miles, but through winding, high-banked lanes, over moors and finally down a flaky, clacky shale track that would have given a mountain goat vertigo. And now we’d made it. Tintagel. I climbed off the bike, helped Pip out of the sidecar and leaned back to drink in the view from the clifftop over the Atlantic. The bike ticked and pinged as it cooled in the breeze off the sea.

As I usually do on a trip like this, riding done, I unrolled the Ural’s toolkit on the ground beside the bike, opened a beer and started checking the machine over, part by part. This is therapy and my favourite part of the day. Miles covered, supper and another beer earned and in view and a chance to tinker with the bike as the sun goes down over the sea.

The Ural – my bike and sidecar combination – rewards care. Without it, she’ll sulk, get upset, run badly. With it, she’s happy and runs with the same unstoppable precision as a vintage caliber 1560. She’s a high-maintenance girl. But she’s far from sophisticated. An antique horizontally-opposed 650 pushrod twin, barely making 40 horsepower. Carbs, not injectors. Cable brakes, no hydraulics. Plenty of milled steel and no plastic at all. She’s slow, needs fear-assistance to make the brakes work, struggles on hills and gets out-dragged by pizzaboys on mopeds, but she’s a proper motorcycle. A motorcycle with soul.

What on earth does that mean? What’s ‘soul’? How can an inanimate machine have ‘soul’? Plenty of people talk about it – in Watchland as well as Bikeland. A 1964 1016 Explorer has soul. A G-Shock doesn’t. A classic Laverda Jota has it, a new GSXR600 doesn’t. But perhaps soul is more about time and our relationship with something than the thing itself. For a start, we make the inanimate animate; petrol and a kickstart for a bike, our own movement for a mechanical watch. A watch that only ever needs a battery every five years doesn’t allow that interaction. A hyper-efficient Japanese superbike that is only ever serviced by a computer-wielding white coat is far more competent than its rider, but that very competence keeps him at a distance.

My most competent watch is easily my Breitling Aerospace. It’s gained just three seconds in six months, so it never needs setting unless I’m feeling more OCD than usual. It can wake me up, precisely measure my morning run (and subsequently accurately time my breakfast eggs), tell me the exact time in Tokyo and its titanium case keeps it waterproof to deeper depths than I’ll ever plumb. I hardly ever wear it.

Instead, I’ll pick up my old Explorer I, a Timefactors PRS3 or my favourite – my IWC Mk XII. They’re all less accurate. All they’ll tell me is the time-ish (although the Rolex is frighteningly accurate for a 40-year old watch) and that’s it. They’re heavier, clunkier, less accurate and much simpler. But they allow me a level of interaction that the Aero simply doesn’t. When the Aero dies, I have to buy a battery. When my mechanical watches stop, they need movement – mine – to make them live again. I need to interact with them to re-set them once the energy of the mainspring has lapsed. And I like that, because that interaction gives me a sense of relationship that the Brietling and its quartz cousins just doesn’t.

Photo & Video Sharing by SmugMug

And maybe the very lack of precision and presence of faults is part of this relationship, this attribution of soul. We’re not precise animals. We don’t always do the same things in the same ways, react consistently and we change our minds. Something more organic, more flexible just fits us better than something with the hard edges of absolute accuracy. It’s why a Cotswold village’s higgledy architecture and meandering lanes is more comfortable than the ruler-edges of the town planner’s gleaming flats and open boulevards.

For me, there’s a lesson here. And that’s that human beings are best when they’re allowed and left to be human. Because we’re designed to harness our imprecise, organic, chaotic humanity and turn it into creativity. And the more precise, hard-edged and controlled we’re made to be, the worse we run. So I’m finishing this here so I can bugger off and do something irrationally human, like go and check the valve clearances on the Ural. After all, I haven’t done it for at least a week.

Siblings

So, the 1665 and 1675… two absolute beauties, but are they comparable?

I was blown away when I put the 1665 on my wrist. It’s hefty but comfortable, and the dome gives it a really wonderful appearance, complimenting the perfect dial and hands. Compared to the many Subs I’ve owned, it’s in a different league altogether.

However…

I’ve had a lot of watches, and some very nice one’s, it has to be said. None of them – and I think that includes the 1665, if I’m honest – get close to the gilt GMT. It’s by far the most beautiful watch I’ve ever had on my wrist, and if I take just one watch to my grave, I hope that this will be the one.

I should regard them, I guess, as investments but – if that’s indeed what they are – they’re investments that will be worn, and worn a lot.

Here they are together.

“You’ll never go in the water again…”

I’ve watched Jaws too many times for comfort and always enjoy it! Well, not so much now, but then it was made in 1975! Cue more vintage loveliness, then…

The Sea Dweller needs no introduction, but this one is a 1665 “Great White” dating back to 1982. The model was actually released in the mid-70’s, still with the tried and tested 1575 engine of its predecessors but with all-white dial lettering.

Sporting a magnificent NOS Tropic 39SuperDome crystal to set off a perfect dial, hands and case this example really is something rather lovely. It certainly has phenomenal wrist presence – I’m not sure if it’s the domed crystal that does it, but the moment you put it on you know that you’ve got a watch on your wrist.

I love it, and I can barely believe that I’ve picked up both this and a gilt GMT in the space of a week.

Night and day

I do love the 1675 with the black bezel insert, as it matches the beautiful black gloss dial so well. However, it wasn’t available as an option until the early 70’s and therefore wouldn’t have been fitted from/as new. I also quite fancy something that’s instantly distinguishable from my 1680.

Only one solution, really…

Sexy sixties

I have to say to begin with that I don’t really have, or “do” grails. I should probably qualify that by adding that there are watches that I’d really like to own, and perhaps a Rolex 5517 or even a nice old Panerai 6152 fit that bill, but there are lots of others that fall somewhere in between “nice to own” and those I’d give my right arm for.

Closer to the latter than the former would be the GMT-Master 1675, launched in 1960 as a successor to the 6542. Whilst the watch lost out to Omega in the famed NASA moon watch tests the fact remains that a number of the Apollo astronauts opted for the GMT because the Speedy was simply impossible to operate whilst wearing bulky space suit gloves.

Prior to that (in fact, as soon is it was launched in 1954) the 6542 had been adopted by Pan Am as their official watch for pilots and aircrew. In fact it was soon similarly adopted by many of the world’s airlines such that, in 1960, Rolex claimed that it was actually the timepiece of choice for 20 out of 21 cockpit navigators. In other words, the GMT-Master of the 50’s and 60’s has a genuine and rich heritage behind it that justifies its place in any vintage collection.

I love the GMT – even the more recent ones – and have been on the lookout for a nice old one for quite a while. To find one from 1963 (1.1m serial with IV 63 stamped inner case back) that’s in absolutely fantastic condition; that has a perfect glossy, deep black gilt dial with crisp, sharp lettering; that sports the much sought-after pointed crown guards; and that has the most perfectly-matched, creamy yellow hour markers and hands, together with the small GMT hour hand; was an opportunity that proved completely irresistible. So, after an agonising wait of 3 or 4 days (which seemed more like 3 or 4 weeks) this is what landed earlier today.

The watch was serviced in 2003 and 2009 but still has a marvellously fat case that’s completely corrosion-free. To say that I love it would be to call the Mona Lisa a good drawing.

In fact, not unlike the aforementioned astronauts, I’m over the moon!

Bring on the quartz…

Well, Megaquartz, actually. I was lucky enough to pick up this Cal. 1310 F32 Seamaster, NOS from 1976, as an exchange for a modern Tag, meaning that I now have no modern watches at all. (In fact, I’ve had to buy another G in case I’m doing something… I don’t know. Rough?!)

These are pretty rare beasts, especially in this kind of condition. In fact, my 70’s Omega collection seems to be growing nicely!

Speedy Mk II on mesh

I do love this watch, but I’ve been hankering after a mesh bracelet for it for ages. The lug style is a perfect match for it, in fact, and last night I got my hands on one.

It was fitted within nanoseconds, and won’t be coming off any time soon.

Fit for a King

I’ve always thought that the Air-King is a hugely under-rated watch. Its simplicity is a joy, and although the 34mm case is considered small these days it actually makes the watch incredibly versatile. Dress it up and it’s the perfect dress watch; dress it down and you can wear it with jeans or shorts.

With this in mind, when an example comes along that dates back to 1970 but looks like it left the Rolex factory only yesterday, the decision to buy is quite an easy one. You can see why from the photos, and now I’m searching for an authentic bracelet – possibly a rivet bracelet, in fact – to pair it with.

The force is strong in this one…

Lately, I’ve been having a bit of a love affair with Omega’s from the ’70’s. In terms of design, I think it was the high-point of watchmaking and even though I wasn’t always an Omega fan I have always felt that they were at the forefront back then.

Following the recent acquisition of my Bienne-restored Mk II, when a similarly gorgeous Seamaster 145.024 became available the prospect of having a matching pair from 1972, both in pristine condition, was overwhelming. The two together are, frankly, amazing.

There’s been a fair amount of confusion regarding terminology surrounding this watch, but I think it’s safe to say that it’s the real “Jedi”. certainly, Chuck Maddox thought so when he wrote about it here. It’s rare, and it’s a fantastic addition to my existing vintage pieces.

I’m on cloud nine.