If money were no object, which aviator watch would you wear?
- Thread starter franknyc
- Start date
TFaudree_ERAU
Mashin' dem buttons
Re: If money were no object, which aviator watch would you w
So a Casio is just as reliable as a Citizen or Breitling. I find that hard to believe.
I like my Citizen Skyhawk AT because I a) will never have to change the battery and b) will never have to set it, so long as WWVB keeps broadcasting. I'd be willing to bet the price of the watch that I'll pass it on to my grandson some day. I doubt I'd have the pleasure of doing that if it were a $12 Casio from Wal-Mart.
So a Casio is just as reliable as a Citizen or Breitling. I find that hard to believe.
I like my Citizen Skyhawk AT because I a) will never have to change the battery and b) will never have to set it, so long as WWVB keeps broadcasting. I'd be willing to bet the price of the watch that I'll pass it on to my grandson some day. I doubt I'd have the pleasure of doing that if it were a $12 Casio from Wal-Mart.
JoelT
Well-Known Member
Re: If money were no object, which aviator watch would you w
Any of the G-Shocks will out-live pretty much any watch out there. The resin strap might start to fade but, that is easily replaced. You could bang on mine with a sledge hammer and it would not phase it. There is video out there of a steam-roller running over one and it hardly had a scratch. Plus with wavecepter (atomic) and solar they have just as much capability as your Skyhawk AT.
Here is the one I have: GW5600 (I like the retro look).
Any of the G-Shocks will out-live pretty much any watch out there. The resin strap might start to fade but, that is easily replaced. You could bang on mine with a sledge hammer and it would not phase it. There is video out there of a steam-roller running over one and it hardly had a scratch. Plus with wavecepter (atomic) and solar they have just as much capability as your Skyhawk AT.
Here is the one I have: GW5600 (I like the retro look).
Acadia
Well-Known Member
Re: If money were no object, which aviator watch would you w
My Timex uses the same charging system as the eco drive, keeps time to within .02 seconds a month, and cost $50. It also has five alarms and two time zones.
Not saying other people shouldn't get nice watches, but I would still get a cheap watch if money was no object.
My Timex uses the same charging system as the eco drive, keeps time to within .02 seconds a month, and cost $50. It also has five alarms and two time zones.
Not saying other people shouldn't get nice watches, but I would still get a cheap watch if money was no object.
Acadia
Well-Known Member
Re: If money were no object, which aviator watch would you w
No doubt! I have an old one that I wore from 1988-2001, and that includes literally thousands of days of climbing, sailing, biking, and boarding with it. It is still going strong and fully functional, but I have beat up the display so badly it is a little hard to read in glare.
No doubt! I have an old one that I wore from 1988-2001, and that includes literally thousands of days of climbing, sailing, biking, and boarding with it. It is still going strong and fully functional, but I have beat up the display so badly it is a little hard to read in glare.
flyboywbl
3rd regional in 1 year
Re: If money were no object, which aviator watch would you w
I have the Rolex GMT Master II. I love it but it's heavy. Not to mention that you have to send it away to be cleaned every 5-6 years. That runs about $600 bucks so i've heard. Not sure yet, I've only had it for 6 months. I have the bare bones black on black one in stainless steel. I really like it though. It keeps amazing time and you never have to change the battery. My wife gave it to me. I probably would not of gone out and bought one my self. If money was no object i would get this one for around $66,000. I can't imagine spending that amount of coin on a watch though. I'd rather have an older Cub or 172. Though you don't have to put gas in the watch. but you can't build hours in it either
.
,
This is the one i have. I wanted to get one with blue and red (the original one for the Pan-Am pilots) on the bezel but they started making the bezel out of ceramic and they said they can't make two different colors any more. They actually shoot atoms of Platinum onto the ceramic to make the grey numbers in the bezel. As cool as that is it is kind of an expensive hunk of stainless steel.
I have the Rolex GMT Master II. I love it but it's heavy. Not to mention that you have to send it away to be cleaned every 5-6 years. That runs about $600 bucks so i've heard. Not sure yet, I've only had it for 6 months. I have the bare bones black on black one in stainless steel. I really like it though. It keeps amazing time and you never have to change the battery. My wife gave it to me. I probably would not of gone out and bought one my self. If money was no object i would get this one for around $66,000. I can't imagine spending that amount of coin on a watch though. I'd rather have an older Cub or 172. Though you don't have to put gas in the watch. but you can't build hours in it either
.
This is the one i have. I wanted to get one with blue and red (the original one for the Pan-Am pilots) on the bezel but they started making the bezel out of ceramic and they said they can't make two different colors any more. They actually shoot atoms of Platinum onto the ceramic to make the grey numbers in the bezel. As cool as that is it is kind of an expensive hunk of stainless steel.