Which Design Elements Do You Not Care For On A Vintage Watch?

Posts
9,896
Likes
56,007
For me, other than on my Speedmasters, it's baton style hands. I just find them . . . boring.
 
Posts
1,372
Likes
2,000
Dunno if this is design or construction, but anything less than a full stainless steel case is usually enough for me to toss a watch from consideration.
 
Posts
8,833
Likes
73,404
Dunno if this is design or construction, but anything less than a full stainless steel case is usually enough for me to toss a watch from consideration.

I still have 4/5 gold/capped/plated watches - acquired early on in my addiction - but I now, like you, only consider full stainless steel.
 
Posts
1,932
Likes
4,966
I’m not a big fan of date windows unless they are discrete or don’t bugger up the symmetry of the dials … and don’t get me started on Cyclopes … the more apt nomenclature here would be browneye
 
Posts
9,896
Likes
56,007
I’m not a big fan of date windows unless they are discrete or don’t bugger up the symmetry of the dials … and don’t get me started on Cyclopes … the more apt nomenclature here would be browneye
Completely agree on the cyclops. I'm not a Rolex fan generally, but that particular feature ruins the dial for me.
 
Posts
8,156
Likes
28,774
I could compile a (vintage only) list, so let's get started...

1) mixing Roman and Arabic numerals on a dial
2) recessed crowns that are difficult to manipulate (most)
3) embossed indices (though a few, e.g. IWC, were very well executed)
4) lugs that feature no demarcation between them and the top of the case
5) high-polished case backs (they scratch much too easily), e.g. Longines Silver Arrow
 
Posts
843
Likes
6,732
Dynamic's funky case. I just can't. Which is a shame because I think these have very cool dials.

Omega_Dynamic_1970-3.jpg
 
Posts
1,932
Likes
4,966
Yeah, awful
Dynamic's funky case. I just can't. Which is a shame because I think these have very cool dials.

Omega_Dynamic_1970-3.jpg
 
Posts
6,305
Likes
21,492
Out of balance crowns, which can be too large but are generally too small. Not only do they look frail and appear to be an afterthought, they can feel tinny and be difficult to use for winding or adjusting the watch.
 
Posts
1,076
Likes
1,787
Front loader, the watches without case backs that require removal of crystal, split stem to access the movements
 
Posts
1,567
Likes
12,408
4) lugs that feature no demarcation between them and the top of the case

This +1
 
Posts
2,895
Likes
4,627
Never cared for Torneu barrel shaped cases. Reminds me of what I did not like about the 1970s.

-j
 
Posts
843
Likes
6,732
4) lugs that feature no demarcation between them and the top of the case

I'm not sure I understand. Let's see some illuminating examples of this feature.
 
Posts
6,801
Likes
54,022
Date features, especially if in combination with day features. A few live here, but they are not my favorites. A date feature causes an otherwise appealing dial to appear as if it has an ulcerated sore.

herpes-labialis-symptoms_1024x1024.jpg

Besides which, I never consult the day date features, but feel compelled to set the silly things if I don a watch having them. They're just fiddly and pointless for my purposes.





Round watches look honest, open, and happy. All other watch shapes look a bit devious or sinister somehow.



Only two on hand that aren't round.