Quote:
Originally Posted by kisho
Wow thanks for such a thorough post. I'm liking the Traditional Minimalism examples most, especially the Breguet and the ALS. However, for ALS, I'd choose this Saxonia over the Thin. I must like my numerals over ticks, especially in a stylish typeface like the Breguet.
[pic deleted]
Through my searches, I found that the most expensive watches all have some sort of gold casing. Even the ALS pictured above is in white gold. Are there any benefits from this? Like weight perhaps or is it just for the "bling" factor?
|
Red:
Well, a great many certainly do. One very fine and pricey watch that doesn't is F. P. Journe's Chronometer Bleu. It's case is tantalum, although the movement itself is gold. Tantalum is considerably more scratch and ding resistant than is gold. A fair number of high end watches are offered with platinum cases.
Blue:
While it is true that pure platinum is harder than pure gold, alloyed 18kt white gold is harder than is jewelry grade platinum, which is usually 95% platinum. Platinum, however, is less malleable than is 18kt gold, and so it is a bit better for holding diamonds, and that may yield some benefit if the watch case has diamonds or other stones/objects set into it.
As a practical matter, unlike women's diamond engagement rings, particularly those having solitaire settings, the gemstones set into a watch case won't typically see the same sort of routine "punishment," not only because there isn't usually a lone stone sitting up high with the prongs holding it waiting to catch on and be bent by all manners of things, but also because in the pave setting the stone centers tend to stand higher than do the posts that hold them in place by securing the edges of the stones.
From the consumer's POV, no, there's not really any practical benefit to a watch having a gold case or movement except for watches whose design don't allow the watch to be made water resistant. In general, minute repeaters aren't water resistant (FP Journe's is an exception) because of the pusher that activates the repeater complication. For such watches, having a gold movement helps combat corrosion because corrosive "stuff" is less keen to adhere to gold. The thing is that rhodium plating produces the same benefit and keeps the cost of the movement down. (As go minute repeaters, I have no preference between gold, gold plated or rhodium plated movements.) Outside of that, gold is just a more luxurious/indulgent metal. I suppose if one is allergic to metals other than gold, that's an advantage, but otherwise, no there's no specific benefit that I am aware of.
From the maker/seller's POV, sure, there's a huge benefit: absolute profit. The higher the price of an item, the greater the absolute profit the seller/maker will receive.
Other:
Barring some specific reason to want the gold version of a given watch, if a watch is offered in gold and stainless steel, I'll buy the steel version. I can think of only one watch for which one may prefer the gold version over the steel version and that watch is Arnold & Son's Perpetual Moon. The steel version has a black dial and its Moon disk doesn't have stars on it; the gold versions come either with a cream or cobalt blue dial and the disk does depict stars. Otherwise all three versions are the same, but for, of course, the price.
Moon Disk for the gold versions of the Perpetual Moon
Perpetual Moon
All the best
P.S.
I don't know about you, but I have to look very closely at polished steel, white gold and platinum to discern the difference among them. When the three are side by side, it's not hard to tell. Just looking at a watch or ring by itself at a glance, I pretty consistently can't tell. I can tell yellow or rose/pink gold (or metals plated with those gold colors) fairly easily.