robinbarke wrote:Are we being asked because of an increasing number of watches being returned with a damaged crown?
Is an independent forum the place for the company to conduct its market research?
Robin
It is nothing more than a simple question, related to design, that was being discussed between Fraser and Chris and came up during the chat. Chris was interested in our overall opinion.
Kip
"Asylum Administrator"
Visit the CWArchives for everything CW. Historical, specs, manuals and resale. It is all there.
tempusmaximus wrote:I think you should have crown guards on sport watches to offer the crown some protection ,but on dress watches like the c20 I would not ..at the moment I would leave them as they are!
I agree with this, C60, C700, C40, and C7/70 are spot on, but not for dress watches.
+ 1
I checked the contents of my watch box and as above, the C7, C40 and C60 have crown guards of one form or another. They look fine and the crown guards are appropriate.
Looking at my C9 and C8 / C11 (don't have a C20) and IMHO pilot and dress watches should be 'naked'.
Guy
In small proportions, we just beautie see:
And in short measures, life may perfect bee. - Ben Jonson (1572 – 1637)
Inscription on the Longitude Dial
Hatfield House, Hatfield, Hertfordshire AL9 5NB, England
lloyd_m wrote:Personally, I've yet to see a watch with a crown guard that I like. They just look plain ugly IMO. Here's an example, Ball Hydrocarbon
:
This looks asymmetrical and clunky; it would look a lot better without a guard at all.
I disagree the crown guard looks good and substantial giving full protection to the crown on a obvious sports watch .when doing any sporting activity you wouldn't be worrying about knocking the crown and damaging it just my opinion
lloyd_m wrote:Personally, I've yet to see a watch with a crown guard that I like. They just look plain ugly IMO. Here's an example, Ball Hydrocarbon
:
This looks asymmetrical and clunky; it would look a lot better without a guard at all.
I don't find that my Ball with the crown guard looks unbalanced although to be fair, it looks from your pic as if the newer Hydrocarbons have guards that extend out even more to cover the full thickness of the crown, and they have lost the bar "lock" on mine that swings down to click into place around the crown stem.
In real life, my crown guard + lock works well and is unfussy.
I like them, and it's good that CWL are asking for our opinion on this.
They provide additional style and function, HOWEVER, they should only be considered as part of the overall design of a watch, not just releasing existing designs with crown guards - as these inevitably (I assume) have been designed to have a great balanced design/feel/look without a guard.
So I'd love to see a new watch from CWL, that benefits from the additional 'heft' and chunkiness that a crown guard offers. The emphasis there being a new watch design, as let's be honest, chucking a crown guard on an existing popular design is bound to offend/annoy some people!
I am in favour, though I think the C11 case would become to cumbersome with guards. If there was to be a sportier version of the C20 released then I think they would be a nice addition. Putting them on the right style of watch though is important. Dress watches are a no no…
triffidman wrote:I like them, and it's good that CWL are asking for our opinion on this.
They provide additional style and function, HOWEVER, they should only be considered as part of the overall design of a watch, not just releasing existing designs with crown guards - as these inevitably (I assume) have been designed to have a great balanced design/feel/look without a guard.
So I'd love to see a new watch from CWL, that benefits from the additional 'heft' and chunkiness that a crown guard offers. The emphasis there being a new watch design, as let's be honest, chucking a crown guard on an existing popular design is bound to offend/annoy some people!
I think this is the crucial point, the crownguard has to be an integral part of a design, not just a "bolt on" afterthought.