Black looks very good. I think the bezel markings work better than I first thought too. It really is a strong design overall.

I just looked at the black version and I prefer the silver version, which is typical of my taste. Oddly, I don't like the strap on the silver version, but I do like the one on the black version. I hope Chris will offer either strap for either version. To me, the black strap's buckle looks more substantial than the silver strap's buckle (which looks cheap to me). It must just be the angle and proximity though because the shape looks the same.

I don't really like it. To me, it looks more like a Nautica you'd see at a midlevel department store than a high end watch. Especially if it's quartz. The design is just very busy, and the bezel really adds to the cheap look. For me, the best part about CW's current line is that it could pass for a $1,000+ watch (very clean, classy design, automatic, high quality, display back, etc). This watch looks like the K-Mart special for $39.99. I'm sorry Chris.

Something to add...

Like I said before, this watch is just over complicated to the point of being ostentatious. Look at a company like Panerai... They make big, fancy, "macho" looking watches ready for battle, which seems to be the general goal with the watch. However, they do it in a classy, understated way. This Peregrine is just gaudy. To me, the Peregrine is like a Honda Civic with a lime green paint job, a large spoiler, and a tasteless bodykit. Yes, it looks sporty, but it's also quite gaudy and not really something you'd want to drive. Something like a Panerai is more like a Porsche. Somehow it looks MORE sporty without the wings, paints, neons, etc.

I suppose this Peregrine is probably more similar to a Breitling. Although many Breitlings are quite gaudy, they seem to do it with a little more style than the Peregrine.

There are so many things I dislike. The silver subdials on the black face, the numbers/markers, the bezel, the supersize glow strips on the hands, etc...

My suggestion would be to just simplify the whole thing. Make the face one color (subdials included). Smooth out the bezel. Take off the lume stripes on the hands, or if you must keep them, make them much smaller. Redesign the hour markers, again, simplify them. And of course, make it mechanical! I think people are willing to pay an extra $50-100 (or whatever it costs) for a mechanical.

It's not all bad though. I like the design of the seconds hand, and the strap fits the character of the watch well. The double clasp peice seems like a good idea, assuming it doesn't make it more difficult to get it on/off, so kudos on that. The hands are a nice design as well. I also like all of the complications and subdials of the watch, if you could just find a more attractive way to display them.

I'm sorry for being negative and harsh, but as an enthusiastic CW fan and owner, I feel it is my duty!

It looks like a damn Nautica!

Obviously, not every watch in a company's lineup is meant for everyone.

Questions: Who do you think this new watch is for? Based on your assumption, do you think this watch is appropriate for the intended audience?

Let's have some serious discussion because there seems to be quite a bit of dissapointment with the new design.

For instance, I see this watch mostly as a fun and sporty watch to wear on the weekend. It's plenty loud with assorted doodads one might use while traveling.

I think I feel a poll coming on.

El Tiempo

Good question. As I mentioned above I had the impression it isn't for my demographic. My guess is that the market for quartz chronos is quite possibly teenagers and young adults. Chronos have that gee whizz factor that all guys seem to like (with features most probably use only occasionally after the first month). Chronos also make more of a splash in a youthful sort of way. So I guess it might be about the same market as a Casio G Schock but a bit less "homey". With the aviator cues it might be a slightly more sophisticated G shock sort of market.

Having said all that the next question is how well would it appeal? Hmmm... I would want to take it out and ask a few. It is a pretty cool looking watch on its own terms and so I suspect it could go down well.

The Malvern is more my taste and its not like the Peregrine. The Malvern is loaded with features for the money, which got my attention, but the general appearance - balanced, refined and well considered - worked for me straight away. I had looked admiringly at other classic watches such as Portofinos etc and one of my 1960s watches has similar hands and dial engraving. I could see the heritage elements in the Malvern straight away and liked how well they were incorporated into a contemporary design. The build quality just reinforced the first good impression.

One of the big pluses for me was that it had a traditional three-piece case. This won't be an issue for many people but in my mind it is a starting point for a watch above the budget level. I've since realised that the hand-polishing also gives the sides a lustre that machine polished cases don't have. Cheap cases and large gaps between dial and crystal are some of the budget markers that you often find in this price range.

So the Peregrine and Malvern are very different but I suspect the Peregrine will also feel great in the hand. I hope it is a winner with the target market.

DavidM1 wrote:My guess is that the market for quartz chronos is quite possibly teenagers and young adults. Chronos have that gee whizz factor that all guys seem to like (with features most probably use only occasionally after the first month). Chronos also make more of a splash in a youthful sort of way. So I guess it might be about the same market as a Casio G Schock but a bit less "homey". With the aviator cues it might be a slightly more sophisticated G shock sort of market.

Good call David. Even though I'm not nearly as old as you, the Malvern suits the more refined look I'm looking for these days. The main reason I won't be purchasing this watch is because I already own a sporty, quartz chrono that I purchased, well, in my youth. It'd just be redundant for me. I think a younger guy could definitely rock this watch and look good.

I like the G-Shock comparison because, choosing between the two, I'd go CW all the way. I just don't wear plastic watches.

Youthfully,
El Tiempo

Hey I may be old... but I'm not nearly as old as Bob Demers! (did you catch that Bob?)

With the forum almost entirely populated by people wearing Malverns I guess there are going to be a few of us suggesting cleaner lines for the Peregrine. Something tells me this aint no random sample.

.."not as old as Bob Demers" comment! I've attached a picture of my first watch to give you a real sense of my age. It's accurate to about +/- 20 minutes.

As to the new Perregrine discussion, it's really not "my cup of tea". Like others have said the dial is very "busy". Forty-two mm id too big for my taste. I actually like the black dial prototype of the Malvern Chronograph much better.

What I'm really looking for is a hand-wound Malvern with a power reserve or moon dial complication. Even a plain hand-would Malvern would be great.

I'm not sure who the target market is, but I'm a teenager, and I don't like the looks of the Peregrine at all (reasons listed above). Also, it is quite a large watch, and even the Malvern is a bit large on me, so I don't think a watch of this size would appeal to teenagers. Lastly, very few teens would pay what the CW costs (although around $200 is quite low in the watch world, not many teenagers are willing to spend this on a watch), especially without a more prestigious name (Tag Heuer and Rolex seems to be the watch of choice for most teens).

If it doesn't appeal to the older guys here, nor the younger ones (me), then who does it appeal to? It's an ugly watch, simple as that.

I think it (the silver one) is very handsome. Sure, if I had control over it, I would make some tweaks, but cosmetically, I find it appealing. To me, the deal breaker would be a quartz movement. For my interest, it must be mechanical (preferably automatic), and it must have an exhibition back.

What i would like CW to make:

Name suggestion: The Malvern II

- different color leater strap(with stitches perhaps)
- dial color white.
- no 'outer' ring like on the malvern. The dial must be 1 whole.
- blued hands
- size a little bigger about 40 mm.
- another ETA movement(2824/2836) or a handwound movement like a ETA 2801.

I think a Malvern II like this would hit the market like a bomb. What i described above is basically just a improved malvern and i would buy it immediately even if it was 200 british pounds.

But i wonder, is CW going to make something like this again? We have only seen new quartz models, which i also like, but no new mechanical one yet. I thought the malvern was a succes...

MYND wrote:What i would like CW to make:

Name suggestion: The Malvern II

- different color leater strap(with stitches perhaps)
- dial color white.
- no 'outer' ring like on the malvern. The dial must be 1 whole.
- blued hands
- size a little bigger about 40 mm.
- another ETA movement(2824/2836) or a handwound movement like a ETA 2801.

I think a Malvern II like this would hit the market like a bomb. What i described above is basically just a improved malvern and i would buy it immediately even if it was 200 british pounds.

But i wonder, is CW going to make something like this again? We have only seen new quartz models, which i also like, but no new mechanical one yet. I thought the malvern was a succes...

While what you say isn't quite what I'd do, I definately think your idea is more of the right direction than what CW seems to be taking, IMO of course. The only thing I'm thinking is that with a size that big and a completely plain dial, it might be a little bit too flat and plain. I think some stylized Roman Numerals would do the trick nicely, however.

Honestly though, that sounds REALLY nice. White face w/ black roman numerals, blued hands, mechanical w/ exhibition back, leather strap... it would all come together and make a classic and sophisticated timepiece.

KevRC4130 wrote:Honestly though, that sounds REALLY nice. White face w/ black roman numerals, blued hands, mechanical w/ exhibition back, leather strap... it would all come together and make a classic and sophisticated timepiece.

Make that applied (preferably gold) Roman numerals on a guilloche white dial, and automatic, and we have a deal.

joerattz wrote:

KevRC4130 wrote:Honestly though, that sounds REALLY nice. White face w/ black roman numerals, blued hands, mechanical w/ exhibition back, leather strap... it would all come together and make a classic and sophisticated timepiece.

Make that applied (preferably gold) Roman numerals on a guilloche white dial, and automatic, and we have a deal.

I think I'd prefer black roman numerals, but yes, we would have a deal