What CW would you get next?

Discuss Christopher Ward watches

Which watch?

A different Malvern auto.
1
9%
Malvern chrono.
1
9%
Peregrine.
1
9%
Corax.
0
No votes
Aviator.
8
73%
A ladies watch.
0
No votes
 
Total votes: 11

User avatar
El Tiempo
Senior Guru
Senior Guru
Posts: 785
Joined: Sat Dec 24, 2005 12:53 am
CW-watches: 0
Location: Parts Unknown

What CW would you get next?

Post by El Tiempo »

Okay, so we all grabbed a Malvern early on because, you know, we're smart. What with the addition of many new models over the past few months, which one has caught your attention the most?
Post which options you want.
carman63
Senior
Senior
Posts: 197
Joined: Sun Aug 06, 2006 8:38 pm

Malvern Chronograph

Post by carman63 »

Hi all,

First post here :D Just got my Malvern in the mail yesterday, and am already looking at my next purchase. I'm seriously considering the Malvern Chronograph, blue face/black strap. The Malvern I picked up has a cream face/brown leather band. I like the classic looks :D

-Jim
Warhol
Senior
Senior
Posts: 114
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2006 9:23 pm
CW-watches: 0
Location: Bodegraven, The Netherlands

Post by Warhol »

If I buy another CW it'll be a Aviator. I think it's a bit expensive though, when I look at what I've paid for my Malvern... But we'll see.
joerattz
Senior Forumgod
Senior Forumgod
Posts: 1279
Joined: Tue Jan 03, 2006 9:34 pm
CW-watches: 8
Location: Alpharetta, GA

Looks like the mechanicals are dominating

Post by joerattz »

I am not surprised to see the mechanicals/automatics dominating though. You can buy a lot of decent watches in the same price range as the CW's if you go quartz. Seiko and Citizen make a boatload of them. So, I can't see myself ordering one of the quartz watches. Plus, I still have to admit, when it comes to quartz, the Japanese have the most experience, so they SHOULD be able to make the better quartz module. That of course doesn't mean they will, but they should be able to, were they to choose to.

So, has anyone ordered an Aviator yet?
joerattz
Senior Forumgod
Senior Forumgod
Posts: 1279
Joined: Tue Jan 03, 2006 9:34 pm
CW-watches: 8
Location: Alpharetta, GA

Expensive Compared To What?

Post by joerattz »

Warhol wrote:I think it's a bit expensive though, when I look at what I've paid for my Malvern... But we'll see.
Yes, compared to your Malvern, then yes, almost any watch with an automatic movement is expensive if you got yours for the 99 pound price. Let's face it, where else can you get a watch with an ETA-2824 for that price. It was a bargain at that price. I knew it. Based purely on color preference, I would have preferred to wait for one of the newer MAs, the one with the gold color. I talked with Chris about it, and I sensed a higher price coming. Ultimately, I decided that at 99 pounds, the existing one was too much of a bargain to pass up. Plus, I was new to watches and it seemed like such a great deal to break into the watch game with. And, if I liked the gold one enough, I would buy one of them too when they were ready. However, since then, the Aviator has caught my eye!

But, I still think the Aviator is a pretty good buy. I don't see very many ETA-2824s out there for less.
Warhol
Senior
Senior
Posts: 114
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2006 9:23 pm
CW-watches: 0
Location: Bodegraven, The Netherlands

Re: Expensive Compared To What?

Post by Warhol »

joerattz wrote:
Warhol wrote:I think it's a bit expensive though, when I look at what I've paid for my Malvern... But we'll see.
Yes, compared to your Malvern, then yes, almost any watch with an automatic movement is expensive if you got yours for the 99 pound price. Let's face it, where else can you get a watch with an ETA-2824 for that price. It was a bargain at that price. I knew it. Based purely on color preference, I would have preferred to wait for one of the newer MAs, the one with the gold color. I talked with Chris about it, and I sensed a higher price coming. Ultimately, I decided that at 99 pounds, the existing one was too much of a bargain to pass up. Plus, I was new to watches and it seemed like such a great deal to break into the watch game with. And, if I liked the gold one enough, I would buy one of them too when they were ready. However, since then, the Aviator has caught my eye!

But, I still think the Aviator is a pretty good buy. I don't see very many ETA-2824s out there for less.
Still I think it's too expensive if you compare it to what I paid for my Malvern: one of the big advantages of CW is that his watches are inexpensive. Now he's making them more expensive and with that CW is becoming more and more like other brands.
In a few years we probably have to pay for a CW what we pay for other similar watches right now. When that happens CW is really a lot less attractive..

On top of that, I like the Aviator, but the Malvern is nicer and more original...
joerattz
Senior Forumgod
Senior Forumgod
Posts: 1279
Joined: Tue Jan 03, 2006 9:34 pm
CW-watches: 8
Location: Alpharetta, GA

Re: Expensive Compared To What?

Post by joerattz »

Warhol wrote:Still I think it's too expensive if you compare it to what I paid for my Malvern:
Don't get me wrong, the higher the ratio of quality to price, the more I like it. But, even at the newer prices, there just aren't a lot of alternatives that are less expensive. If you know of any, please post them because I would love to see them.
Warhol
Senior
Senior
Posts: 114
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2006 9:23 pm
CW-watches: 0
Location: Bodegraven, The Netherlands

Re: Expensive Compared To What?

Post by Warhol »

joerattz wrote:
Warhol wrote:Still I think it's too expensive if you compare it to what I paid for my Malvern:
Don't get me wrong, the higher the ratio of quality to price, the more I like it. But, even at the newer prices, there just aren't a lot of alternatives that are less expensive. If you know of any, please post them because I would love to see them.
That's not really the point.
I agree with you that CWs are still quite inexpensive.. but they'll get more expensive and that's not a good sign of you ask me.