Trident date window.

Discuss Christopher Ward watches
robinbarke
Senior Forumgod
Senior Forumgod
Posts: 2868
Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 7:42 pm
CW-watches: 7
Location: Lower Heyford, Oxon

Re: Trident date window.

Post by robinbarke »

JAG wrote:
robinbarke wrote:Doesn't it strike anyone as odd that in the "final drawings" for the 2012 FLE blue and red the date window is at 4 o'clock. Does anyone wish to suggest, with supporting logic, that the window is better in no man's land?

Robin
The incorrect face dial was used read the FLE Blue what Kip has posted but the FLE,s will have same position as the standard trident :D

View topic/page TOPIC
I think you misunderstand me. I am aware of Kip's message on the 2012 FLE thread. My point was that even in the 'final drawing' of the FLE C60 the drawer intuitively placed the date orifice at 4 o'clock. My question was to invite members to say why they preferred the date in no man's land.

Robin
C9GMT C8 Mk 1 C5 Malvern 2011 C9FLE C50 Malvern COSC C60 FLE2012 2013FLE
Oris Big Crown, Hublot, Rolex Datejust, Nomos Tangomat.


See my book, Aynho Junction, in the News section of http://www.robinbarkerphotography.com
User avatar
downer
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 25482
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2008 11:02 pm
CW-watches: 4
Location: UK

Re: Trident date window.

Post by downer »

robinbarke wrote:Doesn't it strike anyone as odd that in the "final drawings" for the 2012 FLE blue and red the date window is at 4 o'clock. Does anyone wish to suggest, with supporting logic, that the window is better in no man's land?

Robin
The date is at 4 on the drawings because it is an error. CWL used an old drawing as a basis for the FLE drawing. It would have been preferable if that had not happened, but it did, and it is hardly a show-stopper.

The date window is where it is on the Trident because a) as explained, it can use a standard date wheel, b) it is where CWL decided to put it, and c) because it does not matter to the majority of buyers.

As already explained by Mortis, the positioning is possibly driven more by economics than by aesthetics, and it is a very small compromise to make.
Richard
robinbarke
Senior Forumgod
Senior Forumgod
Posts: 2868
Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 7:42 pm
CW-watches: 7
Location: Lower Heyford, Oxon

Re: Trident date window.

Post by robinbarke »

downer wrote:
robinbarke wrote:Doesn't it strike anyone as odd that in the "final drawings" for the 2012 FLE blue and red the date window is at 4 o'clock. Does anyone wish to suggest, with supporting logic, that the window is better in no man's land?

Robin
The date is at 4 on the drawings because it is an error. CWL used an old drawing as a basis for the FLE drawing. It would have been preferable if that had not happened, but it did, and it is hardly a show-stopper.

The date window is where it is on the Trident because a) as explained, it can use a standard date wheel, b) it is where CWL decided to put it, and c) because it does not matter to the majority of buyers.

As already explained by Mortis, the positioning is possibly driven more by economics than by aesthetics, and it is a very small compromise to make.
Richard, I admire both yours and Mortis's blind loyalty to this brand but the case you have both made in support of the abitrary placing of the date wheel on the C60 is fully understood by me. You are both coming very close to insulting my intelligence. No brand which aspires to 'bringing luxury watches to within the reach of all' should be adopting such cheap compromises when clearly, the evidence on this thread alone shows that it is not necessary. If Archimede, Stowa, Rado and many others who offer inexpensive watches can avoid this issue then why, with a little more ingenuity could not CW?
C9GMT C8 Mk 1 C5 Malvern 2011 C9FLE C50 Malvern COSC C60 FLE2012 2013FLE
Oris Big Crown, Hublot, Rolex Datejust, Nomos Tangomat.


See my book, Aynho Junction, in the News section of http://www.robinbarkerphotography.com
User avatar
downer
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 25482
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2008 11:02 pm
CW-watches: 4
Location: UK

Re: Trident date window.

Post by downer »

robinbarke wrote:
Richard, I admire both yours and Mortis's blind loyalty to this brand but the case you have both made in support of the abitrary placing of the date wheel on the C60 is fully understood by me. You are both coming very close to insulting my intelligence. No brand which aspires to 'bringing luxury watches to within the reach of all' should be adopting such cheap compromises when clearly, the evidence on this thread alone shows that it is not necessary. If Archimede, Stowa, Rado and many others who offer inexpensive watches can avoid this issue then why, with a little more ingenuity could not CW?
Robin, sorry to say you are also coming close to insulting my intelligence. My loyalty to the brand is not blind; it is pragmatic. We have to be realistic in what we can expect from CW at the price the sell for. Archimede, Stowa are both significantly more expensive than CW and you are not comparing apples with apples. I have no clue about Rado.

In my opinion, the compromise on the date position on the Trident is an extremely trivial issue. I cannot put it any more plainly. That is not blind loyalty or anything else. It is my opinion.

In the same way, it is your opinion that the date should be positioned differently. It is your opinion..nothing more than that.

Neither of us are right or wrong, but you keep asking the same question, expecting to receive a different answer.

The debate is becoming circular and boring - just like the date position on most watches. ;)

Image
Richard
robinbarke
Senior Forumgod
Senior Forumgod
Posts: 2868
Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 7:42 pm
CW-watches: 7
Location: Lower Heyford, Oxon

Re: Trident date window.

Post by robinbarke »

Sorry Richard, I meant "blind loyalty" as a compliment.

May I make just a couple of points then I'll never raise this issue again, unless I absolutely have to.

The comparable Archimede is on the official website at Eu 565. It is distributed through the retail trade so I imagine the factory gate price would be similar to the C60.

This is not my thread but it is already on page 4 so I think this issue is of much more concern to many than it is "extremely trivial " to you.

I never comment on issues that I regard as trivial and I would never seek to close down a thread by a dismissive put down however irritated I may be feeling!

Robin
C9GMT C8 Mk 1 C5 Malvern 2011 C9FLE C50 Malvern COSC C60 FLE2012 2013FLE
Oris Big Crown, Hublot, Rolex Datejust, Nomos Tangomat.


See my book, Aynho Junction, in the News section of http://www.robinbarkerphotography.com
castle
Forumgod
Forumgod
Posts: 868
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2009 11:40 pm
CW-watches: 3
Location: Belfast, UK

Re: Trident date window.

Post by castle »

As the OP on this, my original query was WHY the date window was where it was, rather than should it be like that or not. Whilst it has been interesting working out why the date window is placed where it is(not only on this watch but on quite a few others as well), and discussing possible reasons why CW chose to position the window there rather than opting for another solution, I would be keen to avoid unnecessary conflict between forum members.
Therefore, if you have comments to make that further enlighten, please make them, otherwise could we consider this thread closed please.
CW-C8 MKI
Steinhart Nav B-Chrono II
Citizen -"Orca" and 1976 chrono.
Seiko-"Spork", "Stargate II", "Blumo", 009 mod.
Zeno 300m army diver
Revue Thommen Airspeed chrono
Junkers Bauhaus.
User avatar
Dancematt
Senior Forumgod
Senior Forumgod
Posts: 7817
Joined: Sun Feb 07, 2010 11:15 am
Location: Top secret hollow Volcano. Kent UK

Re: Trident date window.

Post by Dancematt »

In the interests of discussion and not arguement - the new C11 does appear to actually have the date at 4 o'clock (the pictures on the website appear to me to be of a real watch - not just photoshops but please correct me if i am wrong) and therefore must use a different date wheel or have had been proffesionally 'moved' by the CW watchmakers.

Thus we almost now have the answer to the question; 'what will it cost to have a true 4 0'clock date?' The difference in price between the two models is £34 - if we consider that for the most part you are possibly paying for the new and unique case design then you can possibly speculate the cost is very low to avoid placing the date at 4:10.

But to look at it from another perspective - having the date at 4:10 as opposed to a more appropriate 4 0'clock would give us severe watch geeks something to talk about in the future - rather like how vintage rolex collectors can't stop banging on about the different types of rolex crown logo's that have been available through the ages :) - il shut up now in fear of replacing the Lairds self-professed role :lol:
I miss all the great things that may never be.
User avatar
Grommit
Expert
Expert
Posts: 240
Joined: Sat Aug 06, 2011 11:04 am
CW-watches: 2
Location: Bedfordshire, UK

Re: Trident date window.

Post by Grommit »

Throughout this discussion, I kept seeing references to concepts such as "right" and "wrong" or "better" and "worse", In order to avoid doing this kind of thing again, could somebody please post a link to whatever "rules" there are that govern watch design? Then we'll all know who's right and we won't have to argue about it. Alternatively, we can just enjoy the fact that we all appreciate different aesthetics, ideas, styles etc.

Let's be honest, if all watches looked the same we really wouldn't have anything to talk about.
C15 Henley
C8 Vintage
Bulova Precisionist Claremont
Omega Seamaster Professional
Omega Planet Ocean

Want - C8 Mk1 black & tan, C70 DBR1

"....or wonder 'til it drives you mad, what would have followed if you had."
stinker
Junior
Junior
Posts: 55
Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 11:25 pm
CW-watches: 1

Re: Trident date window.

Post by stinker »

Would love to own a trident.
However
Don't like (more like hate) the date position so therefore not buying one.
Might be trivial to some and a massive thing to others. For my eyes it is just wrong.
  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post