Horological Meandering

Greetings Purists,

I recently acquired a Chopard LUC Sport 2000, and am extremely impressed with all aspects of the watch--movement, casework, dial, hands, amazing markers, beautiful finishing, outstanding bracelet. At any rate, having this fine watch makes me wonder whether Chopard isn't a bit underappreciated. So here is my question: How does the LUC Sport 2000 match up against the other outstanding manufacture sportwatches? Is it as good as AP, VC, Breguet, Blancpain, etc.?

How would you rank the following SS sportwatches, and why?
AP Royal Oak (15300)
Vacheron Overseas
Breguet Marine
IWC Inge
Chopard LUC Sport 2000
GP Evo
Blancpain Aqualung

Cheers,
Daniel

Some pictures, just for fun:

as a sportswatch.

For example the Blancpain Aqualung isn´t a sportswatch for me ...





but this is one for sure ...





Just my 2cent

Oliver

In your list, my fav is the AP.

But as a sportwatch,  the best IMHO is the Submariner. Strong and reliable.

Fr.Xavier

Which I think is a slightly different category from sport watch (more WR and timing bezel).

Why do you prefer the AP?

DJK

But it is much more reliable for sport than any of the watches of the selection. that's my feeling.

I prefer the AP for its beauty, the perfect integration of the bracelet in the overall design and for its caliber.

Fr.Xavier

Unless you sharpen your criterias.

PP Aquanaut
Some Panerais
IWC Aquatimer
Some Rolexes

I think one has to differentiate between sporty watches and sports watches - divers watches and watches you also can take a swim with. Or you can throw them all in the same pool and set other criterias.

allegro

But they are all similar: haute horology, manufacture movements, about 100m WR, no diving bezel, cross-over better than dive watches (i.e. can be worn appropriately in dressier situations).

I don't think Rolex compares: 1) because it's a dive watch, 2) movement has different design motivations/principles, 3) finishing falls well short of the others.

But I can see that no one wishes to offer their opinions of how this list shapes up--that's okay, as I'm really enjoying the Chopard, and was primarily just curious about what Purists thought about how it compares to the direct competition.

DJK

Wombat,

I think you're treading on pretty thin ground there.

The Submariner, and indeed any of the Rolex professional series are in my opinion, and I'm sure not mine only, some of the finest sports watches ever made in terms of sheer versatility and durability. They can survive things not half of the watches on your list will. They can make the transition from being purely utilitarian tools to being an appropriate companion piece to a suit, tie and cufflinks. Like they say, from boardroom to battlefield.

Talking about 'cross overs' is a bit like saying a Cayenne GTS is superior to a Land Rover Defender. There simply is no common ground apart from a raised chassis and 4wd. Note that I say only a bit.

And in terms of finishing, a Submariner is as well finished externally as IWC or Chopard, in my opinion, and will take more of a beating in terms of movement durability due to the full bridge escapement set up within.

If you wanted just a comparative ranking of the pieces you mentioned, then you should have made it clear in your original post, rather than deride an iconic piece in the pantheon of great sport watches.

My original post explicitly and directly asked for the ranking--did you read it?

I didn't insult the Sub--it is a classic and will remain so for a variety of reasons, most of which have to do with it's work-horse nature. A dive watch is never truly appropriate in the board-room unless you are referring to surf-boards. Furthermore, the exterior finish on a Sub is clearly inferior to the IWC and the Chopard, much less the AP, VC, BP and Breguet. If you think otherwise you haven't seen the others in person. It's a very good watch and a classic, yes. But besides that, what places it in direct competition with the watches I mentioned? Nothing, for the reasons I mentioned.

Cheers,
Daniel

i thought this would be my order
GP
AP
BP
VC
B
CH
IWC

all good brands though even the sub

Is that a new category? The Boardroom watch? I don't get it. My MD and CEO wears a Casio and thinks the whole watch thing amusing. Don't get him started about Corvette Stingrays, though.

Being a watch enthusiast shouldn't be about wrist-gazing and making assumptions about people based what's on the end of their arm. If I saw any of the watches mentioned in this thread, I might be half interested in them (Particularly your Chopard) but in the end, it's all personal choice.

. . . entitled to frame the question as he pleases . . . anyone is equally entitled to post a response asking for clarification, but there is no need to bring an axe to the party . . . at least, not over a matter like this ;-). Fwiw, I feel there's a subtle distinction ewpwmbat has made that I tend to agree with, namely, that many Rolex models, including the Submariner, are more appropriately categorized as 'tool watches'. In my humble opinion, the term 'sports watch' is imbued with a connotation of refinement derived from 'dress' or even 'casual' watch designs, and is more appropriately bestowed on watches like the VC Overseas than the Submariner . . . just my two cents worth. Cordially and respectfully, Art

...I can see here is the razor tongue/fingers of personal accusation.

Skins can be thin, but fortunately mine has been tempered by sufficient exposure due to lack of time spent in boardrooms wrist gazing.