Who's got a nice watch? Traditional watches only, no smartwatches please.

[SHNXX]

Here is another picture of a 3714 I found from Watchprosite (a great site) for watches

And another from Hodinkee.

There are some subtle differences in typography on the dial, although that could be easily explained by different versions.

What? You would willingly forego wearing one of the most impressive and genuinely legendary (and quite beautiful) - and timeless - ageless - time pieces ever made - for an overpriced fashionable toy that will be out of date in a year or two?

Me, well, suffice to say that this is not the choice I would have made in such circumstances. Then, again, mind you, I would not be in the market for an Apple watch in the first place.

My thoughts exactly.

Well, I'd just say that overpriced is relative to one's needs.
Patek, Breguet, Rolex, etc are also "overpriced" if we are talking about profit margins.

But obviously, wearing a gold dress watch everyday is impractical and quite frankly I really like the fitness tracking aspect of the Apple Watch.
I've been wearing it pretty much everyday since I bought it, except when I wear suits or ironically, when I went watch shopping.

 

[Scepticalscribe]

Because the way the dial looks, particularly 4 and 6 look different from the dials I've seen.
The 4 is curved on the real one.
This one looks straight.
6 looks a little different.
And the leather strap looks weird as well.

I'm not fakewatchbusta or anything, but this one looks pretty off to me.

On the Portuguese model, too?
[doublepost=1464788704][/doublepost]

Well, I'd just say that overpriced is relative to one's needs.
Patek, Breguet, Rolex, etc are also "overpriced" if we are talking about profit margins.

But obviously, wearing a gold dress watch everyday is impractical and quite frankly I really like the fitness tracking aspect of the Apple Watch.
I've been wearing it pretty much everyday since I bought it, except when I wear suits or ironically, when I went watch shopping.

I assume that the watch in your picture is white gold, then? Granted, I wear glasses, but I had assumed that it was possibly stainless steel.

Personally, I like proper analogue watches, and love the craftsmanship that goes with them. And, yes, I also love beautifully crafted objects, and prefer to use them, if possible, and derive pleasure from using them, rather than having them secreted away in a safe, somewhere.

Actually, I wasn't even a fan of digital watches when they first came out, although I accept that some people thought that they were incredibly cool.

However, each to their own.

 

[SHNXX]

On the Portuguese model, too?
[doublepost=1464788704][/doublepost]

I assume that the watch in your picture is white gold, then? Granted, I wear glasses, but I had assumed that it was possibly stainless steel.

But, each to their own.

Personally, I like proper analogue watches, and love the craftsmanship that goes with them. Actually, I wasn't even a fan of digital watches when they cam out, although I accept that some people thought that they were incredibly cool.

I've posted a side by side photo.
Unless there is another 3714 model I'm not aware of, I'm 99% sure it's fake.
I don't wear glasses and I have perfect vision according to the last few times I've had to do those reading tests, but I think it should be obvious from the picture above.

Patek Calatravas don't come in stainless steel. In general, only steel models are the Nautilus and the Aquanaut, except for a few special edition steel watches they release occasionally.
Actually, if my Calatrava had been steel, it would probably become far more valuable as a collectible item in a few decades, so that'd be quite nice.

 

[Scepticalscribe]

I've posted a side by side photo.
Unless there is another 3714 model I'm not aware of, I'm 99% sure it's fake.
I don't wear glasses and I have perfect vision according to the last few times I've had to do those reading tests, but I think it should be obvious from the picture above.

Patek Calatravas don't come in stainless steel. In general, only steel models are the Nautilus and the Aquanaut, except for a few special edition steel watches they release occasionally.
Actually, if my Calatrava had been steel, it would probably become far more valuable as a collectible item in a few decades, so that'd be quite nice.

Well, I'm not a watch specialist, so, I'm afraid you'll have to explain the differences to me. Unfortunately, I don't fully see it, and it is not 'obvious' to me. (And I am not trying to be difficult, just curious.)

Now that you mention it, I do see some differences in the '2', and in the '5' in the two pictures.

However, re the '4' and the '6' - which were the two that you had originally pointed out as somewhat suspicious, - I must admit that I fail to spot the differences.

Anyway, thanks for posting the pictures.

 

[OllyW]

I'm not fakewatchbusta or anything, but this one looks pretty off to me.

You are comparing blown up low resolution photos where one watch is pretty much face on and the other is held at an angle so I would have to give the benefit of doubt myself. It's not like the fake Patek Philippe 5002 posted on here a few months ago which was so obvious even I spotted it.

 

[SHNXX]

You are comparing blown up low resolution photos where one watch is pretty much face on and the other is held at an angle so I would have to give the benefit of doubt myself. It's not like the fake Patek Philippe 5002 posted on here a few months ago which was so obvious even I spotted it.

Yeah, I wanted to give the benefit of doubt, which is why I asked the poster if it's genuine.

But looking at the pictures more closely, I'm afraid it's probably not real.
Perhaps he was scammed.

 

[Scepticalscribe]

You are comparing blown up low resolution photos where one watch is pretty much face on and the other is held at an angle so I would have to give the benefit of doubt myself. It's not like the fake Patek Philippe 5002 posted on here a few months ago which was so obvious even I spotted it.

Yes. The very same thought crossed my mind.

I think I would to see both watches photographed at the same angle.

 

[Vogue Harper]

You are comparing blown up low resolution photos where one watch is pretty much face on and the other is held at an angle so I would have to give the benefit of doubt myself. It's not like the fake Patek Philippe 5002 posted on here a few months ago which was so obvious even I spotted it.

Giving the benefit of the doubt too. I can see where SHNXX is coming from with the curved '4' on the dial but as you say, it might all be in the angles. The difference in the pushers is definitely in the angles, if you go to the official IWC website there are pictures of the Portugieser 3714 that shows the pushers from that low angle and they look like those in the earlier photo.

And obviously given aftermarket straps, the strap is not a reliable measure of authenticity either.

 

[OllyW]

Yeah, I wanted to give the benefit of doubt, which is why I asked the poster if it's genuine.

But looking at the pictures more closely, I'm afraid it's probably not real.
Perhaps he was scammed.

If it's so obvious you can spot it from a low resolution photo then I'm doubtful a genuine buyer would be tricked by it. Most people buying poor fakes know exactly what they are buying.

I'm still sticking with the benefit of the doubt.

 

[Scepticalscribe]

Okay; with the addition of the further two photographs, I now see the point about how the '4' is supposed to be 'curved' inward on the left side.

Thanks for drawing my attention to what I should be looking out for.

 

[SHNXX]

Here is a side-by-side.

2 looks different. Left (real) looks to have less curvature.
3 looks different. Left is shorter.
4 looks different. It's more curved (see below as well).

The chrono pusher length also looks different.

Once again, it could be different models, but they are definitely different.
Perhaps it's different from older models vs. newer ones.

 

[Vogue Harper]

Does the IWC Portugieser 3714 Chrono have a skeleton back? Not sure if Chronos do but if it does, the proof of the pudding would be there. I know that with my (wholly authentic) 5007 looking at the movement through the skeleton back would be a pretty quick giveaway of a non-genuine watch.

 

[SHNXX]

Does the IWC Portugieser 3714 Chrono have a skeleton back? Not sure if Chronos do but if it does, the proof of the pudding would be there. I know that with my (wholly authentic) 5007 looking at the movement through the skeleton back would be a pretty quick giveaway of a non-genuine watch.

No. A lot of 3714s have closed casebacks.

 

[MacRy]

Regardless of the authenticity of it - what are people's thoughts on the partial 12 and 6? I hate it when watches have a partial number because of sub dials. Why bother with them at all, just have a marker or something. It's just bad design in my opinion.

 

[OllyW]

Regardless of the authenticity of it - what are people's thoughts on the partial 12 and 6? I hate it when watches have a partial number because of sub dials. Why bother with them at all, just have a marker or something. It's just bad design in my opinion.

I don't like it either, I think batons look a lot better than numbers on watches with sub dials.

 

[SHNXX]

So you guys don't like the Royal Oak Offshores?
I like them.

 

[OllyW]

So you guys don't like the Royal Oak Offshores?
I like them.

No, they are a bit too brash for my liking.

 

[Dowjohnny]

Ordered another nato strap for my omega (not my pic but exactly my setup), it is nice to be able to swap a little.

Image Credit to watch collecting lifestyle

 

[Scepticalscribe]

Regardless of the authenticity of it - what are people's thoughts on the partial 12 and 6? I hate it when watches have a partial number because of sub dials. Why bother with them at all, just have a marker or something. It's just bad design in my opinion.

I don't like it either, I think batons look a lot better than numbers on watches with sub dials.

Actually, while I am not crazy about partial numbers - or rather, numbers partially obscured by a subdial (just let the subdial take that full space instead), I do rather like Arabic numbers on a watch, even on a watch with subdials.

My very first watch, given to me by my mother, when I was in hospital with appendicitis at the age of ten, had been her own watch from the 40s an had blued steel hands, a subdial at the six, and nice Arabic numerals. So, no, I prefer numerals to batons, I must admit, and the old classics form the 50s and 60s appeal strongly to me.

 

[LordQ]

Ordered another nato strap for my omega (not my pic but exactly my setup), it is nice to be able to swap a little.

Image Credit to watch collecting lifestyle

They say the alarm is rather loud

 

[MacRy]

Actually, while I am not crazy about partial numbers - or rather, numbers partially obscured by a subdial (just let the subdial take that full space instead), I do rather like Arabic numbers on a watch, even on a watch with subdials.

Absolutely. I like an Arabic number on a watch and there are good examples of them with sundials where the numbers have been removed from that area of the dial. It can be done and I don't know why you wouldn't from a design perspective, as it's so much more aesthetically pleasing.

 

[Scepticalscribe]

Absolutely. I like an Arabic number on a watch and there are good examples of them with sundials where the numbers have been removed from that area of the dial. It can be done and I don't know why you wouldn't from a design perspective, as it's so much more aesthetically pleasing.

Yes, my stupid autocorrect insisted (three times) that sundial was what I wanted to write not subdials. Grrr.

Agreed, where the number is removed entirely by the subdial - above all, at the 'six' location, and if the subdial is generously sized, I do think that this looks better, especially with Arabic numerals.

 

[Dowjohnny]

They say the alarm is rather loud

Pardon? I don't get it

 

[CooperBox]

that parnis looks very IWCish. any relation?

I was just about to make the same comment. Certainly very similar to an IWC pilot.

 

[Mr. McMac]

just checked it out. wow...

It's a quality watch that only cost me $100. It's fit and finish is excellent. And so far, it only loses 5 seconds a day which it much better than average for a mechanical watch