Baselworld 2018- Coverage, new launches and reaction

Posts
11,973
Likes
39,480
Two things.

There has been a three hand Carrera before the TAGHeuer one.

There has been a diving Autavia before.

Two more things -

The first three-hand Carrera was a desperate attempt to remain relevant during the Quartz Crisis. Should we be celebrating that?

The new three-hand Autavia is not a dive watch.
 
Posts
22,732
Likes
32,411
So wait, I'm confused. Are we now saying that there being a precedent historically is no longer the crux of right and wrong?

::stirthepot::
 
Posts
160
Likes
33
I was not making any comment on right/wrong: just correcting some inaccuracies.
 
Posts
2,840
Likes
2,528
I think i might be the cursed child in the family having to like all the not-suppose-to-be three hander range.

Three hander Carrera ? Love !

Three hander Monaco ? Love !

Three hander Autavia ? Never thought it would someday exist, but yes ! Love !

On the other hand i also like something that not-suppose-to-be chronograph. (Some would argue diving watch shouldn't be chronograph)

The chronograph Aquaracer ? Love !
 
Posts
643
Likes
764
Technically, the 1000m wasn't part of the 1000 model line.

I’m not sure I agree. It’s in catalogues smack bang in the middle of other 1000 series models and is numbered 980.xxx which was used only on 1000 series watches. The fact the dial, hands, bezel and even the case design (except for crown position) were the same style as the 42mm 1000 series suggests it’s a 1000 series model.

I’m not aware of anything that excludes it from the 1000 series, and just see it as the halo model of the professional diver series.
 
Posts
160
Likes
33
I’m not sure I agree. It’s in catalogues smack bang in the middle of other 1000 series models and is numbered 980.xxx which was used only on 1000 series watches. The fact the dial, hands, bezel and even the case design (except for crown position) were the same style as the 42mm 1000 series suggests it’s a 1000 series model.

I’m not aware of anything that excludes it from the 1000 series, and just see it as the halo model of the professional diver series.

The model predates the 1000 series official formation.
It did not share the same case as the 1000 (or the 844 either for that matter).
 
Posts
22,732
Likes
32,411
I think i might be the cursed child in the family having to like all the not-suppose-to-be three hander range.

Three hander Carrera ? Love !

Three hander Monaco ? Love !

Three hander Autavia ? Never thought it would someday exist, but yes ! Love !

On the other hand i also like something that not-suppose-to-be chronograph. (Some would argue diving watch shouldn't be chronograph)

The chronograph Aquaracer ? Love !

Free spirit or sick freak, let the people decide! 😁
 
Posts
7,124
Likes
15,104
The model predates the 1000 series official formation.
It did not share the same case as the 1000 (or the 844 either for that matter).
Heuer did their best to confuse us all.

In the 1984 catalogue they refer to the Lemania 510 watches as the "Heuer 1000" range
Heuer-1984-28-960x1283.jpg
Heuer-1984-29-960x1283.jpg

I would agree that the 1000m diver is more a standalone model than part of the 1000 range given that the watch has its own case...even if the dials are similar/ same.
 
Posts
160
Likes
33
Was the 2000 in that catalogue yet?

The trouble with trying to place the early dive watches into the later more defined series is that early models were made/introduced as stand alone models. The watches themselves then changed when and as spec/supplies demanded.

I didn't know those chronograph models were called Chronogr 1000. I asked earlier about the 2000 line because I'm now wondering if the original intention was to have the 1000 as the chronograph you show and the 2000 as dive watches. My hazy memory says that formally, the 2000 came before the 1000 (1982 vs 1984).

This would've been smack bang in the Heuer/Piaget/TAG storm and would explain the confusion in naming convention of new/old models and legacy models.
 
Posts
7,124
Likes
15,104
Was the 2000 in that catalogue yet?

The trouble with trying to place the early dive watches into the later more defined series is that early models were made/introduced as stand alone models. The watches themselves then changed when and as spec/supplies demanded.

I didn't know those chronograph models were called Chronogr 1000. I asked earlier about the 2000 line because I'm now wondering if the original intention was to have the 1000 as the chronograph you show and the 2000 as dive watches. My hazy memory says that formally, the 2000 came before the 1000 (1982 vs 1984).

This would've been smack bang in the Heuer/Piaget/TAG storm and would explain the confusion in naming convention of new/old models and legacy models.

The 1000 diver came in the late 1970s, but wasn't known as the "1000" at that time while the 2000 arrived in 1982.

Agree with you that the 1000m would have arrived during the Piaget period. We see a lot of new case designs during this period, many of which are shared with other brands- this was because Roventa Henex, an outsourced manufacturer of watches for many brands, was an equity owner of Heuer and so used Heuer to market and distribute their case designs...the same rationale as Lemania wanting to own a slice of Heuer so that Heuer would use their movements.
 
Posts
10,400
Likes
13,750
The new ones are just perfect 👍

-matte dial
-big white sub dials
-red, orange AND blue
-solid caseback
-white contrasting inner minute track
-ceramic bezel

The only downsides I see is that its not quartz and Im scared the applied logo wont be straight 😗
 
Posts
22,732
Likes
32,411
The new ones are just perfect 👍

-matte dial
-big white sub dials
-red, orange AND blue
-solid caseback
-white contrasting inner minute track
-ceramic bezel

The only downsides I see is that its not quartz and Im scared the applied logo wont be straight 😗

I don't think the vintage lume works against those big white sub dials.
 
Posts
22,732
Likes
32,411
That picture doesn't show them up though... they look normal. So what you're saying is it looks wrong in real life?

Besides, that Carrera doesn't look as obviously retro as the Monaco.
 
Posts
3,256
Likes
2,326
That picture doesn't show them up though... they look normal. So what you're saying is it looks wrong in real life?

Besides, that Carrera doesn't look as obviously retro as the Monaco.

Are you referring to my Gulf Monaco photoshop effort? If so, yes, the red hour markers ruin it. I have mocked up my version of what it should look like.
 
Posts
643
Likes
764
The model predates the 1000 series official formation.
It did not share the same case as the 1000 (or the 844 either for that matter).

I can agree on that. With the case I meant the style of the case only, but you’re right on the actual formation of the 1000 series, and generally I lump even the Monnins in with the 1000’s, even though technically they aren’t you could argue, due to dates.