Rob and Jim later...

 

Speaking of which, check out the WOTY Missing Years post up today....

http://tagheuerenthusiast.blogspot.com/2022/12/feature-watch-of-year-missing-years.html

 

I agree with Adam that the shock shutdown of C11 still lingers. Thankfully the forum has not only survived but has been very active and we see old and new faces checking in all the time.
The stake of TAG Heuer in C11 was a flaw that ultimately led to its demise. You can't write completely independently, allow the forum to write whatever nonsense it likes, and expect TAG Heuer to pick up the bill. David did outstanding work by not exactly cataloging vintage Heuer but by going deep into the details of every reference and highlighting the links between heritage pieces, re-editions and the current range. His article on vintage Autavia was so detailed and well written you could actually make sense of the Autavia rabbit hole. His article on the Montreal prompted me to buy one five years ago. He was the heritage director avant la lettre.
This is the draft arcticle on Autavia on the TAG Heuer website. It's elaborate, good stuff you'd want to read on plaques in the museum, but it's not research material. In David's article you could find so many details about case, dial, hands, bezel, variations and all the differences between the Autavia generations. It doesn't mean TAG Heuer's effort is without merit. You will be able to find a lot more information about heritage pieces here than on the websites of most watch brands.

 

So you like em big and black, absolutely nothing wrong with that my friend

 

WUUUT!!!

 

Okay, that's better than expected. But I won't hold my breath for a similar article about the 3000 Series or the 1500 Series.

 

And I wouldn't mind betting the 80s watches will have more mistakes in the text too... they've done lots of research on the models they've re-issued, but like I said before, they probably won't invest the time in 'dead' models. But they are still part of the history.

 

Not too sure as TAG Heuer was on fire in the 90s. The kirium, F1, 2000,… were everywhere. They will have their place in TAGs history acknowledged at some point no doubt. The were no TAG Heuer Carreras, Autavias or Monacos at the time and TAG Heuer thrived.

 

Exactly. It all went tits up when they started with the re-issues.

 

Bizarrely, TAG Heuer managed to completely re-invent themselves and create brand new products that people actually liked and bought and then they jumped on the heritage bandwagon anyway.

 

Me neither. There's this draft on the vintage Aquaracer, which glances briefly on the 1000 and 2000, but DC had in-depth articles covering many of the pre-Aquaracer divers. Hopefully, the material will be resurrected in some form on the TAG Heuer website.

 

Nah the AR and F1 are still key watches in the line-up. Don’t think the Link is as successful as it once was. The Carrera and Monaco deserve to be part of TAG’s continuing legacy. The Monaco is such a cult classic, on the list of most iconic watch polls.

 

I read that, and it strikes me as a series of paragraphs lifted (almost at random) from a much longer article.

Also, there's no indication of what each photo actually is.... For example, what, exactly, is this model??



It would appear to be a 1163, of some sort, (given it's position within the article), but a brief perusal of a few classic watch sites reveals nothing like it.

 

The watch in the photo is the Autavia, Reference 73663, sometimes called the "Bund" or "Military" version, as shown here -- http://www.onthedash.com/chronograph/autavia-73663-military-painted-numerals-bund/

 

While it would nice to have a caption, it does appear that the photo is placed in the correct section. The section is covering Manual-Wind Autavias of the early 1970s, and that's what this watch is . . . Reference 73663 "Bund" version.

Jeff

 

Thanks for clearing that up.

For us less knowledgable folk, it would be useful if the articles on Heuer's own website were a bit clearer.

 

Well, it is and it isn't. On a mobile screen it appears between two sections, so could easily relate to either. Its directly above the title for the 11630 section.
I'm not one of the cognoscenti, so a caption would be infinitely more helpful.

 

Agree with that entirely!!