For those of you that like wrist watches a question

Here is another version of the B design with some tweaks based on some suggestions. Do you like it better than the original?

17758222_1499998393351910_8848670573715779006_o.jpg
 
Thomas Carey said:
Here is another version of the B design with some tweaks based on some suggestions. Do you like it better than the original?

17758222_1499998393351910_8848670573715779006_o.jpg
Click to expand...

Nope.

Version B 2.0 needs to have individual second marks, just not the little sub-second marks between the seconds. I'd also eliminate the 5, 10, 15 etc. on the outer scale as they aren't needed and instead add 13,14, 15 … 24 in smaller numerals on an inner scale for showing 24 hour time.

And I still don't like the hands. :D (If nothing else, at least make the tips of the hands more pointed.)

Again, just my opinion.

P.S.--What automatic movement will this have?
 
Last edited:
Wardo46 said:
Nope.

Version B 2.0 needs to have individual second marks, just not the little sub-second marks between the seconds. I'd also eliminate the 5, 10, 15 etc. on the outer scale as they aren't needed and instead add 13,14, 15 … 24 on an inner scale for showing 24 hour time.

And I still don't like the hands. :D (If nothing else, at least make the tips of the hands more pointed.)

P.S.--What automatic movement will this have?
Click to expand...

I'd like to see it 41mm - 43mm in diameter, and with a Miyota 9015 or Seiko NH35 movement as the ETA 2824 movements are in short supply or more expensive.
 
I still like version 1. I don't know why you would use 1 marker between 5 second intervals on version 2.0. As stated by other members, I don't like the hands or the crosshair. I would put an emphasis on making it easier to read than making it look more "tactical."
 
kspaz said:
I still like version 1. I don't know why you would use 1 marker between 5 second intervals on version 2.0. As stated by other members, I don't like the hands or the crosshair. I would put an emphasis on making it easier to read than making it look more "tactical."
Click to expand...

We are married to the hands from a cost stand point. These need to use the same hand set we are using on our Darby and RWB.

http://minutemanwatches.com/collection/category/current-models

On version 2.0 the marker is really more a divider.

If I was going after purely clean and easy to read it would be totally different. =)

As our brand has always made what amounts to a field type watch and many customers are military and the like it will be a tactical look. =)
 
Happy Monday people! =)

First up I really want to thank all of you for you suggestions and help selecting a new model we are considering.

I asked for a 2.0 version of the C design I have been showing here in the group. The difference is we've gotten rid of the markers in the middle of the dial that seemed to have no real purpose.

Also note the middle of the dial is sunken like one might find on a fine old pocket watch. This is something I am not sure most picked up on before.

Do you like the new version better or original?

17635309_1500944526590630_7377010586759215594_o.jpg


FYI this would be the spec

Proudly assembled in the USA by Minuteman Watch Co.
Stainless Steel case with black DLC finish
Double domed sapphire crystal.
Clear type A/R coating on the inside of the crystal.
42mm width without crown.
Screw down crown.
200 meter water resistant.
Military style Zulu/Nato watch strap
Miyota 9015 automatic mechanical movement.
Luminous hands and dial.
 
Thomas Carey said:
Here is another version of the B design with some tweaks based on some suggestions. Do you like it better than the original?

17758222_1499998393351910_8848670573715779006_o.jpg
Click to expand...

Yes... much better. "B" 2.0 is now my first choice. has everything I'd need and is easier for me to read. I like the minutes marked outside of the hours. Much rather have them than the hash marks.
 
B 2.0 is a significant improvement. Add back the seconds/minutes marks (without the additional hash mark clutter) to make B 2.5 a functionality winner. Having the crown on the left would put it over the top.

I'll never get along with any variant of C.
 
This style watch doesn't really strike my fancy, but I like the simplicity of B. C 2.0 is an improvement, for sure.

I wish you the best of luck with whatever design you choose.
 
I like B then C. And only C Because it looks like a non rotating bezel. I sometimes time things with my analog watches and rotating bezels are handy for that. IMO date should be larger and consider moving it between 4-5.

Red
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top