Dr No
[Moderator Omega - Wristscan]
37693
I tended to prefer display backs pretty much across the board . . .
. . . until recently; I've come around to preferring solid backs for most standard production movements, as the view into an unexceptional movement strikes me as akin to a negligee on an unattractive woman . . . yes, it heightens the interest, but to what end? There are a few modern watches on my wish list, like the GS SBGW001, that I feel have a more compelling appearance without a display back; the GS is reminiscent of classic three-handed Swiss watches from the 50's and 60's, none of which had display backs. I'm all for adding a display back to a vintage watch that has a movement worth enjoying, like a UG micro-rotor or Omega 30T2, so long as the original back is undisturbed.
This issue has come up recently with Glashütte Original when they decided to offer a display back for owners of cal 100 Senator Navigators which were originally issued with solid casebacks in deference to the original designs. I suspect many owners will take advantage of the offer to switch to a display back, but I wouldn't be one of them . . . the gestalt of the watch would be compromised, in my opinion. G O has also, like a few other manufacturers, introduced a watch - the 1878 Moritz Großman - that comes with both a solid engraved back and a display back, so the owner can switch back and forth as suits his fancy. I'm not sure that's an approach that many others will take, but as far as I'm concerned, options are good to have . . . . cordially, Art
if the movement is well finished then yes, but there seem to be....
I always prefer display back
I tended to prefer display backs pretty much across the board . . .
Minority report
Maybe minority, but not alone.
Solid
Yes if...
