Gevril

watches under $!000
eddiea
Founding Member & Master of Time
Posts: 10648
Joined: December 25th 2009, 11:00pm

Gevril

Post by eddiea » February 5th 2013, 4:39pm

Watching the Gevril presentation yesterday with that creepy, totally clueless dude and Tim "the point is" Temple...I was thinking, is Gevril now an exclusively for TV brand?
User avatar
foghorn
Founding Member & Master of Time
Posts: 20223
Joined: December 18th 2009, 11:00pm
Contact:

Re: Gevril

Post by foghorn » February 5th 2013, 5:42pm

eddiea wrote:Watching the Gevril presentation yesterday with that creepy, totally clueless dude and Tim "the point is" Temple...I was thinking, is Gevril now an exclusively for TV brand?


If my memory serves it always was. I recall in the early pre- Skelton days of SNBC , when Temple was the man , that Gevril was a major player on TV. I remember Temple touting Gevril as being" under the umbrella" of Audemars Piguet as a hype point.
Image
User avatar
Horse Feathers
ASSHAT - RETIRED
Posts: 9280
Joined: August 29th 2010, 10:00pm
Facebook ID: 0
Contact:

Re: Gevril

Post by Horse Feathers » February 5th 2013, 6:18pm

foghorn wrote:
eddiea wrote:Watching the Gevril presentation yesterday with that creepy, totally clueless dude and Tim "the point is" Temple...I was thinking, is Gevril now an exclusively for TV brand?


If my memory serves it always was. I recall in the early pre- Skelton days of SNBC , when Temple was the man , that Gevril was a major player on TV. I remember Temple touting Gevril as being" under the umbrella" of Audemars Piguet as a hype point.


That's true, I remember seeing a video of JayZ walking the NY streets in the rain wearing his Royal Oak. when suddenly he stepped on a discarded Gevril.
Image

"I did lose a pusher pulling it out of the mug however
it doesn't affect functionality"

- JR of Reclinervision ™
hcharles
Watchlord WIS
Posts: 2579
Joined: March 4th 2012, 11:00pm
Facebook ID: 1081120685253371
Location: Snake River Valley
Contact:

Re: Gevril

Post by hcharles » February 6th 2013, 7:05am

The show was difficult to stomach. I gave up, with all the engines and guilloches, and this watch won't last at this pace.

The rep is Steven Jay, who looks like Snidely Whiplash.
Since light travels faster than sound, some people appear bright until you hear them speak.

The trouble with quotes on the internet is that you can never know if they are genuine. Abraham lincoln
User avatar
Tzimisces

Re: Gevril

Post by Tzimisces » February 6th 2013, 2:25pm

Didn't Richard Gere stick one of these up his ass?
hcharles
Watchlord WIS
Posts: 2579
Joined: March 4th 2012, 11:00pm
Facebook ID: 1081120685253371
Location: Snake River Valley
Contact:

Re: Gevril

Post by hcharles » February 6th 2013, 3:11pm

That old story about Richard Gere, sure has made the rounds.
Since light travels faster than sound, some people appear bright until you hear them speak.

The trouble with quotes on the internet is that you can never know if they are genuine. Abraham lincoln
Luftwafflles
Senior Member & WIS
Posts: 3056
Joined: July 9th 2012, 10:00pm
Facebook ID: 0
Location: Near the motor city..

Re: Gevril

Post by Luftwafflles » February 7th 2013, 5:25am

Kind of liked the blacked out XO Submarine. Under $300 on sale. True moon phase. Nothing special, but seemed worth the price.
We called another exterminator to take care of the rat problem in the basement. This one hasn't come out either.







.
User avatar
Falstaff
Watchlord WIS
Posts: 8240
Joined: August 31st 2010, 10:00pm
Facebook ID: 0
Contact:

Re: Gevril

Post by Falstaff » February 7th 2013, 8:13am

Luftwafflles wrote:Kind of liked the blacked out XO Submarine. Under $300 on sale. True moon phase. Nothing special, but seemed worth the price.


Now think about it, wafflles - submarine watch with a moon phase? Really? I guess it's no worse than a Flieger with an HRV.
"Open the pod bay doors, Hal." "I'm sorry Dave, I'm afraid I can't do that."
User avatar
Hawk
ASSHAT
Posts: 10235
Joined: October 8th 2010, 10:00pm
Facebook ID: 0
Location: Orlando, FL
Contact:

Re: Gevril

Post by Hawk » February 7th 2013, 8:32am

Falstaff wrote:
Luftwafflles wrote:Kind of liked the blacked out XO Submarine. Under $300 on sale. True moon phase. Nothing special, but seemed worth the price.


Now think about it, wafflles - submarine watch with a moon phase? Really? I guess it's no worse than a Flieger with an HRV.

As the kids say: you made me look.

http://www.amazon.com/GV2-Gevril-4512-Submarine-24-Hour/dp/B0057WF63M

And look I did. The moon phase may make marginally more sense in the context of the one review posted on Amazon: it seems you can't get it wet and move at the same time. Hence one might assume that "submarine" is the portion of the description that's questionable.

Pretty funny actually - kind of reminds me of a wg post right prior to ban hammer falling:
It looks great on paper. Then your $800 disappointment arrives and you get to realise that you've just been conned by one of the biggest companies in the World!

You'll notice that the watch is rated water resistant to 165 feet. The explanation next to it states " 50 meters (165 feet): The watch is suitable for swimming and high altitude sports, such as skiing and parachuting." But don't take a shower in it. A regular, normal, 2 minute shower. Because it will leak.

Gevril, the manufacturer, tell you that 165 feet means "165 feet (50 meters, 5 ATM) allows you to wash your hands, no showering nor swimming. The watch will withstand a pressure equal to the pressure you have under 165 feet of water with the watch in a static position (not moving). It doesn't mean you can go swimming, showering or diving because in that case the pressure on the crown is much higher. Michela Bonincontri Gevril Group ".

Awesome. A watch that is advertised as water resistant but isn't. Gevril refuse to help. So do Amazon. Awesome - save yourself the hassle and but a $5 copy from China because it will do the same job. This is complete and utter garbage.

Testy sort of fellow, wot?
User avatar
Falstaff
Watchlord WIS
Posts: 8240
Joined: August 31st 2010, 10:00pm
Facebook ID: 0
Contact:

Re: Gevril

Post by Falstaff » February 7th 2013, 9:09am

Hawk wrote:
Falstaff wrote:
Luftwafflles wrote:Kind of liked the blacked out XO Submarine. Under $300 on sale. True moon phase. Nothing special, but seemed worth the price.


Now think about it, wafflles - submarine watch with a moon phase? Really? I guess it's no worse than a Flieger with an HRV.

As the kids say: you made me look.

http://www.amazon.com/GV2-Gevril-4512-Submarine-24-Hour/dp/B0057WF63M

And look I did. The moon phase may make marginally more sense in the context of the one review posted on Amazon: it seems you can't get it wet and move at the same time. Hence one might assume that "submarine" is the portion of the description that's questionable.

Pretty funny actually - kind of reminds me of a wg post right prior to ban hammer falling:
It looks great on paper. Then your $800 disappointment arrives and you get to realise that you've just been conned by one of the biggest companies in the World!

You'll notice that the watch is rated water resistant to 165 feet. The explanation next to it states " 50 meters (165 feet): The watch is suitable for swimming and high altitude sports, such as skiing and parachuting." But don't take a shower in it. A regular, normal, 2 minute shower. Because it will leak.

Gevril, the manufacturer, tell you that 165 feet means "165 feet (50 meters, 5 ATM) allows you to wash your hands, no showering nor swimming. The watch will withstand a pressure equal to the pressure you have under 165 feet of water with the watch in a static position (not moving). It doesn't mean you can go swimming, showering or diving because in that case the pressure on the crown is much higher. Michela Bonincontri Gevril Group ".

Awesome. A watch that is advertised as water resistant but isn't. Gevril refuse to help. So do Amazon. Awesome - save yourself the hassle and but a $5 copy from China because it will do the same job. This is complete and utter garbage.

Testy sort of fellow, wot?

Quite so - but his point is valid. I've said more than once that the whole XXX meters or XX atm water resistance figures are really very misleading as to the true ability of a watch to resist water penetration. There was a fellow on another forum recently decrying a company's use of the term "splash resistant" rather than providing a specific number of meters of WR when it occured to me that "splash resistant" actually gives a more truthful and accurate picture of water resistance. Why not substitute real world abilities for meter depths? Start with "Splash resistant", "Suitable for showering or bathing", "Suitable for Swimming", "Suitable for snorkeling" and "Suitable for scuba diving". Less anxiety and fewer bitter tears.
"Open the pod bay doors, Hal." "I'm sorry Dave, I'm afraid I can't do that."
User avatar
Hawk
ASSHAT
Posts: 10235
Joined: October 8th 2010, 10:00pm
Facebook ID: 0
Location: Orlando, FL
Contact:

Re: Gevril

Post by Hawk » February 7th 2013, 10:00am

Falstaff wrote:
Quite so - but his point is valid. I've said more than once that the whole XXX meters or XX atm water resistance figures are really very misleading as to the true ability of a watch to resist water penetration. There was a fellow on another forum recently decrying a company's use of the term "splash resistant" rather than providing a specific number of meters of WR when it occured to me that "splash resistant" actually gives a more truthful and accurate picture of water resistance. Why not substitute real world abilities for meter depths? Start with "Splash resistant", "Suitable for showering or bathing", "Suitable for Swimming", "Suitable for snorkeling" and "Suitable for scuba diving". Less anxiety and fewer bitter tears.

Let's say "justifiably testy". There are places on the WWW and in several user manuals that attempt to translate the arcanum of water resistance numbers into real world terms. I would, however, agree that no one buying a watch or two should be expected to track down a copy of the Necronomicon of Watch Terms to determine if a watch might be worn while showering.

50 meters is supposed to be "suitable for swimming" and the thing crapping out in the shower tells me the 50 meter claim was probably bogus. And the "submarine" moniker is probably misleading.

I'd welcome a transition to real world terms but it would sure stifle sales pitches on the TV. Suddenly invicter's 1,500 meters of resistancy(sic) would be "humidity less than 80%, non-condensing".
User avatar
conjurer (Online)
ASSHAT & Master of Time
Posts: 31951
Joined: July 13th 2010, 10:00pm
Contact:

Re: Gevril

Post by conjurer » February 7th 2013, 11:32am

Several of the GV2's I've seen, made up to look like divers, were also 50m WR as well.

I owned a Gevril I got from the old SAH days--I ended up trading it in to Dave McCready for my d.freemont. The Gevril wasn't bad for the money.
Image
boscoe
ASSHAT
Posts: 9825
Joined: March 31st 2010, 10:00pm
Contact:

Re: Gevril

Post by boscoe » February 7th 2013, 11:38am

My beef with Gevril is "Limited Edition" on the cases when watches are actually numbered "limited production runs."

My GV2 is a "Limited Edition" of 500 - but it is STILL being sold today about 10 years after it was made with the LE sales pitch.

Hence, I will never buy another.

Hucksters, sheisters and scumbags.
eddiea
Founding Member & Master of Time
Posts: 10648
Joined: December 25th 2009, 11:00pm

Re: Gevril

Post by eddiea » February 7th 2013, 2:46pm

I remember JTV ex-resident watch blowhard , Timmy Temple pushing something called "first Generation" Gevrils, way back , about the same time he first tried to convinced folks, that it was actually something called "Platinum Edition" grade 7750's, then attempted to coin the monike ..this forum have a lot to do with him cease and desist the bullshit , after been called out here.
Luftwafflles
Senior Member & WIS
Posts: 3056
Joined: July 9th 2012, 10:00pm
Facebook ID: 0
Location: Near the motor city..

Re: Gevril

Post by Luftwafflles » February 8th 2013, 2:06am

Falstaff wrote:
Luftwafflles wrote:Kind of liked the blacked out XO Submarine. Under $300 on sale. True moon phase. Nothing special, but seemed worth the price.


Now think about it, wafflles - submarine watch with a moon phase? Really? I guess it's no worse than a Flieger with an HRV.
Point taken Mr. Staff. But with a WR of only 165 ft., I already know that I better cover it in a light rain. I'm just a sucker for a nice moonphase, kind of like the looks of it, and there are a ton of watches out there with ironic, grandiose, and downright silly names.
Last edited by Anonymous on February 8th 2013, 2:20am, edited 1 time in total.
We called another exterminator to take care of the rat problem in the basement. This one hasn't come out either.







.
Luftwafflles
Senior Member & WIS
Posts: 3056
Joined: July 9th 2012, 10:00pm
Facebook ID: 0
Location: Near the motor city..

Re: Gevril

Post by Luftwafflles » February 8th 2013, 2:19am

Hawk wrote:
Falstaff wrote:
Luftwafflles wrote:Kind of liked the blacked out XO Submarine. Under $300 on sale. True moon phase. Nothing special, but seemed worth the price.


Now think about it, wafflles - submarine watch with a moon phase? Really? I guess it's no worse than a Flieger with an HRV.

As the kids say: you made me look.

http://www.amazon.com/GV2-Gevril-4512-Submarine-24-Hour/dp/B0057WF63M

And look I did. The moon phase may make marginally more sense in the context of the one review posted on Amazon: it seems you can't get it wet and move at the same time. Hence one might assume that "submarine" is the portion of the description that's questionable.

Pretty funny actually - kind of reminds me of a wg post right prior to ban hammer falling:
It looks great on paper. Then your $800 disappointment arrives and you get to realise that you've just been conned by one of the biggest companies in the World!

You'll notice that the watch is rated water resistant to 165 feet. The explanation next to it states " 50 meters (165 feet): The watch is suitable for swimming and high altitude sports, such as skiing and parachuting." But don't take a shower in it. A regular, normal, 2 minute shower. Because it will leak.

Gevril, the manufacturer, tell you that 165 feet means "165 feet (50 meters, 5 ATM) allows you to wash your hands, no showering nor swimming. The watch will withstand a pressure equal to the pressure you have under 165 feet of water with the watch in a static position (not moving). It doesn't mean you can go swimming, showering or diving because in that case the pressure on the crown is much higher. Michela Bonincontri Gevril Group ".

Awesome. A watch that is advertised as water resistant but isn't. Gevril refuse to help. So do Amazon. Awesome - save yourself the hassle and but a $5 copy from China because it will do the same job. This is complete and utter garbage.

Testy sort of fellow, wot?
And not very bright. Amazon (and Gevril) clearly label the watch 165 ft. WR. That basically means "do not get wet". Plus, he paid twice as much as he should have, had he done a little research.
We called another exterminator to take care of the rat problem in the basement. This one hasn't come out either.







.
User avatar
Hawk
ASSHAT
Posts: 10235
Joined: October 8th 2010, 10:00pm
Facebook ID: 0
Location: Orlando, FL
Contact:

Re: Gevril

Post by Hawk » February 8th 2013, 3:38am

Luftwafflles wrote:And not very bright. Amazon (and Gevril) clearly label the watch 165 ft. WR. That basically means "do not get wet". Plus, he paid twice as much as he should have, had he done a little research.

The "mouseover" on the water resistance specification on Amazon will get you a pop-up stating it's suitable for swimming. If it craps out in the shower I'd hazard a guess it's most assuredly not suitable for swimming.

I guess Amazon's copy of the Necronomicon is an edition or two off the one you have.

The guy has a legitimate beef.
Luftwafflles
Senior Member & WIS
Posts: 3056
Joined: July 9th 2012, 10:00pm
Facebook ID: 0
Location: Near the motor city..

Re: Gevril

Post by Luftwafflles » February 8th 2013, 4:22am

Hawk wrote:
Luftwafflles wrote:And not very bright. Amazon (and Gevril) clearly label the watch 165 ft. WR. That basically means "do not get wet". Plus, he paid twice as much as he should have, had he done a little research.

The "mouseover" on the water resistance specification on Amazon will get you a pop-up stating it's suitable for swimming. If it craps out in the shower I'd hazard a guess it's most assuredly not suitable for swimming.

I guess Amazon's copy of the Necronomicon is an edition or two off the one you have.

The guy has a legitimate beef.
Can't agree. He clearly states that a purchaser will be surprised upon receipt of the watch, that it is 165 ft. WR. That is true if said buyer ignores the clearly posted specs. If Amazon claims it is safe to swim with 165 ft WR, they are (IMHO) wrong. On that issue alone, he might have a beef. However, a hot shower is far more likely to compromise any gaskets then taking a swim. The two situations (again IMHO) are not comparable.
We called another exterminator to take care of the rat problem in the basement. This one hasn't come out either.







.
User avatar
Hawk
ASSHAT
Posts: 10235
Joined: October 8th 2010, 10:00pm
Facebook ID: 0
Location: Orlando, FL
Contact:

Re: Gevril

Post by Hawk » February 8th 2013, 5:01am

Luftwafflles wrote:
Hawk wrote:
Luftwafflles wrote:And not very bright. Amazon (and Gevril) clearly label the watch 165 ft. WR. That basically means "do not get wet". Plus, he paid twice as much as he should have, had he done a little research.

The "mouseover" on the water resistance specification on Amazon will get you a pop-up stating it's suitable for swimming. If it craps out in the shower I'd hazard a guess it's most assuredly not suitable for swimming.

I guess Amazon's copy of the Necronomicon is an edition or two off the one you have.

The guy has a legitimate beef.
Can't agree. He clearly states that a purchaser will be surprised upon receipt of the watch, that it is 165 ft. WR. That is true if said buyer ignores the clearly posted specs. If Amazon claims it is safe to swim with 165 ft WR, they are (IMHO) wrong. On that issue alone, he might have a beef. However, a hot shower is far more likely to compromise any gaskets then taking a swim. The two situations (again IMHO) are not comparable.

Then we will agree to disagree.

Amazon is hardly alone in stating that 50 meters is suitable for swimming. In fact you'll find it again here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_Resistant_mark

Now, I have heard that a shower is more likely to compromise gaskets than a swim. However, your assertion is the first time I've heard it outside the controlled environment known as watchgeeks where I admittedly dismissed it out of hand as a tale told by an idiot - specifically M. Davis.

Intuitively, such a thing would not be obvious. A swim in a Texas pool in August will be in water we described as "piss warm". A shower, barring someone who enjoys being boiled like a lobster, won't be in appreciably warmer water. Soap? Nah - soap gets its ass kicked by chlorine and pool chemicals.

It just doesn't make sense. It sounded like a strained verbal tap-dance to cover up for a crappy watch when Davis said it at watchgeeks and, frankly, it doesn't sound any less strained when you say it here.

No normal consumer in their right mind is going to equate "suitable for immersion to 50 meters" with "don't get it wet". Neither should this consumer have to research the matter to discover such a thing - particularly when such discovery requires tracking down random forum posters rather than the wikipedia article which says "suitable for swimming".

Thanks for the little walk down memory lane. I'd nearly forgotten the WG "Holy crap!! It's warm water and soap!" incantation. If warm water and soap compromises your gasket I suggest you have succeeded in finding the sorriest ass excuse for a gasket supplier as exists on the planet.
Luftwafflles
Senior Member & WIS
Posts: 3056
Joined: July 9th 2012, 10:00pm
Facebook ID: 0
Location: Near the motor city..

Re: Gevril

Post by Luftwafflles » February 8th 2013, 6:35am

I never quote Davis, unless to show him a buffoon. And suggesting I "strain" to emulate him is a bit of an insult. I would not swim in any watch less than 100 meters wr, no matter any assurance from any "wiki". That is from personal experience, not forum research. WR is static. Human movement isn't. Never mentioned soap. Maybe I should have specifically mentioned "hot" shower, I mistakenly thought it was obvious. Many watch companies warn of not subjecting their watches to extreme heat, regardless of gasket material. And lastly, yes, we will agree to disagree.
Last edited by Anonymous on February 8th 2013, 7:10am, edited 1 time in total.
We called another exterminator to take care of the rat problem in the basement. This one hasn't come out either.







.
User avatar
TemerityB
ASSHAT
Posts: 17111
Joined: June 12th 2010, 10:00pm
Facebook ID: 0
Location: New York City
Contact:

Re: Gevril

Post by TemerityB » February 8th 2013, 6:42am

Am I alone in thinking that WR ratings don't even apply when showering - and that you're never supposed to shower with a watch on, even dive styles? I'm being serious here. I don't understand why someone would want to shower with a watch on under any circumstance; it's just asking for it. And I know some brands even say not to shower with their watches on, so I get confused. After all, I'd hate to damage my Mark Namier.
WatchGeeks will go down in watch forum history as the worst watch related site that existed. Trolls, threats, bannings, and owners and sponsors talking out of their collective asses to fleece people out of hard earned money. - Koimaster
Post Reply

Return to “Affordable Watch Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: AJC and 1 guest