Life with ONE great Leather Jacket vs. Life with MANY Leather Jackets

[IXL]

A friend of mine (single) stated he owned 17 motorcycles. When I asked him why he said..."Because I can."

I had to show this to my wife, as I have 14 motorcycles. She pointed out that I'm not single....

 

[Monitor]

I know a guy who has approx. fifty motorcycles - mostly 50's to 70's Ducatis, possibly 10 more in pieces, the rest being Laverdas, Triumphs and Nortons and few others I never even heard about. He's got five bikes sitting in his third floor apartment, one in the kitchen, covered with blankets so that the cat can sleep on it. He's currently trying to acquire three more bikes. He has around 500 pieces of WW1-WW2 firearms of all sorts (small artillery pieces included) and close to a 100 leather jackets.
I've asked him why once which lead to a good two hours lecture about how there was really no question about acquiring any of the motorcycles he has because of some crucially important feature unique to each one.
Good thing about knowing such person is that he'll buy literally anything I want to get rid of, as long as it holds his interest.

 

[Don Tomaso]

Lovely design. I want one of the more recent models, with the mechanical movement. I don't like quartz, and the anachronism of the mechanical movement appeals. If I do buy it, it'll be the most expensive watch I ever will buy.

Well, but the Ventura was a dedicated modernist design in its time to emphasise the tuning-fork-movement. So re-issueing this with a machanical movement is an anachronism too many.

 

[Don Tomaso]

I had to show this to my wife, as I have 14 motorcycles. She pointed out that I'm not single....

Well, there you are...

 

[Sloan1874]

I had to show this to my wife, as I have 14 motorcycles. She pointed out that I'm not single....

"...at the moment..."

 

[Edward]

Well, but the Ventura was a dedicated modernist design in its time to emphasise the tuning-fork-movement. So re-issueing this with a machanical movement is an anachronism too many.

That's exactly what I like about it: the clash of the modernist design and the old-school internals. It's like buying an amplifier that combines digital technology with valves. That, plus I have a strict 'no quartz, no batteries' rule for my watches.

 

[Stand By]

Yeah, same as how most people don't see the difference between a brown cafe racer and a black D-pocket, I don't think I'll ever get watches. I use cell phone to tell time nowadays and can't really stand having anything wrapped around my wrist. But I understand that there's something to be understood about it, so...

Interesting how this thread has detoured over to watches … interesting all the same.
I'd say that, for me Monitor, I only have two Rolex's - both courtesy of my dad: A 1958 black face Oyster Royal and a modern Air King. I love them - and the reason is that they are the only bit of "jewelry" I own. I don't have any piercings (so no studs), am too clean-cut and not "cool" enough to rock a tattoo, and I don't like rings or necklaces or even rope bracelets on me - it's not me. None of it.
But a nice watch … well, there's something classy and classic about them and, for me, it's a single slice of the high life (like my jackets too) and I really appreciate that.

As for the jackets, for 18 years I ran around in just two jackets: an A2 and an Irvin, both by Aviation Leathercraft, and was happy to do so. I had just two as I wanted one for the milder seasons and one for the colder seasons. It was all I needed for so long..
But these days, my needs have turned to wants as I have learned to appreciate the jackets especially. And these days I like a B3 and an Irvin (and a B-6). And I like a Luftwaffe as well as an A2/ANJ-3. And I like an L2-A nylon jacket for summer and a N3-B on cold and snowy days like today.
And money's tight these days - and so I get a lot of pleasure from looking at what other people have here and can live somewhat vicariously through others here as I appreciate their hunt and acquisitions.
Yeah, we could be described as somewhat obsessed around here, but there are worse things to be obsessed about.

 

[Fanch]

That's exactly what I like about it: the clash of the modernist design and the old-school internals. It's like buying an amplifier that combines digital technology with valves. That, plus I have a strict 'no quartz, no batteries' rule for my watches.

I am in concurrence with what you have to say. I have one cheap "throw away" quartz watch as a back up when I travel, although I have never had need of it thus far. I will say that my preference for watches parallels my preference for jackets, as I much prefer simple, understatement for both. I have an affinity for mechanical pilot watches (automatic over hand wound), preferably without date function, that includes most of the many past and present IWC pilot watches with black dial, and the 39mm Rolex Explorer. My favorite jackets are my Teamster, Maxwell, and a couple of A-2's that I own. There must be a pattern here.

 

[Justhandguns]

You guys really have money to burn! I am pretty much confined with some cheapo collection of Japanese watches other than those inherited from my dad's collection. As much as I like untouched original/repro jacket styles, I prefer my watches to be practical, robust and multifunctional. That is why I prefer some Japanese all steel diving watches as they are cheap to maintain (or zero maintance if you like, except for changing batteries on the quartz ones), and I hate to pay 500bucks to the AD for servicing my Rolex.

 

[Fanch]

Justhandguns, keep in mind that there is a difference between preference for something and actually owning it. One nice aspect of owning a Rolex is that service is rarely needed and can sometimes go several decades between. Sometimes not too. Some jackets are higher maintenance than others as well. My primary articles of maintenance are my to two old cars and home. [huh]

 

[Justhandguns]

Justhandguns, keep in mind that there is a difference between preference for something and actually owning it. One nice aspect of owning a Rolex is that service is rarely needed and can sometimes go several decades between. Sometimes not too. Some jackets are higher maintenance than others as well. My primary articles of maintenance are my to two old cars and home. [huh]

Hi Fanch, that's exactly what I thought! Until..... well, I paid my bloody service charge. Or I was just plain unlucky, twice. All I can comment is that, the older your Rolex, the more reliable it is.

 

[RJR]

I like mechanical watches also but agree that older Rolexs seem to run forever.

 

[IXL]

How old is "old" for a Rolex. I bought mine in around 1979. That doesn't seem all that old to me, but many of my friends state that it is ancient. Of course, these are guys that get a new I-phone about every 93 minutes.
Sorry to keep talking of watches on this, an otherwise "motorcycle" thread......

 

[Seb Lucas]

I thought Rolex recommended servicing every 5-7 years. I've not heard of any reputable mechanical watch that doesn't need servicing.

 

[dan_t]

All mechanical watches do require servicing approximately every 5 years.
The misunderstanding that this is not the case comes from the thinking that you only have a service when the watch noticeably starts to loose time.
The reality is that the oils and lubriation DO degenerate over time and move away from the crucial parts.
Hence, a service every five years ensures that you actually avoid unnecessary wear and tear & ultimately ensure that the individual components DO last for generations.

 

[Seb Lucas]

Thanks Dan thought so. One other reason I don't wear one anymore.

 

[Spitfire]

It's just amazing how this thread went from leatherjackets to jeans to watches. That's what I like about this forum - or parts of it anyway. Total lack of discipline.

 

[HoosierDaddy]

Ya think next it might be hats...?? :eeek:

 

[Smithy]

Ya think next it might be hats...?? :eeek:

Don't go there HD there's a whole subforum on that arcane and mystifying subject

 

[HoosierDaddy]

How about some Crocs for that horsehide..??