The 50 Fathoms, the JLC Reverso, the Royal Oak, and the Cartier Santos.

1) The Fifty Fathoms - Giving this some sensible thought I realized that while I'm not a "Rolex Guy" and don't own one, if I drop the Fifty Fathoms, I'm afraid the Submariner or Sea Dweller should probably, by all rights, be its replacement, not the Navitimer. The two Rolex's have a long history and are icons (and huge sellers to boot) with the Sea Dweller particularly famous as a diver's watch (like the "Comex" versions). That leaves the Reverso, Royal Oak and Santos.

2) The Reverso is a legend too, with its revolutionary case design and formal dress appeal. I've always hoped I might someday find a Hamilton Otis (ca 1938) which was an American version or copycat of that watch. Apparently JLC sued Hamilton forcing its discontinuation after a very short period of time. Oops, I digress. I'm finding it kind of hard to drop the Reverso from the Top Ten. It too is an icon and I must admit I'd love to own one for the infrequent formal occasions I attend.

3) The Cartier Santos has an aviation history as does the Breitling Navitimer and, in fact, predates the Navitimer by many years. I've personally never been enamored by the Santos however. I think its main attribute when introduced was legibility, not so much overall function. The Navitimer, on the other hand, can/could be used to calculate airspeed, fuel consumed, altitude ascension, etc. with its slide rule and it's also a chronograph. I think only recent, modern, models of the Santos are available as chronos. Hmmm. I'm getting close to subbing the Navitimer for the Santos. In fact, if I felt compelled/forced to include a Cartier in my own Top Ten list, I'd probably go with the Tank instead. That watch has sold for nearly a century with very little change other than size, and it is often copied by others. I have a friend who has about half a dozen Cartier Tanks and rarely wears anything else.

4) My last possible choice to drop down to number eleven is the AP Royal Oak. I believe this Gerald Genta (the man, not company) design was introduced sometime in the 1970's so it is fairly recent in comparison to all including our beloved Monaco. Very expensive (out of my reach) but very masculine and I guess it spawned other GG designs like the Patek Nautilus and inspired the Ingenieur (or was it the other way around? not sure). Hmmm, maybe I should eliminate the Ingenieur. Probably not, the IWC crowd is fiercely loyal to that brand and it did have that potent anti-magnetic case. Did it pre-date the equally anti-magnetic Rolex Milgauss I wonder?

Well, now I'm very confused and almost sorry I spoke up. However, its getting late so I'm going to make my choice. I would drop the Cartier Santos to make room for the Breitling Navitimer. To me, Cartier is more of a jewelry house than watchmaker which is influencing my decision (along with other factors mentioned above), I'm afraid. But, that's just my opinion. Your miles may vary. Any comments, thoughts?

My two Navitimer's are shown below,

This is the 2005 circa Navitimer "Montbrillant Edition", a manual wind, not automatic movement, intro'd to honor the original Montbrillant factory. The dial is very similar to the 1942-1946 "Chronomat" and I fell for it at first sight. The only "love at first sight" that ever worked out for me, LOL! 43mm case

This is the circa 1993 Navitimer "Snowbirds" in honor of the Canadian aviation acrobatic team. Limited edition of 1000, mine is 01XX, acquired on the 'bay, a "second chance" offer thanks to a non-paying bidder. 41mm case. They made a "Patrouille Suisse" version too with a beautiful blue emblem. I hope to find a reasonably priced one someday . . .

Steve

: I agree that the Navitimer is either (a) the one that should
: have been on the list, or (b) first runner up, in the 11th slot.
: Which leads to the question: which of the 10 would you delete
: from the list, in order to make room for the Navitimer?

: Remember . . . these are watches that we should "know" .
: . . not necessarily the ones that we should "own". Of
: course, this also explains the vintage versus modern thing: if
: you know the watch, then you probably know both the vintage and
: the modern.

: Jeff