The $5,000-$7,000 GADA Watch

rolex explorer I 214270

Here I go again with another installment of the GADA watch series. If you’ve missed out up until now, this is where I pretend these “best of”, or, “top 5” opinion pieces mean anything at all, and give you my choices for my favorite “Go Anywhere, Do Anything” watches in a certain price point. Today I’m going to attack the $5,000 to $7,000 price range. Not only do I think GADA watches are awesome, but I think this bracket is a real sweet spot for the “one watch” guy looking to get into luxury watches. It’s likely that with these watches, you’ll notice a step up in overall build quality from sub-$4,000 watches, and you’ve also got a piece that will retain more value if you “buy smart”. So, without further ado, here are my picks for the $5,000-$7,000 GADA watch.

 

IWC Pilot’s Watch Mark XVII

iwc Mark xvii pilot

The IWC Pilot’s Watch Mark XVII was one of the first watches that popped into my head for this article. Having spent a lot of time with these, it’s one of the most versatile watches on the market. There was a brief moment where I considered the basic Ingenieur in its place, but ultimately, it was the Mark XVII’s chameleon-like abilities that won the day.

At 41mm in diameter, the Mark XVII has certainly grown since the days of its earliest predecessors, but it’s still a fantastic modern size. The case wears very nicely on the wrist, and it (thankfully) lacks the feeling of a bulky, oversized watch that’s so common today. And although there isn’t a strap on earth that would look bad on the Mark XVII, I would have to go with the bracelet out of the gates. It looks good, it’s damn comfortable, and it’s always easier to go from bracelet to strap, rather than the other way around (in terms of acquisition).

If I had bad things to say about the Mark XVII, it’d be the triple date window, and the stated 60m of water resistance. However, the date window sometimes doesn’t bother me (it’s hit and miss), and I really think the 60m has to be a conservative number. With a screw-down crown and caseback, and no other holes in the case, I would personally have little problem going for a swim with the Mark XVII. Then when I move on to the anti-magnetic characteristics, and the ultra-reliable ETA 2892 ticking away, all is forgotten. At $5,700 on the bracelet, the IWC Mark XVII makes for an excellent GADA watch.

Bonus: Mark XVII’s can be found brand new for somewhere around the $4,000 for savvy buyers. Also, don’t forget about some of its predecessors – they’re smaller, and can be had for even less.

 

Omega Aqua Terra Master Co-Axial 38.5mm

omega aqua terra blue

Here was another easy pick for me. I mean, how can you not go with a watch that James Bond wore? If there’s anyone that needs a GADA watch, it’s him. And truth be told, I think the Aqua Terra is one of the smartest choices for a Bond watch the series has made – it does almost nothing wrong in my book.

Omega being Omega, they offer the Aqua Terra Master Co-Axial in two sizes (38.5mm and 41.5mm), and a number of dial colors. For me, it has to be the blue dial and 38.5mm. I think it’s one of the best looking blue dials out there, and the size is just about perfect. If I had a magic lamp, I’d wish the case could be thinned out by a few millimeters, but that’s the sacrifice when it comes to the caliber 8500 and 150m of water resistance. As you can guess, the AT looks good on a number of different straps, and I also think Omega’s bracelet quality has gotten better and better. It seems that Omega really went after Rolex’s plethora of simple Oyster Perpetuals and Datejusts with the Aqua Terra, and they hit the nail on the head. For $6,000, the Aqua Terra is a no-brainer for a $5,000-$7,000 GADA watch.

Bonus: Like the Mark XVII, the Aqua Terra Master Co-Axial 38.5mm can be had for around $4,000 fairly easily. And if you don’t mind the previous iterations without the Master Co-Axial movement, you’ll save a bit more money.

 

Rolex Explorer I ref 214270

rolex 214270

As I just mentioned, Rolex has a host of GADA competitors with their DJ’s and Oyster Perpetuals, which made this choice the toughest of all. In the end, I couldn’t go away from the Explorer I. The history and conception of the Explorer I was impossible to ignore. This watch was created by iterations of research and development, in search of constructing a watch that really could go anywhere and do anything. They ended up with a watch that has found itself all over the world, in all climates, including breaking trail to the top of Mt Everest. I’m not sure if the spirit of a GADA watch could be better captured.

Ask me if I want an Explorer I, and I will say, “yes”. If you then ask me, “wait, which reference?” I will say, “yes”. Frankly, they’re all awesome, and I’d seriously wear any of them. However, the latest 39mm version is a smart iteration for today’s world. The previous 34mm and 36mm Explorers wouldn’t cut it for the modern man in terms of size. Thankfully, Rolex didn’t turn it into a monster like so many other brands are wont to do. Keeping it a hair under 40mm is perfect, and it wears like a charm. If I had to muster up criticism, though, I think the hands are slightly short for the markers, and I want a return of drilled-through lugs. Beyond those nitpicks, it’s the perfect watch. At $6,550, I’m not sure how the premium above the 39mm Oyster Perpetual is justified, but it’s still the most affordable sport Rolex watch. Long live the Explorer I.

Bonus: Brand new, you should have no problem finding an Explorer I for a little under $6,000, with used ones dropping another $500-$1,000. If you don’t mind the smaller case, the previous reference 14270 can be had for around $4,000. And if you’re a vintage guy, minty 1016s and 6610s are typically five-figures, but still underrated in my opinion.

Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedinmailby feather

Shane is one of the founding members of Wound For Life and a contributor to several other publications. A lover of all things mechanical, his true passions lie with watches and adventure. To keep up with the latest from Shane, you can follow him on Twitter (@shanegriffin1) or Instagram (@shanegriffin25). If you'd like to get in touch with Shane, email him at shane@woundforlife.com.

6 Comments

  • October 21, 2015

    TrevorXM

    At an outrageous $5,700 retail for an ETA 2892 (found in a $1000ish Hamilton or Tissot) and that silly date window, the ICW is completely disqualified from serious discussion. Of the Rolex and Omega, the Omega is the only one meeting the description of GADA. You can’t have a GADA watch without a basic date function. In fact, the Omega is perfect in every way at being what it’s supposed to be. The only criticisms that can be leveled against it are on the basis of personal taste.

  • October 21, 2015

    Ian

    Possibly my biggest watch judgment problem is that I basically want everything in this category. But that’s foolish! The whole point of this category is that any one of them will do for everything you could want.

    I think I’m down to 2 GADA watches now, a Mark XVI and a Zenith El Primero. But the Explorer and the new 39mm Oyster Perpetual both keep calling me, not to mention the days I wonder if I should reacquire an Ingenieur and a Nomos Club, or the days when I wonder what I’ll do if/when Omega releases a new Railmaster…

    • October 22, 2015

      Shane Griffin

      I think the 39mm OP would be perfect because of the dial colors. Your Mark XVI and Explorer would overlap in a lot of ways. If Omega does a Railmaster, it HAS to be manual wind. I’ll be very upset if they go and make it as thick as the SM300.

  • October 21, 2015

    Izaak

    After owning vintage almost exclusively, I recently decided to sell my collection and find one GADA watch. I also decided that I wanted it to be brand new. This was the tough part as I’ve always preferred vintage. Anyway, after MONTHS of deliberating, I recently bought the Explorer 214270. I can’t recommend it enough. It wears great and has all the capabilities you’re realistically ever going to need. IMHO, the “issue” with the shorter hands is overstated. It does not hinder time telling in the least. I also usually prefer drilled lugs, but I haven’t really missed them with this watch. The Explorer ain’t perfect, but try to find a better one at that price point. The Omega AT is a nice option, but the case is too thick and felt a bit awkward on my wrist. I also found the dial to be a little too busy. Just some thoughts from a guy who has owned A LOT of watches.

    • October 22, 2015

      Shane Griffin

      Thanks for your comments. For me, the hands don’t create an issue with time telling, it’s just when I look at it, the proportions of the hands to the dial seem off. It’s a balance issue. It doesn’t keep me from appreciating the Explorer, just a tiny imperfection that I notice. I agree that the AT could be thinner — it’s a bit more wearable than Omega divers though.

  • March 25, 2016

    Tom

    Hi! I’ll suggest that 36 mm is a preference. I recently purchased the Explorer 114270 and it’s working very well for me as an everyday work watch. I’m a 6 footer so I can wear a larger diameter, but the 36mm on the stainless band looks fine.