This Is Your Chance to Design the Next Hot Watch
WatchesAnd a good reminder of how hard that actually is.By Oren HartovMarch 7, 2025Save this storySaveSave this storySaveThis week, beloved microbrand Furlan Marri launched its Community Design Lab, a voting platform that allows fans to submit design requests for a watch that will debut in 2026. Anyone who votes will get a discount on said watch, and five lucky participants will also receive Furlan Marri gifts and accessories throughout the year. But the free stuff and discounts aren’t really the point—getting a chance to take part in the watch design process is an exciting—and, I came to find out, daunting—proposition.Four years ago, microbrand Furlan Marri came along and debuted its brilliant mechaquartz-powered chronos inspired by coveted vintage Patek Philippe references for well below vintage Patek prices. All of a sudden, these rare midcentury designs were available to all and at a price that wouldn’t give the average collector a heart attack. Then, the brand went ahead and began making vintage-inspired mechanical watches to boot. Before long, Furlan Marri had won a GPHG award for one of the world’s simplest perpetual calendars. That’s quite a run for an upstart company started by two passionate collectors! The brand is taking a break from pillaging auction catalogs to give its community the chance to make a watch.The new Design Lab provides a series of prompts and choices. The choices just scratch the surface of what it takes to make a watch and even these feel like quite the undertaking. FM asks about everything from size and material to which complications you want on a watch. The first was case size. Jumping in one-millimeter increments from 35mm to 41mm, I had the chance to state my preference. Seeing as I wasn’t sure whether I’d be landing on a dressier or a more utilitarian design, I went for 37mm—a “Goldilocks” size, to my mind. The next prompt dealt with shape, and I was given six blueprint-style drawings of various case silhouettes to choose from. Because I’m a boring traditionalist, I chose “round.”The next question was Shakespearean: “To lug, or not to lug?” Again, being conservative, I opted for lugs. A materials question followed: Would I care for a tantalum piece? Bronze? “Other?” You probably know what I said: That’s right, stainless steel. (What can I say? I’m a Submariner guy. And steel is utilitarian.) Next was Complications. Here’s where I got (slightly) weird: I wanted a full calendar—which wasn’t an option—so I chose “Other,” and then manually typed in my preference. (Perpetuals are expensive. Full calendars? Much less so.) I was then greeted with a multiple-choice question asking what kind of watches I like, such as Dive, Classic, Pilot, etc. (I chose all of them.) Next? Indices. (“Arabic.”) Then? Dial color—multiple choice. (I went ham. No orange, though.) Bracelet? Everything but rubber. (I’m not making a dive watch.)Maybe the most important question has nothing to do with aesthetics: FM asked which kind of movement I wanted. While I was perfectly happy to use quartz-powered watches in the army, I’m not generally enchanted by them the way I am by mechanical watches, so I chose ‘Mechanical” and “Automatic,” with “Mechanical” likely indicating “hand-wound,” in this case.That was the end of my part at least. The Furlan Marri team now has to actually design and build the theoretical watch using the data collated from countless voters…and man, does that seem like a ton of work. We watch writers love to complain about features and tweaks that we think were mishandled or that should’ve been enacted, rarely taking into account the sheer number of countless tiny choices that go into making a watch—any watch. If nothing else, this little voting exercise has given me that much more perspective on what goes into making these objects we love After all, crafting a little mechanical universe is a complicated undertaking, and one that’s certainly not for me…I just wanna wear it once it’s done!
This week, beloved microbrand Furlan Marri launched its Community Design Lab, a voting platform that allows fans to submit design requests for a watch that will debut in 2026. Anyone who votes will get a discount on said watch, and five lucky participants will also receive Furlan Marri gifts and accessories throughout the year. But the free stuff and discounts aren’t really the point—getting a chance to take part in the watch design process is an exciting—and, I came to find out, daunting—proposition.
Four years ago, microbrand Furlan Marri came along and debuted its brilliant mechaquartz-powered chronos inspired by coveted vintage Patek Philippe references for well below vintage Patek prices. All of a sudden, these rare midcentury designs were available to all and at a price that wouldn’t give the average collector a heart attack. Then, the brand went ahead and began making vintage-inspired mechanical watches to boot. Before long, Furlan Marri had won a GPHG award for one of the world’s simplest perpetual calendars. That’s quite a run for an upstart company started by two passionate collectors! The brand is taking a break from pillaging auction catalogs to give its community the chance to make a watch.
The new Design Lab provides a series of prompts and choices. The choices just scratch the surface of what it takes to make a watch and even these feel like quite the undertaking. FM asks about everything from size and material to which complications you want on a watch. The first was case size. Jumping in one-millimeter increments from 35mm to 41mm, I had the chance to state my preference. Seeing as I wasn’t sure whether I’d be landing on a dressier or a more utilitarian design, I went for 37mm—a “Goldilocks” size, to my mind. The next prompt dealt with shape, and I was given six blueprint-style drawings of various case silhouettes to choose from. Because I’m a boring traditionalist, I chose “round.”
The next question was Shakespearean: “To lug, or not to lug?” Again, being conservative, I opted for lugs. A materials question followed: Would I care for a tantalum piece? Bronze? “Other?” You probably know what I said: That’s right, stainless steel. (What can I say? I’m a Submariner guy. And steel is utilitarian.) Next was Complications. Here’s where I got (slightly) weird: I wanted a full calendar—which wasn’t an option—so I chose “Other,” and then manually typed in my preference. (Perpetuals are expensive. Full calendars? Much less so.) I was then greeted with a multiple-choice question asking what kind of watches I like, such as Dive, Classic, Pilot, etc. (I chose all of them.) Next? Indices. (“Arabic.”) Then? Dial color—multiple choice. (I went ham. No orange, though.) Bracelet? Everything but rubber. (I’m not making a dive watch.)
Maybe the most important question has nothing to do with aesthetics: FM asked which kind of movement I wanted. While I was perfectly happy to use quartz-powered watches in the army, I’m not generally enchanted by them the way I am by mechanical watches, so I chose ‘Mechanical” and “Automatic,” with “Mechanical” likely indicating “hand-wound,” in this case.
That was the end of my part at least. The Furlan Marri team now has to actually design and build the theoretical watch using the data collated from countless voters…and man, does that seem like a ton of work. We watch writers love to complain about features and tweaks that we think were mishandled or that should’ve been enacted, rarely taking into account the sheer number of countless tiny choices that go into making a watch—any watch. If nothing else, this little voting exercise has given me that much more perspective on what goes into making these objects we love After all, crafting a little mechanical universe is a complicated undertaking, and one that’s certainly not for me…I just wanna wear it once it’s done!
