Anyone like watches?

scarysharp said:
Why anyone would even use an analog wristwatch today is beyond me.
They make great collector pieces, but as far as telling time,waterproofness and durabality I cant see how any of them could compete with a good Casio G-Shock
Click to expand...

I could go on for hours trying to reply to this one. I mentioned earlier that I used a Casio G shock during my military career and for that type of duty g-shocks, citizen aqualands (my old longtime dive watch for actually diving), etc... are hard to beat.

But an analogous question would be... Why buy a $900 knife when I can purchase a Rambo 'knock-off' knife from US Calvary and a box cutter from Home Depot. They're both knives and both cut. I can probably get the same steel as the $900 job in a similar knife for $825 less.

I currently use my GSAR for diving and don't see myself changing it out in the near future.
 
Last edited:
scarysharp said:
Why anyone would even use an analog wristwatch today is beyond me.
They make great collector pieces, but as far as telling time,waterproofness and durabality I cant see how any of them could compete with a good Casio G-Shock
Click to expand...
I DO NOT like digital watches period. I very much prefer my analog & automatic watches. They have a class to them, that NO digital watch can come close too. You can KEEP your G-Shocks, and I WILL keep my Tag Heuer & other assorted watches. I could go on and on about this, but I won't.
 
I've become a Marathon shill. :D I wear a GSAR and a Navigator's all the time.

I will also admit to wearing a G-Shock if I am going into some particularly nasty place. :eek: :foot:

I do prefer the analog watches, though, and particularly automatics. :thumbup:
 
T-SAR :cool::thumbup:.
DSC02598.jpg
 
scarysharp said:
Why anyone would even use an analog wristwatch today is beyond me.
They make great collector pieces, but as far as telling time,waterproofness and durabality I cant see how any of them could compete with a good Casio G-Shock
Click to expand...

To each his own. I personally can't see why anyone would want a digital watch, but obviously some people do or they wouldn't make them. I like being able to quickly glance at my analog watch and know what the time is....I don't have to stop and read it like with a digital. I also like the fact that if my automatic watch breaks it can be repaired.

As far as waterproofness and durability go, I'd put a Rolex or a Seiko diver up against that Casio any day.
 
As well as, the divers I own, are automatic..no battery needed, with COSC specs, so they keep almost perfect time and are rated to 1000ft depth...how deep is your g-shock? oh..200m.

David
 
At the risk of being the Devil's Advocate, this might be intersting.

http://forums.watchuseek.com/showthread.php?t=128625

I own several G's which I wear for work. Mainly because I use either the countdown timer or stopwatch for finding out cycle times on a new job or keeping jobs constantly running by using the CDT to know when the cycle ends. Those things you can't do so easily with an auto watch ;).

I own digital, quartz, autos and I like them all. The argument between the 3 will go on forever. As already mentioned, there is a use for digital. And some SEALS are issued a DW-6600 G-Shock :cool:.
 
XD45 said:
I own several G's which I wear for work. Mainly because I use either the countdown timer or stopwatch for finding out cycle times on a new job or keeping jobs constantly running by using the CDT to know when the cycle ends. Those things you can't do so easily with an auto watch ;).
Click to expand...

I can time cycles quite easily with my Omega Speedmaster. :D As for countdown timing, a simple diver's bezel can be used for that. .

I own digital, quartz, autos and I like them all. The argument between the 3 will go on forever. As already mentioned, there is a use for digital. And some SEALS are issued a DW-6600 G-Shock :cool:.
Click to expand...

In the end, it all depends on what you like. If they didn't sell, they wouldn't make them.

At one point SEALs and Royal Marines/Royal Navy were issued Rolex Submariners. I imagine the change to G-shocks and CWC watches had more to do with cost than anything else.

I almost forgot....an analog watch can also be used as a field expedient compass.
 
I bought a Modded Seiko about a month or two ago. It was called a PMMM (Poor Man's Marine Master). Basically a lower end Seiko Automatic diver's watch with new hands and the day/date wheels swapped from white to black. Really nice watch and it does look like a Marine Master. I just couldn't get used to having to constantly reset it (I don't wear a watch every single day due to my work). I wound up giving it to my brother for his birthday a couple of weeks back. I found a smokin' deal on Traser H3 Tritium Super Sport watches and picked one up. Ronda 715 Movement, sapphire crystal, steel case & bezel with nice bright tritium tubes on the elements, hands and second hand. Keeps very accurate time and I don't have to reset it if I don't wear it for a day or two. I replaced the steel bracelet with a black Seiko band. I'm very happy with it.

Expensive watches are just like expensive knives. You just can't explain why to some people.

Here's an example: I will call it the "Poor Man's Sea Dweller".

The real deal: Rolex Sea Dweller $5950
RolexSeaDweller.jpg

The "Poor Man's Sea Dweller". Timex Men's Dress Watch With Metal Band Model: T297819J New $65.00
Timex.jpg

According to several leading watch magazines, the Timex quartz action is more accurate than the Rolex.... and it has IndiGlo.
Which would you rather lose or break? A $6K Rolex or a $65 Timex? Hhmmmmm, how many Timex's can you buy for $6K

The exact same thing can be said about knives, mine included. But I won't go there. ;)
 
I agree, quartz is better but I like mechanical watches more :-).

Breitling and Oris for me. My Breitling SuperOcean with blue dial gets the most wrist time. A simple Frederique Constance (new brand, decent quality for money but a bit boring) for formal occasions.

I’ ll probably get an Edox sports watch (Class 1) with ceramic bezel in the next few weeks. Also one of my Seiko’s is undergoing a modification, orange hands and a new dial.

Rafael
 
I own 3 mechanicals (1950 Omega, 1993 Zodiac Chronograph, Seiko 009), 1 Tag quartz analog and a Timex Ironman digital. I love 'em all except the analog quartz. The problem with analog quartz watches for me is that when I glance quickly at the time, it looks as if the watch has stopped due to it's non-sweep second hand.
 
I think they've actually done studies that say that humans perceive time better with an analog dial. The physical presence of the hands provides a tangible reality for the mind to grasp. This is why nurses and EMTs nearly always choose analog; it's more intuitive when taking BP.

Accordingly, a mechanical/automatic watch gives a far more realistic representation of the passage of time.

Time does not pass in the discrete segments: the stop-start, stop-start, of the quartz dial. -Let alone the digital display.

It flows, inexorably, as with the mechainical.

Can you tell I'm a watch guy, and I wear an automatic? ;)

For me, it's a Rolex Explorer and an Omega Seamaster Professional Chronograph (Bond chrono.)
 
tortoise said:
Accordingly, a mechanical/automatic watch gives a far more realistic representation of the passage of time.

Time does not pass in the discrete segments:
Click to expand...


Actually, it does.




Time does not pass in the discrete segments: the stop-start, stop-start, of the quartz dial. -Let alone the digital display.

It flows, inexorably, as with the mechainical.
Click to expand...


Most mechanical watches are noticably tick-tock; they make noticable, discrete, jumping motions.

Seiko's Spring Drive is the first and only with a truly flowing, continuous motion. Zenith's El Primero movements come close.
 
I cant wear analog. too heavy, normally have steel bands. I find them uncomfortable.

Digital watches are normally lighter, more reliable.

I don't care about the , price, inner beauty, and arty farty element of mechanical watches. They do not appeal to me.

Digital is simply better. Some people just cant face the fact that technology is on the digital side.
to each their own
 
Gollnick said:
Actually, it does.

...
Seiko's Spring Drive is the first and only with a truly flowing, continuous motion.
Click to expand...

The Seiko Spring Drive is a wonderful movement. But I think the Spring Drive watches are a bit expensive for how they look, just personal taste because fit and finish is excellent.

I have no problem whatever with quartz watches (or mechanical/quartz hybrids like the Spring Drive) and realize that the jumping seconds-hand was once a highly desirable mechanical complication.

I just like mechanical watches better.

I might get a high end quartz watch though, because the absolute lack of maintenance other then the battery change and accuracy are practical. Also I bought my girlfriend a quartz, most women seem to prefer the convenience of quartz.

Rafael
 
gazaati said:
I cant wear analog. too heavy, normally have steel bands. I find them uncomfortable.

Digital watches are normally lighter, more reliable.

I don't care about the , price, inner beauty, and arty farty element of mechanical watches. They do not appeal to me.

Digital is simply better. Some people just cant face the fact that technology is on the digital side.
to each their own
Click to expand...

What? Mechanical things always fail and electronics never do? I was around when the digital watches first appeared on the market, and man, were they expensive.Now of course they are cheaper but they still can fail just like any other watch. I have owned both and I have to say I have had more digitals fail than quartz. I still wear and use a 30 year old quartz I bought at Radio Shack, works perfectly. Technology may be on the digital side but that doesn't make it better.
 
Gollnick said:
Actually, it does.
Click to expand...

Actually I'd argue that it doesn't. My basic observation was about time: that it flows. Fair enough, I did suggest that the operation of mechanical timepieces was analogous...




Gollnick said:
Most mechanical watches are noticabley tick-tock; they make noticable, discrete, jumping motions.

Seiko's Spring Drive is the first and only with a truly flowing, continuous motion. Zenith's El Primero movements come close.
Click to expand...


Which brings us to: I would suggest that "noticabley tick-tock" is an opinion question.

No question, the SD is truly smooth, but if you feel that the ten beat per second (full house) El Primero is close, I'm not sure why at viewing distance, any high beat movement at eight beats per (including a de-tuned EP in a Daytona for example) would be noticabley different.

-And if one did find it so, that should only reinforce my point. To a person so attuned, I would expect nothing might look so unnatural as the herky-jerky, time-freezing of a quartz analog.

In any case, I stand by the assertion (with a nod to you and the caveat) for most, a 28.8K movement is close enough to flowing to create that perception. A quartz analog does many things well, but in this, I can't see where it even enters the arena of debate. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top