are high end watches really worth it?

Hi All-
gbaker said:
"... For the past two months I've not even used a watch. Been outdoors too much which tends to get them scratched. I've just been using my cell phone..."
Click to expand...
Some cellular services receive the correct time beamed from the network and therefore won't work if you're not within range of a tower. Besides, a cellular telephone can't work as a field-expedient compass if needed! :)

~ Blue Jays ~
 
Hi Vermont Woodsman-

There is nothing like a stainless steel Omega Seamaster Professional as a great all-around watch. This is the 42mm GMT version of the watch on leather. It looks even better with a strong and waterproof kevlar strap or coupled with a matching stainless steel bracelet:

standard.jpg

~ Blue Jays ~
 
cockroachfarm said:
You simply will not get a rational discussion between a watch collector who thinks you're nuts for spending $3,000 on a forged bowie and a knife collector who thinks you're nuts for spending $3,000. on a Breguet.
Click to expand...

That's worth quoting a time or two.... :cool:
 
Understanding diminishing returns, they're absolutely worth it.

The materials used: better steel, gold, etc. will hold up and look good longer. A simple example: in twenty years, the dial on an "average" watch will be faded, the hands corroded. A new Rolex, in contrast, uses white gold hands and marker surrounds. They use 904 stainless for the case and bracelet. These aren't affectations, they're functional improvements. These two things alone will keep a Rolex looking sharp decades down the road. Look at an average Rolex from '85 versus an average Timex or even a Seiko. (And I like Seiko) from that time.

Worldwide service and nearly infinite parts availability are also advantages of the "big" companies.

As to accuracy, while I don't doubt the rare stories of very accurate Seikos, these are exceptions. The most common Seiko automatic movement, the 7s26 is not known for precision. Even Bill Yao only sends his Seikos out regulated for +/-15 seconds per day. That's over two to nearly four times more error than chronometer specs. Bill says that Seikos often go 25 seconds a day, are known for not holding a regulation and are very positionally sensitive. None of these apply to Rolex, for instance.

Now if you want top shelf stuff and you like Seiko, the Grand Seiko brand is for you.
 
tortoise said:
As to accuracy, while I don't doubt the rare stories of very accurate Seikos, these are exceptions. The most common Seiko automatic movement, the 7s26 is not known for precision. Even Bill Yao only sends his Seikos out regulated for +/-15 seconds per day. That's over two to nearly four times more error than chronometer specs. Bill says that Seikos often go 25 seconds a day, are known for not holding a regulation and are very positionally sensitive.
Click to expand...

That's why I reckon mine is a freak - not kidding it's only a few seconds out per month and has been that way for a year now.
 
Temper said:
No, its not, you will get more than you paid for your Rolex whenever you sell it.

I got my Explorer II in the UK in 82, list price was 1,100 Pounds. Its 2,250 today. If I bought one today second hand I would have to pay more than the original 1,100.
Click to expand...

The amount of money may be larger, but you have to take inflation into account. According to this British inflation calculator for example, those £1,100 from 1982 are worth more than £2,500 today, and even more if the development of average earnings and GDP are taken into account. Adjusted for inflation, today´s Explorer II is thus a bit cheaper than its counterpart in 1982, and selling an old one today would mean losing money.

Kristofer
 
My bad I meant 1992 (My 21st Birthday year) with the same calcuator using retail it works out at 1482 pounds. I dare say I would get more than that for it now.

Cool calc though I had fun remembering how much stuff used to cost :)
 
Your "exception" for optics also applies to watches, oil filters, wine, furniture, automobile tires, food, motorcycle suspension components, clothing, ski equipment, camping gear, bicycles, cigars, audio equipment, and a whole host of consumer goods where there is a marketplace demanding the highest quality...
Click to expand...

My point was that, in the upper ranges of quality, you can buy a product that does the same thing or darn near the same thing for a fraction of the cost.

A demand for the absolute highest quality is something different.

Hey, I'm not knocking it entirely. I'm a gear snob when it comes to fishing tackle or camping equipment or building tools. I'm just saying that I realize I get by just as well with my $100 REI or Kelty tent as with a much more expensive $400 model.

I don't buy crap. REI and Kelty already make good tents. But once you go past gear that is already quality gear and move upward into "highest quality" gear, you usually pass a point of diminishing returns in my opinion. Too often for me, it just ain't worth it.

I'll give you auto tires though. Michelin tires are well worth the extra cash from a functional (not aesthetic, but functional) perspective. They last and last.
 
Alot is made of the "pass it down to your grandchildren" aspect.
But technology can have a very unpredictable effect on the usefulness of certain heirlooms.

I once worked in an electronics/stereo store, and one day a guy came looking for parts for his daddy's old "reel-to-reel" tape recorder.
This was in 1992 and there's nothing we could do for him except advise him to search the internet and classifieds.

There may come a time when it becomes so expensive to get a hand-made automatic watch serviced, or that repair parts become so rare, that the watch eventually becomes merely a "dead" paper-weight.

Yes, the Rolex could be passed down for two hundred years, but would the receipient want it two hundred years from now?

Allen.
 
Blue Jays said:
Hi All- Some cellular services receive the correct time beamed from the network and therefore won't work if you're not within range of a tower. Besides, a cellular telephone can't work as a field-expedient compass if needed! :)

~ Blue Jays ~
Click to expand...

Oh living on the MS gulf coast makes it clear that a cell phone w/o signal is useless, but it still gave the time. FWIW I could get a weak signal at work but none at home. Anyway by outdoors I didn't intend to convey that I was in the field. I meant climbing on roofs and through debris. Normally I'm in the office 75% of the time and the field 25%. These were reversed for several weeks.
 
The biggest problem with cheaper watches is the size. Most are too thick and heavy to get one with full features. I was looking at watches for $200-300 just to get most of the on-paper requirements, and even then I didn't quite like any of them.

I gave up and decided to stick with a max price of $100 and give up on all the fancy auto date and chrono features. Skagen makes some really nice stuff for less than that. My $20 Timex "camper" is nice, but extremely loud.
 
Hi Carl64-

Nobody wants small watches because they are typically difficult to read at a glance. Clarity and legibility is popular now.

~ Blue Jays ~
 
Blue Jays said:
Hi Carl64-

Nobody wants small watches because they are typically difficult to read at a glance. Clarity and legibility is popular now.

~ Blue Jays ~
Click to expand...

I meant thin, not a small face.
 
Hi Carl64-

Skagen does make thinner watches, but the trend has been towards a stronger and more robust construction. The very clean-looking chronograph model from SINN pictured below is typical of the migration towards this type of watch:


Sinn756.JPG


~ Blue Jays ~
 
Blue Jays said:
Hi Carl64-

Skagen does make thinner watches, but the trend has been towards a stronger and more robust construction. The very clean-looking chronograph model from SINN pictured below is typical of the migration towards this type of watch:
Click to expand...

That looks pretty nice. But I think 1/8" titanium cases are strong enough already. You still have the lense and the tiny spring bars. It seems unbalanced to have such a hefty case.
 
I get into this discussion with one of my local buddies who does the Omega / Rolex thing. Yeppers ..., he ponies up for a $150 - $300 service on at least one of his high dollar watches each year. He had his Omega done last year and it's already losing time.

His watches are beautiful, but I have to admit, I'm on the Seiko side of this discussion. I've got four of them and have done little more than replace an occasional battery over the last decade plus.

Razz
 
I'm with the people that aren't for spending a lot on a watch. I get by with my 80$ swatch and my 40$ dakota good enough.
 
Hi DaveH-

That is the SINN 756 which is available on either a strap or metal bracelet. If you desire a plain face, the SINN 656 model doesn't have the chronograph features. The best place to see pictures is on the WatchBuys site. Click on each picture to see a larger image.

If you like those models, you'll probably also like FORTIS watches. They share the same no-nonsense, utilitarian, tool-type appearance.

~ Blue Jays ~
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top