question for watch guys

Minjin said:
Not any better than a much cheaper Corvette Z06 or EVO FQ400...
Click to expand...

You can't compare a Corvette with a Lambo or Porsche. American cars do not even come close to European cars in terms of driveability

Anyway, back to the watch topic. I never once stated anything about status symbol. I have no problems with anyone wearing a mechanical watch but i just have a feeling that most people wearing one always try to justify their purchase in some way...like telling other people why a mechanical watch is better and what not. IS IT REALLY BETTER IN TERMS OF WHAT IT'S SUPPOSED TO DO? AS IN KEEP TIME...???

If you like mechanical watches ....fine....i like 'em too. But when it comes to timekeeping, a quartz watch from a quality manufacturer can consistently beat it.

Sure mechanical watches are great but saying to other people that it has soul and it's a great piece of engineering and what not is just nonsense. YOU LIKE WHAT YOU LIKE. PERIOD.

You do not need to justify your purchases. Somehow mechanical watch wearers always feel a need to do so. If i ask anyone how accurate is their mechanical watch compared to a quartz watch....what would they say? Can you just answer the question without going into stuff like mechanical excellence, soul, it doesn't need a battery, accuracy is not everything, blah blah blah....
 
pcnorton said:
Things I do not need and can't explain to you why my picks are what suits me: Watches, pens, guitars, knives.
Click to expand...

I feel the same way about certain things as well. I've always hated the Strat...and i've never liked expensive pens. But in the end when you buy it, it's not because it is better than other choices. It's just because there's something inside you that wants it. Usually it's because of some sentimental reason. Maybe you've always wanted one as a kid or maybe your grandad or dad used to wear it.

I just feel that everytime someone asks for advice on which watch to buy there's just too many people saying 'buy a mechanical watch'. However, the reason why people buy a mechanical watch isn't because it keeps great time. There surely is some other reason inside them..however irrational.
 
Point44 said:
IS IT REALLY BETTER IN TERMS OF WHAT IT'S SUPPOSED TO DO? AS IN KEEP TIME...???
Click to expand...

Has anyone said that they are? I don't think so. Everyone I know who is into mechanicals freely admits that they will not keep time as well as a quartz watch but they certainly can keep time well enough for most of our needs. My life isn't scheduled on a minute by minute basis, so if my watch is off by a minute or two....no big deal to me. My watch runs +1 sec per day....that is good enough for me. I'll reset the watch every few months when a date change is required and that too doesn't bother me...actually it's kind of fun, giving me a chance to play with my watch.

Point44 said:
Sure mechanical watches are great but saying to other people that it has soul and it's a great piece of engineering and what not is just nonsense.
Click to expand...

I don't know about the whole "soul" thing. I think that is a term people use for lack of something better. Mechanicals do, to me anyway, have a special something about them. I think it has to do with the interaction between the wearer and the actual functioning of the watch. An auto will quickly run out of power if not worn....sort of a neat co-dependency thing going on. It needs to be worn to work, and a person needs to wear it to tell time with it. I still don't think I would say they have a "soul" though...that is silly, but I do think they have something that appeals to me.

As for being a great peice of engineering, I can't imagine you can claim that it isn't! It's a little machine made of gears, springs, etc. that can keep time to within 99.99% accuracy (or actually better then that...that is just based off COSC ranges) all contained in a case measuring less then 1.5 inches wide and .5 inches tall. To me, that is quite impressive.

I can see why they don't appeal to everyone. A person who is the "practical" sort will probably find very little draw to a mechanical watch, and that is cool...I can understand that.




To say that a mechanical watch is simply a status symbol is a complete generalization and in most cases wrong! A watch brand may be a status symbol, and that watch may be a mechanical, but most people buying those couldn't care less how the watch works because they just want the status symbol. I appreciate all mechanicals, from the "symbol" watches like Rolex and Patek (not that I could ever afford a Patek) all the way down to the Seiko 5's that can be had off the 'bay for about $50. In the circles I run in nobody notices my watch....ever! Other college students couldn't care less, they mostly know nothing of watches except for the Fossils you can pick up at the mall...and that is ok. I bought my watch because I like the style, the quality and the history....not to impress someone else. It also makes me happy knowing that in 20 or 30 years my watch will still be functional and worhty of being passed down to my children. Sure, it will cost a few hundred bucks every five years or so, but that is well worth it to me to have something to pass down to future generations. This will be the watch that I wear at my graduation, my first day at my first real job, and hopefully on the day I meet and marry their mother (assuming I actually find a women who will have me again:)) That may not appeal to some, but it does to me. Let's just try and avoid generalizing about people who are into nice mechanicals, we're not all concerned with what others think of what is on our wrist.
 
slide13 said:
It also makes me happy knowing that in 20 or 30 years my watch will still be functional and worhty of being passed down to my children. Sure, it will cost a few hundred bucks every five years or so, but that is well worth it to me to have something to pass down to future generations. This will be the watch that I wear at my graduation, my first day at my first real job, and hopefully on the day I meet and marry their mother (assuming I actually find a women who will have me again:)) That may not appeal to some, but it does to me. Let's just try and avoid generalizing about people who are into nice mechanicals, we're not all concerned with what others think of what is on our wrist.
Click to expand...

It's always nice to have something to remember events by. I wish i'd have the money to get a nice watch before i graduate. Just over a month left till graduation and i don't have anywhere close to buying an SMP or Sinn.
 
Please re-read my earlier post.

I said that high-dollar watches are status symbols.
And I stand by that remark.
If you pay over $1000.00 dollars for a watch, you're not just buying a timepiece. you're buying a status symbol.

I did'nt say that all mechanical watches are status symbols.

This is a case of reading what you wanted to read and not what I actually wrote.

Allen.
 
Point44 said:
I've always hated the Strat...
Click to expand...
Educate me please....what's a "Strat"??:confused:

Violin_on_notes.gif
 
They also make the Telecaster, as opposed to the Les Paul by Gibson
(these are electric guitars), kind of like a Ford vs. Chevy preference thing.

I can dig the passion that a discussion like this evokes. I would just like to remind everyone that a knife that costs over $200 generally tends to be a status thing, kind of like a Buck 110 vs a Sebenza.

There is a big difference between what you need and what you like/want. I gave up on Timex a long time ago, but it serves a purpose. I wear Seiko quartz watches most of the time for the last 20 years, but I own some different watches, and there is a Rolex in my future in about 1 1/2 years.

Status, yeah, you bet! But there is also the fact, like others have said, that there is something pretty cool about having a watch that can be rebuilt, when necessary, and passed on to future generations. Some watches like my Seiko Divers' ana/digi, when it dies, it is dead, no more parts available. That is not likely to happen with a Rolex sub, in this lifetime or the next.

Best Regards,

STeven Garsson
 
allenC said:
Please re-read my earlier post.

I said that high-dollar watches are status symbols.
And I stand by that remark.
If you pay over $1000.00 dollars for a watch, you're not just buying a timepiece. you're buying a status symbol.

I did'nt say that all mechanical watches are status symbols.

This is a case of reading what you wanted to read and not what I actually wrote.

Allen.
Click to expand...


I still disagree though. An expensive watch isn't necessarily a status symbol because most people will never recognize it. Sure, if it says Panerai, Rolex, Omega, Breitling, etc. they will. But what about Sinn, UN, JL, VC, Kobold, Bell & Ross, IWC, etc. Most people have never heard of those. To be a true status symbol, I beleive an item would have to be recognized as such.
 
I'll still take my 200m Seiko (SHC015) QUARTZ dive watch over any automatic watch...I've only had it for 4 days now, but it hasn't gained or lost as much as a second.
 
I have a few questions relating to this thread hopefully someone can help me out with, and I apologize in advance if I drift off topic.

1) Many are claiming Quartz watches to be "tougher" and more durable than a mechanical. My personal experience with watches has been just the opposite. However I do not own a high-end quartz watch, nothing more expensive then a Citizen eco-drive. The only mechanical movements I have experience with are those in the Seiko 5 and 007 and the Rolex 31 jewel movements. These movements have proven very reliable, accurate and durable, I know a guy that once hit his 007 accidently with a hammer and didn't damage it at all. So WHY or HOW are quartz watches more durable/tougher, or are the movements I'm familiar with exceptional mechanicals compared to crappy quartzes? In other words is a watch like the Omega Seamaster which is available both ways tougher as a quartz or mechanical and why?

2) How LONG do the End-of-LIFE indicators typically run a quartz watch with that feature. None of my watches have such a feature. I am thinking of only buying a quartz watch with such a feature bc I am tired of my quartzes which the ones I have with a typical 2 year battery life dying unexpectedly, often when I need to wear them, for business, etc. which is why I switched to mechanicals and solars to begin with. In other words how long will the watch run while letting you know it needs a battery without stopping?

3) What are the BEST in terms of reliability, accuracy, and durability of the quartz movements out there with End-of-Life battery indicators? I am especially interested in the Seiko Quarz Diver and the Omega Seamaster Pro Quartz, also how good is the Accutron Nantucket, good looking watch.
 
Quartz watches are generally "tougher" than mechanical watches because there are less moving parts in a quartz.
That does'nt mean that any quartz watch is stronger than any mechanical watch, but the odds are that a quartz watch can take a fall or get banged around and be more likely to survive than a mechanical.

But also to be considered, a mechanical watch can probably have its "guts' repaired while a quartz might have to have its "guts" replaced.
On the other hand, it would probably cost as much to repair the mechanical as to replace the quartz.

I can't offer any advice on the "end-of-life" indicators--I've never owned a watch with such an indicator.
But the Citizen Eco-Drives and the Seiko Kinetics should last (in theory) longer than you will live.

As for which has the most accurate quartz technology:
I don't know firsthand, but Breitling has something they call "Superquartz" that they claim is ten times more accurate than a standard quartz watch.

Good luck,
Allen.
 
Toughness: Even the toughest mechanical movements can be damaged by shock. Ordinary cheap quartz movements normally survive any shock that doesn't destroy the case and crush the movement from the outside. I've heard of quartz watches stopping after being dropped but I believe they must have been defective -- they must have had a loose connection.

End of life indicators: People often post on the watch forums asking why the heck the second hand started jumping a few days ago, and then it's likely another few days (who knows how long) after they're told why that they get around to replacing the battery. I have never seen a post from anyone saying the watch stopped before they could get the battery replaced. So I guess the safety margin is ample.
 
hey ya can compare the new 'vette ZO6 to lambo/porshe or anyone else, the new one ("05) has 500 HP, and will run with anything.

never understood why some folks think rolex lose time i have 3 (datejust SS, GMT11 and a lady rolex date) and none lose time, the datejust was my dads its a early '60s model, never had the back off until last year when i had it serviced, just thought the service was a good idea, it ran fine, ya do have to either wear them or get a winder though, also rolex is a good investment, usually they gain in value as long as ya didnt get flogged when ya bought it, my GMT11 is worth more now than it was in '99 when i got it, not to mention the datejust my dad paid like $350 or so when he got it.

i know a guy who dissed rolex and other high end watches, status symbols/etc, his mom got him one for graduation and do ya think he still wears his seiko? nope.
 
Hey Dave,
DaveH said:
I think COSC cronometer certification is something like +- 4 or 6 seconds a day, so in a week you could be off a minute, four or five minutes off by the end of a month. That standard might have been good a hundred years ago.
Click to expand...
No disrespect is intended, but please consider the following:
  • Though COSC standards are -4 to +6 seconds of variation per day, that is the outside range. In reality, most COSC watches are far more accurate than that. My Omega SMP averages +.83 seconds per day (that makes for +25.23 seconds a month...a fraction of several minutes per day). I've heard other quality automatics are close to that (certainly not in the outside of the -4 to +6 second range). I have a couple Oris automatics that are not COSC certified but consistently operate within chronometer specifications (one is +3.91 seconds per day while the other is at -2.08)...not bad accuracy for non-certified automatic watches. My analog quartz watches are all at about -.5 seconds a month (I have one Seiko at about +.15 seconds per month)...there are no digital watches in my "stable."
  • From my perspective (and I think if it's considered, it's likely shared by most watch owners...especially owners of chronometers), a main difference between the majority of quartz watches versus certified chronometers are that the chronometers are primarily complex and beautifully crafted pieces of jewelry and secondarily time pieces. Conversely, quartz watches are generally meant to be primarily time pieces and secondarily pieces of jewelry. Because of this, superior jewelry requires quality materials, highly complex engineering, and exquisite detail. Over the history of wristwatches, there are very few high quality, jewelry-oriented quartz watches (yes, there are some, but on a percentage basis, it's very slim). Accordingly, those desiring timepieces of ultimate style/quality, a minute or so a month is a non-issue.
  • A minor (nit-picking detail...sorry)--The advent of quartz watches is a relatively new phenominon, so the "bump" in accuracy only occurred only several decades ago...not a century.
So, because fine watches are bought primarily for style, status, beauty, and ultimate manufacturing intricacy/quality (basically "jewelry"), a variance of 30-60 seconds a month (or a few more) for most chronometer owners isn't a primary issue of concern.

Chronometer watches owners are "fanatics"...just like quality knife owners. It's more of a passion. I hope you understand where this post is coming from and that you're not offended. That was not the intention. :) Just trying to give the other side of the issue.
 
Guess what, both of my Swatch watches also tick.

What's you point?

And quartz watches are even MORE complex than mechanical watches, it's just really hard to see because its electronic heart is so tiny.

Cheers,
Allen.
 
I've owned a GMT Master for twenty years, my Rolex dealer (third generation) says leave it alone unless it has a real problem. Mine's had one crystal replaced and cleaned only once (he is quite reasonable). Keeps good enough time for me to be "on time" and has appreciated quite a bit. I had numerous other brands. For what I spent on them I could have easily owned a Rolex thirty years ago. I wear mine everyday and it pleases me. And that, in reality, is all that counts.

As knife owners many spend literally hundreds on knives that are never used, looking at a watch for the time is far more justifiable than owning some knife that never cuts.

As one poster stated, if you have to ask, you don't understand.

With all due respect, I think I'll keep mine.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top