Reply With QuoteBreitling Aerospace has no second hand, and one of the modes has display off, so it's the same really. I quite like it like that.
If not, why?
I really like the look of the Hamilton Intra-Matic 38mm. It's a good size, good movement for the price range and I feel could be a nice dressy daily wearer. I don't mind the fact that it has a date (I actually quite like that), but I'm just not sure how important a second hand is to me.
So, would you have a daily wearer that didn't have a second hand?
Image from ablogtowatch.com
Breitling Aerospace has no second hand, and one of the modes has display off, so it's the same really. I quite like it like that.
Of course - I have no real need for a second hand.
Of course, the Base Panerai is a particular favourite of mine..
Cheers..
Jase
Definitely. Only concern is case size for me. Wrist has no problem accommodating bigger watches but personally like <40mmOriginally Posted by JasonM
Definitely. Buy it and be happy!
I have a good number of chronos, with the second hand not moving. So a second hand is superfluous really
Doesn't worry me at all - I would happily buy a watch without a second hand
Yes, me too. A dress watch doesn't need a seconds hand, nor a date really in my opinion.
There is also unitas stowa (actaully there are 2 versions, with small seconds and without one, they lost the guy who modified movement to do central seconds)
I am not sure really, what I know is absolutely love seeing gliding second hand, but almost have no use for it in real life
No. I like to have a seconds hand.
Definitely. One of my all time fave watches is the PRS-20. I love the Hamilton you're considering. Go for it and enjoy it.
Love the Hamilton and a very wearable size, could happily live with no second hand.
Tried the Intra-matic a few days ago, and it looks very cool. The lack of a seconds hand makes it actually look even better.
I am a bit obsessive about not being late so I like having a seconds hand so I know the watch is still running - despite the likelihood of it actually being stopped is infinitesimal :-)
If I had no seconds hand I think I would have to listen for ticking every time I checked the time!
So not for me!
I don't need a second hand but not sure I could do without minute markers!If not, why?
I really like the look of the Hamilton Intra-Matic 38mm. It's a good size, good movement for the price range and I feel could be a nice dressy daily wearer. I don't mind the fact that it has a date (I actually quite like that), but I'm just not sure how important a second hand is to me.
So, would you have a daily wearer that didn't have a second hand?
Image from ablogtowatch.com
In a word, no.If not, why?
I really like the look of the Hamilton Intra-Matic 38mm. It's a good size, good movement for the price range and I feel could be a nice dressy daily wearer. I don't mind the fact that it has a date (I actually quite like that), but I'm just not sure how important a second hand is to me.
So, would you have a daily wearer that didn't have a second hand?
Image from ablogtowatch.com
Lovely watch but like to see my money 'in action'.
The intramatic is one of the nicest watches I've owned. Very well balanced and excellent value for money imo. Lack of seconds hand never bothered me.
Yes but doubt as a daily wearer.
Btw, the Montblanc Ultra Slim is a very nice alternative, even if quite a bit more expensive.
It is a nice looking watch, but I must have a second hand.If not, why?
I really like the look of the Hamilton Intra-Matic 38mm. It's a good size, good movement for the price range and I feel could be a nice dressy daily wearer. I don't mind the fact that it has a date (I actually quite like that), but I'm just not sure how important a second hand is to me.
So, would you have a daily wearer that didn't have a second hand?
Image from ablogtowatch.com
A GMT hand is too much for me, and no second hand is too little.
The second hand to me is showing the heartbeat of the watch.
I would still wear a watch if I didn't have a second hand. I suppose I could somehow get it fastened on using my teeth, but I'd probably just ask the missus to help.
This ^^
Same with the date, don't mind if it's not there but not for a daily wearer.
A quick mental check and I think the only one I have without a seconds hand is a perpetual calendar!
Yes I would, I own this very model, the only watch I own without a second hand, I really love it, the 38mm sits so well, I'm even tempted to buy the same with the black dial.
very good
Depends on the watch, but no second hand suits the minimalistic look of the watch.
My answer as well.
Not a chance! It's something that really bugs me. Need to have the second hand.
Yes, for a dress watch. Don't think a dress watch gets much better than this
I would be nervous of a manual watch with no second hand, it would add some uncertainty whether it was still going. A dress watch with small seconds and no date is perfect.
Yes, have a Longines 994.1 dress watch with no second hand, has a date though.
Having read some of your threads I think we are looking for a similar style of watch at present! I really like the look of the Mont Blanc but I'm not sure I like it £900 (ish) more!
If the Hamilton had a handwound movement it would be ideal imho.
Certainly, I think it was George Daniels who said that to make a good watch perfect one only had to remove the second hand. I believe he was referring to accuracy!
My PAM210 didn't have a second hand and it never bothered me at all. The cleanliness of the dial was just about perfection.
I really like two-handers. Only have a couple but find them delightfully minimalist and tranquil.
Regards,
Adam
I have / have had several with no second hand if you include chronographs without running seconds.
That Hamilton is certainly a nice clean design.
Andy
Wanted - Damasko DC57
Used to have a Raymond Weil W1 with no seconds hand. Didn't mind at all. But I caught myself a few times checking the time with another watch, to verify that it is actually working, it always did, it was more a psychological issue of mine. Also, I have caught myself staring at the seconds hands in watches that have one, for no reason at all.
Yep
Yes, another PRS-20 wearer. It's liberating not having the seconds hand.
Yes, I have the Hamilton shown in the first post and I really enjoy wearing it. Don't miss the second had at all when I do.
-wotsch
No, because I like to know what time it is.
Yes, the two that spring to mind are two of my all-time favourites ion my collection.
Tutima Commando and Sinn EZM1.
Not a running second hand between them.
D
You could always try a vintage 3 handed Intramatic.
Here's my 1988 version, maybe not quite vintage yet but getting there.
No. As others have said, I like the second hand to be sure the watch is running ... Even on a dress watch.
If people are concerned about measuring accuracy I think this is still quite easy to do. Just check how many days it takes until the watch gains/loses a minute. I have a Junghans Chronoscope and love how 'calm' the dial looks. I don't tend to need a second hand on a daily basis and you can listen to the movement to make sure the watch is running?
In reality for me its a big no, i have tried and even a 'small seconds' leaves me cold
Each to their own
...nope. I would be looking around the dial to see if the second hand had become detached and was 'floating' around !
I do, however, have an Aerospace Evo, that does have the reassurance of the minute hand jumping twice per 60 seconds.
Seconds hand - what's the hurry? Who needs more than the hour (plus an aproximate fraction)!?
I never thought I would and then I saw the PAM 372...love at first sight.
Posting Permissions
