Ive traded countless wrist watches back in the days, but I recently went trough my collection and noticed that I don't own any Quartz watches, I don't even own a automatic anymore, all of them are vintage and hand wind!?
I love connecting with my watch in the morning and give it some TLC and fuel it up.
Does somebody here have the same problem?
Personally I like 'em all - handwound, automatic, battery-powered quartz, solar.
Actually I don't like kinetics. Too needy. But apart from that, it's all good.
I hate quartz/battery watches.
The Seiko sure, but what about the autoquartz? I always think these, developed from the 2824, are a very different proposition. They are heavily jewelled, solidly built and even hand wind, as do the Springdrive.Quote:
Originally Posted by monogroover
Which brings me to the proposition on the table. I can’t argue with the visceral experience of winding, even the character of the wind, with, say, the old high beat Seiko pushing back as you wind, while an old Hamilton is so smooth as to be almost watery or a thirty series Omega when you can feel each tooth click smoothly if you wind slowly.
However, a large chunk of the pleasure is knowing what’s going on as you wind, knowing the quality, finish and so on and that can be seen in a quartz. If you like handwind, then go for a quartz with a handwind character, something old with a chunky tick, a Girard Perregaux 352 or a (slightly more affordable) Chaika. 3050. Everyone needs a grab and go, or a handy reference, It’s just a matter of finding the right one.
While understanding the convenience of quartz, I wouldn't go near one. Perhaps I'm lucky, my life isn't so busy that I don't have time to wind, and connect with, my watches.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve27752
These comments are strange over reactions to me and show a lack of interest in horology as a subject.Quote:
Originally Posted by EBB21
There are some amazing quartz watches out there along with some technological masterpieces. Take the early hummers for example (although I know they’re not quartz) or the Grand Seiko quartz movements. Even the solar atomic Casios or Seikos are pretty amazing.
To disregard anything but mechanical is just sad.
Always carry an EpiPen when wearing.
I dislike automatic watches that don't keep good time. Plenty of them around, useless things.
Off topic but assuming your chosen user name relates to your motorcycle, a picture of it in the bike thread would be nice to see.Quote:
Originally Posted by K-Z1R
I always find comments like this a little odd tbh. A mechanical watch is no more ‘alive’ than a quartz - they’re all inanimate objects and the fanciful, romanticised ‘connection’ with a mechanical watch is overblown imho. For many I’m sure it justifies the initial cost and maintenance of their pride and joy, but the longer I spend in this hobby, and the more watches I own, I’ve completely abandoned the notion of mechanical being better or more WIS than any other type of movementQuote:
Originally Posted by EBB21
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
At this point I have a pretty much even split between manual wind, automatic, quartz and tuning fork/electronic. I don't really have a preference, they all have their pros and cons.
That pretty much sums up Seiko divers for me.Quote:
Originally Posted by K-Z1R
I have plenty of Quartz watches, but nearly always pick up an Automatic in the morning.
As Jeremy Clarkson would say, a Quartz “has no soul!”.
I, too, find these comments a little odd. As said above they all have their pros and cons andI have both types.
You can be lucky or unlucky with a Seiko.Quote:
Originally Posted by TomGW
I have had a few that have run between +2 and -2, most seem to run between +8 and -8, but if you are really unlucky you can be closer to 20 seconds out per day. They tend to run consistently, so if you get them to a good watch guy, a quick adjustment sees them running excellently (a shame that they don’t do this at the factory!)
I have a mixture of automatics and quartz but only one manual wind watch: Omega Speedmaster 'Ed White' from 1964. My daily wearer is this Breitling that I have NEVER had to adjust (aside from at battery changes) since I bought in in 2005.
https://i.imgur.com/WP9LKuV.jpg
A couple of RAF pilot watches; the Gen I issued to me when going through flying training in the late 80s and the Gen II sometime later.
https://i.imgur.com/fmiBQwA.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/LW5ofPl.jpg
And a couple of dive watches from the 90s used when 'scooby dooing' on holiday dives.
https://i.imgur.com/UsGAEZw.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/SaQFEHs.jpg
Im allergic to vintage watches, i just worry they are going to be unreliable and need repairs etc
I don’t understand the sentiment at all. I’m eagerly awaiting the arrival of a Sinn EZM 2
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I don’t see why anyone truly interested in horology would discount quartz. I have 3 excluding G-Shocks and love them.
Dave
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I have quartz watches, but more often than not, I pass them over in favour of wearing a mechanical watch.
M
Sent from my ASUS_X00PD using Tapatalk
My only problem with quartz is having to do battery changes. Their accuracy is obviously commendable. But, I don’t run my daily life to the nearest second, or even minute for that matter.
Sent from my iPhone using TZ-UK mobile app
It's currently hibernating and won't be out playing again until spring! Standard silver 'bigger tank' version.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave+63
Ironically, of course, if anything has a soul it's quartz. I can literally work my way through every physical interaction in a quartz and everything is open to understanding using eyesight. physics and maths. In a quartz, there is a little 'brain' with a little 'mind' obsessively counting the vibration of the quartz and stacking them in neat little rows, starting again when a certain number is reached until the precise number is counted at which point a signal is sent back to the physical world to tick. All very mystical.Quote:
Originally Posted by andrewcregan
The quartz watch works closer to the way the universe works. Electromechanically. In comparison, the mechanical watch is just a wind-up toy.Quote:
Originally Posted by M4tt
On a serious note, if my life is going to depend on it (which is unlikely) then it better be quartz.
I have automatic and quartz in my collection. No manual wind at the moment. I’m a bit of a watch tart though - I don’t rule out any flavours
I have a mix, though quartz takes up less than 20% of my collection.
However every not sports tracking watch I have purchased in the past four years has been automatic or manual.
There’s merit in both quartz and automatic / mechanical. I probably wear my G-Shock as much as any other watch and it’s my time keeping standard for when I wind and set a mechanical.
Noisy analogue quartz watches with wobbly second hands are off-putting but the issue is more to do with the quality of the engineering than the fact that it’s quartz. You can’t compare a £50 swatch with a £5000 omega and say the issue is that one is quartz.
Personally I prefer a handwound movement but I also enjoy both Auto and Quartz. I have a very modest collection but I think there’s merit in having different types of movements in a collection. This quartz has become my favourite daily wearer:
https://i.ibb.co/yFQRJHd/3-ECDDA28-D...1-C3-D7-A7.jpg
I have a soft spot for solar powered, all the convenience of quartz without the battery hassle. My radio controlled titanium citizen world timer is my go to holiday watch, my Seiko solar tuna tends to be my work watch, and a radio controlled square g shock for when manly tasks are the order of the day
What is this? timezone.com circa 2001?
AmenQuote:
Originally Posted by Dave+63
I’ve several 40 year old quartz watches keeping excellent time (which to me is the purpose of a watch) probably never been serviced in their lives
Eagerly awaiting the arrival of an Omega AT
I’ve always liked that model of 2000 and the kirium F1. The blackness of the dial is deeper than almost any other watch dial I’ve ever seen, yet it’s also a multi function digital display.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Tetley
For me, the automatics with no manual wind facility are a nuisance as almost without fail, they have stopped an hour or so before I need to wear them!
For one of my jobs outside where I cannot use my reading glasses I use quartz 1982 Precista G10 as the dial is easy to read. Newly restored so should be reliable for years.
For another of my jobs, I have to be bare to the elbows and so have to put my watch on a table. The CWC is too valuable knowing some of my customers so a Casio F91W does an excellent job. If it is pinched it’s only £9.99!
So my automatics with manual wind are not for work duties.
Personally, I don’t think it matters what you wear providing you enjoy the timepiece and it does a reliable job of timekeeping.
I love the oysterquartz and like the sinn hydros.
Apart from those I just don't find quartz particularly enticing.
https://i.postimg.cc/dtgRmp78/3823.jpg
https://i.postimg.cc/tJwnFwLq/P1070425.jpg
https://i.postimg.cc/tgN68rVk/P1060939.jpg
https://i.postimg.cc/XJVZsSgS/JLC-MQ.jpg
https://i.postimg.cc/SsR5BMsp/suunto.jpg
https://i.postimg.cc/TYC1HqFj/citizen-eco.jpg
https://i.postimg.cc/nhDQz1L5/7a382.jpg
https://i.postimg.cc/fL672yhb/franklin-clock.jpg
https://i.postimg.cc/zvSBDJs7/GS.jpg
https://i.postimg.cc/hvRGvb3w/ch1.jpg
https://i.postimg.cc/jS1SZqNJ/IMG-2430.jpg
https://i.postimg.cc/RhSVvD12/IMG-1216.jpg
That's a short essay on what you are all missing.
Always seems to me a badge of ignorance that anyone with an interest in watches discounts quartz technology. Tiresome, too.
I have mostly mechanical, but I’ll always have a G-Shock and I’m rather partial to my Aerospace Evo Night Mission too.
https://i.imgur.com/ccVngN9.jpg
I must admit that I generally prefer an automatic watch with cogs. However, i have several G Shocks which always go on holiday with me. I keep them away from the mechanical stuff in a glass topped watches box however.
i have recently been interested in the Cartier Tank Solarbeat, and as part of my research I discovered a lot about quartz movements. I, like many, assumed these were just circus tat made of plastic, but I was very wrong. I found out that some manufacturers fit a new a movement when they change the battery, and there are different qualities etc.
i think both must be looked at on their own merits but the question remains. Are you happy to spend £2500 on a quartz watch? For me the answer is, quite possibly.
I have a soft spot for the 2000 series as the blue dialled auto was my first ‘proper’ watch. The Multigraph has a great underside AR coating and the dial is almost mirror like at times.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave+63
If it was a choice between one or the other I would go mechanical but a collection means you can have both.
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...4124a6f948.jpg
I think there's a difference between people who like horology, and people who like watches*. If you're one of the former then you can't discount quartz (or spring drive for that matter) because that's where the interesting technology is right now.
I'd quite like to get one of those HAQ watches that Citizen sell in Japan one day. 1 second per year is a hell of an achievement.
* realistically we're all a bit of both.
I’ve recently started wearing my 2004 Seiko Tuna SBBN007 after a very long sabbatical in the watch box. 0.035 seconds per day. I think that is pretty immense.Quote:
Originally Posted by lewie
Dave
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I agree with one of the comments above, a quartz has no soul, love listening to the sound of a mechanical watch as I lay in bed and my arm is under the pillow and you can faintly hear the sound of the movement.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I thoroughly enjoy both and currently own a quartz TAG 2000, Grand Seiko 9F and a fun Seiko "Safarnie". All very useful, fun and convenient.
I think I still have a Boylondon quartz chrono which failed to click after battery replacement. I rather enjoy several battery powered clocks with sweeping hands from Ikea.
I went through a phase of considering quartz to be somehow “inferior”, but as I learned more about the technology (it really is quite astonishing) and its development, and the way that Swatch et al deliberately marketed mechanical as “premium” as a simple commercial play, I found my views changing.
Today, roughly half my collection is quartz based - I’ve a Spring Drive which to me is a glorious blend of the old and new technology, I’ve a number of GMW-B5000 G-Shocks (partly because I consider the “square” to be a design icon and partly because the Bluetooth tech is brilliant), I have micro brand mecaquartz chronos (all the aesthetics of a sweeping hand, without the faff), and I have self-consciously complex, feature packed ana-digis.
I like the robustness of quartz - generally speaking of course - and I truly admire its accuracy - setting aside the Bluetooth Gs (“cheating”, really), the fact that my bog standard Safarnie is within 2 seconds per month, while my X-33 has averaged around 5 seconds a year is quite the comparison with even my most reliably accurate mechanical watches.
The more I’ve learned about quartz movements, the more I’ve come to like them - and they’ll always have a place in my collection.
Which comments do agree with? Most of them are contrary to your position.Quote:
Originally Posted by ellsy_79
If you can hear a mechanical watch through a pillow it almost certainly needs servicing! Either way, the fact is that all of these are about reciprocal movement whether it is:Quote:
Originally Posted by ellsy_79
2.5 Hz
https://i.postimg.cc/mkDSwPJG/IMG-0911.jpg
720hz
https://i.postimg.cc/9MPq3VD9/P1050549.jpg
Or a teeny bit faster:
https://i.postimg.cc/CK5QwqYS/IMG-3749.jpg
It's all vibration and maths.
I think I'm getting like more stupider just wif dis thread bean on da forrum .
For me quartz adds an additional "tool" element to a watch. I love my mechanical watches but for everyday duties my Aerospace Evo gets the most wrist time. It's super accurate, can do things that no mechanical watch can do and can be grabbed out of the safe thrown on in a hurry.