Reply With QuoteWhy not consider something like a Silverman's CWC Quartz Diver on a NATO strap. Only about £450 so well within budget, clear and robust - a great grab and go watch.
I have been wearing my Evo Aerospace for about 18 months or so, and in many ways it is the perfect grab and go watch, but to be honest I fancy a change. I want a quartz, as for my daily that suits my lazy style. I have considered a Sinn UX of some kind, probably on either leather or rubber (I do not want a bracelet), but have no experience either of the model or the brand. Any good? What other options would you recommend? Budget is £2,000. This is to sit alongside my 5167 and soon to arrive 5711, and be capable of duties to which I could not expose those beauties. Thanks.👍
Why not consider something like a Silverman's CWC Quartz Diver on a NATO strap. Only about £450 so well within budget, clear and robust - a great grab and go watch.
Tag F1?
Sinn EZM3 is my daily wearer, and I love it. The UX is a bit big on my wrist
Omega Aqua Terra quartz (old model, applied indices) or Grand Seiko SBGX061 do that job for me, both easily within budget even unworn. Not that they are unscratchable or beaters, but compared to your others they are quite replaceable ;-) Also there's plenty of metal on the AT case and bracelet and Omega will service and refinish it for a reasonable sum.
*oops, just saw the no bracelet criteria. That makes it harder but I'd still consider a dressy GS, if you're going quartz why not have a decent movment and good finishing.
Last edited by Itsguy; 29th November 2016 at 18:33.
Nice idea. Had one a long time ago. Perhaps worth a revisit.👍Originally Posted by Wallasey Runner
- - - Updated - - -
Perhaps dress the AT down?
Just googled 'omega aqua terra quartz leather' and it works for me! A very practical, easy to live with watch. Time zone feature, dresses up, down, swims dives... 3 year battery and service with refinish for around £350 if it needs a refresh. Nice proportions and size too, depending on what fits you of course...
Grand Seiko of course, a no brainer.
I have a Tag Aquaracer (latest model) - the quartz doesn't come on rubber but the official TAG ones will still fit. You'd probably get it all in for well under 1200, maybe even under a grand if you tried hard (Chronext have the watch for a good price)
...or vintage Heuer quartz 200m professional diver, I forget the reference number but you probably know what I mean! A stylish approach to the quartz daily beater if ever there was one.
plenty of 980's out there, they do look like a bit small nowadays in the 36mm size though having owned one, even though i have tiny wrists...
The PP of G-Shocks! :)
I kid you not. I think I have one of those in a draw somewhere. Bought in the late 80's!
UX is excellent. I love the smaller EZM2
EZM3 quartz?
Why not pocketing 1000-1500 pounds and buy a good quality and accurate Precidrive by Certina or a supercharged 262.144 kHz Bulova?
Or an old SMP Quartz?
That watch is simply beautiful sir!UX is excellent. I love the smaller EZM2
OHPF!
I have to find it first!
Seiko kinetic diver,£300 range and leave the rest in your pot.there really is no need to spend any more money on a beater,particularly with your choice of high end. Skx371p1 does me for rough stuff,never failed in 4 yrs of abuse!
Have u ever heard about Morgenwerk? It's a German brand and they probably make(in house) the most accurate quartz movements on earth
£400 for a new citizen pmd56... Brilliant do it all.. and enough change for a gs sbgx061 for dressier occasions
Oysterquartz — duh. :)
If you must have a strap, just get some kind of custom job done up and you're sorted.
We may have a winner. Want to sell me that?Oysterquartz — duh. :)
If you must have a strap, just get some kind of custom job done up and you're sorted.
A 17000 on a strap? Sacrilege!
SMP Quartz would be my choice - but I currently have the Skywalker for my weekly quartz duties
It's just a matter of time...
Im not sure if its a good choice for a daily wear.Oysterquartz — duh. :)
If you must have a strap, just get some kind of custom job done up and you're sorted.
Its a truly beautiful watch but arent the Rolex Quartz movements known to be very sensitive, prone to breakage and very hard to fix due to limited spare parts?
I think its possible to exchange the rolex movement for an eta/isa though but still.. It is not the most durable watch, more of a boutique item
Another interesting brand for quartz watches is the british Hoptroff
I love my oysterquartz and whilst not quite a daily probably wear it 2-3 days a week... however it has broken down and is with rolex st james for service so perhaps the suggestion above that its a touch fragile for a daily is fair...
I'm a big quartz fan and may get a breitling colt super quartz soon. For less money but with tons of kudos and heritage I'd consider a seiko tuna. Either 015, 017 pre owned or sbbn033 new. Versatile strap options, looks great on bracelet, rubber or leather.
They have a regular service interval like a mechanical as far as I know and have more mechanical parts than the average quartz which need lubrication, but that's about it. I don't think they are fragile as such and they are also highly antimagnetic. I'd expect a GS 9F to be more robust overall though, and more accurate, it's that much more modern and designed for long intervals. Omega suggest AT quartz should be serviced at intervals and regulated too, but the overall cost of ownership is low. Higher for the Rolex but no worse than a mechanical. Mine's running flawlessly, last service about five years ago.
I have only read an account from a watchmaker that claimed that the circuit board and motors of the OQ is prone to break sooner or later and is insanely expensive to replace. He also wrote that an ETA quartz movement would be huge improvement over the original rolex one.
Its not the mechanical parts that fail but the electronic/analogue ones, so its not fair to compare it to a mechanical watch, which is good to go for decades with the correct service intervals. If such an essential part of the movement such as the circuit or motor fails its not very good or cheap repair if it has to be replaced entirely while matching original specifications.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Last edited by gamba66; 29th November 2016 at 23:03.
Depends on your daily activities I guess, but this is mine when in the office - the Grand Seiko Self-dater, quartz on a strap. When it's weekend playtime I have a CWC SBS. I find quartz very appealing to just pick up and wear. Especially the GS as it's so accurate I only reset when the clocks change (last time it was 3s out!).
Ant
No, they aren't.
They have an extremely robust movement and have thrived and survived in some of the worlds harshest environments (Everest).
Rolex still service them and have parts in supply. Boutique item pffft.
Please read my previous post. Only because Rolex replaces essential parts such as the circuit board or motors (which they charge you alot for) it doesnt mean that the watch is durable by itselve. Maybe the mechanical parts are..
Service meaning disassembling, lubricating and fine-tuning the movement is something very different from a repair work such as replacing the complete movement or essential parts of it...
When your definition of durable means that you are dependant on the expensive replacement parts supply of rolex then we will have to disagree I guess..
It does sound very much like a boutique Item for me, a beautiful one though.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Last edited by gamba66; 29th November 2016 at 23:23.
Lovely, but try finding that for the stated £2k budget!Depends on your daily activities I guess, but this is mine when in the office - the Grand Seiko Self-dater, quartz on a strap. When it's weekend playtime I have a CWC SBS. I find quartz very appealing to just pick up and wear. Especially the GS as it's so accurate I only reset when the clocks change (last time it was 3s out!).
Ant
Usually it's an average priced service at an average interval, in Rolex terms, plus the odd battery change. If the electronics go then only Rolex can help you and it will be a pricey service, but that's not going to happen every day. If you want cheap servicing there are obviously other options, but the basic ETA found in the Omega AT isn't even thermocompensated. The GS 9F is probably the best of the bunch, but refinishing will cost a small fortune and they'll probably be wondering why you're not simply buying a new one and throwing the old one away. Meanwhile in the mechanical corner, the mainspring just went on my Explorer II, £500 service, treated myself to a fresh bezel, £200. Which will be cheaper to maintain over 20-30 years, the Explorer II or the Oysterquartz? Frankly, who knows. But if it's a cheap watch with cheap servicing your after, I'd suggest not to buying a watch with Rolex written on the dial. Otherwise, buy the one you like and I certainly wouldn't be put off an Oysterquartz.
Last edited by Itsguy; 29th November 2016 at 23:48.
I did read you previous post. My position remains the same. I'm also aware of what servicing means. It's not particularly different to owning an automatic.
Either which way you pay for maintenance and repairs when necessary, and it WILL be necessary on a Quartz if only to battery and re-seal/pressure test as required.
If you don't want to maintain or repair - use a phone to tell the time or buy a disposable watch.
However, the question was daily wear Quartz ideas and to go back to that, Im confident in my comments regarding the robust nature of the OQ and second Belligero's suggestion.
They make fantastic daily wearers and aren't fragile in the slightest.
Ed - probably the biggest challenge would be finding one that's still got nice sharp lines as they tend to soften with over zealous polishing over the years.
Last edited by verv; 29th November 2016 at 23:47.
Im sorry but these are not valid arguments.. Of course a Rolex isnt cheap and servicing it regularly also not. I am aware of the costs after all its a luxury product.
But aside from the cost perspective, the OQ movement isnt one of the best rolex has made, when watchmakers refer to them as "rolex lightbulbs" and standard mass produced eta quartz (albeit more modern) movements are deemed superior than their rolex counterparts, that means to me that an Oysterquartz isnt the most reliable watch.. Also for daily wear.
I love the asthetics if the OQ and its high up on my must-have list but that doesnt stop me of having an objective view of the watch..
Last edited by gamba66; 30th November 2016 at 00:17.
Obviously it's a child of the 70s with a highly unusual movement and more advanced movements have been invented since. If the module needs replacing you will have to go to the manufacturer and will have a bigger bill than replacing an ETA. But based on reports from all over the web, rather than just this guy you're quoting, your fears seem a little overblown. It's a special watch. The cost of ownership is similar to a lot of other special watches, and better than some - if this watch worries you then you should steer well clear of the Royal Oak.
Ok lets agree on that the OQ has an unusual movement (btw it also has a very loud and distinctive "tick").
Just an example of how much a repair could cost from this forum:
http://forum.tz-uk.com/showthread.ph...=1#post2274946
In relation to the price of a used OQ that is a very significant cost (these are in british pounds btw).
I am a big fan of the oysterquartz so dont misunderstand me. Its a lovely vintage watch but I dont think it is something the threadstarter is looking for in terms of durability.
Sorry, but "i heard from a watchmaker" isn't up to much either.
My suggestion would be rather than having it on a "must have list" try one, wear one, and live with one as a daily before telling other people they aren't up to the job. That would help with objectivity because it looks like you're discounting it without having any direct experience.
The question from Skyman is what's a good 2k Quartz to sit along side two pateks and fulfill duties that they wouldn't be exposed to.
The OQ is capable of fulfilling that remit with ease.
There are more robust and technologically advanced Quartz movements out there but that wasn't the question.
In response to Gamba66 - Ok we can leave it there and agree then! The usual service is cheaper than, say an Explorer II (purely because I took one in recently, it's £500). You might get hit with a one off cost if the electronics need replacing, but how often? Once in 20 years seems very pessimistic, most seem to manage longer without issues. The result? Get your calculator out... £25 a year more than the Explorer II cost of ownership. Replace the odd Explorer II bezel though, and the Oysterquartz wins. In other words, relax!
You will recall that I said an ETA is a great workhorse with reasonable servicing, if rather dull and not especially accurate. If there's a problem, they will probably just throw a new one in. I don't disagree that it's cheaper if that's what you really want.
And a GS 9F should perform better for longer with little maintenance, though refinishing the cases is another story.
The oysterquartz meanwhile costs much the same as any other Rolex to maintain, even factoring in the odd module and motor if the absolute worst happens. I have an Omega AT and a GS, and much as I love them, the OQ is just that much more special, I certainly wouldn't be put off by the servicing. And in any case, the AT and the GS are gradually losing value, while the OQ is gaining value.
Given that the OPs other watches are Petek Philippes, I suspect he'll be ok with whichever quartz he fancies.
Last edited by Itsguy; 30th November 2016 at 10:30.
Why one would buy an OQ which needs servicing as a daily is utterly beyond me when there are so many examples of lovely watches out there that really will never need sending off for weeks at a time.
Surely that defeats the whole point of the thing?
Sinn UX is a great choice, mine gets worn a lot, super legible from almost any angle, for occasions when checking the time maybe frowned on. Slides nicely under a cuff at 12mm, the underside is not curved, drilled lugs, nice bit of tech too, Im often watching the bounce!
I was dissapointed with the lume at first, but now like it because its not too bright, I can read the time during the night, its marked as a mission timer, so Seiko bright might give away your position..
Its heavy on the bracelet at 190g, I have a nice tan Toshi to dress it up a bit, but most of the time I use a canvass from Steveo, waterproof, very comfy, a photo later in the light.
You can spend a little or a lot on a quartz, as long as you like it, who cares.
Omega SMP? The 2264 is the standout but the Bond is a nice option too.
Both well within budget and is there a cooler watch? (Retorical)
That's a +1 from me. I'm sometimes old fashioned in some ways but it I wanted a dependable quartz pretty much bomb proof then I would go for the original blue waves dial Bond quartz model. Super comfey bracelet as well.
Else try the new colt quartz from Breitling. SQ and 6-8year battery I think.
Od love love to try an OQ sometime.
Last edited by MartynJC (UK); 30th November 2016 at 09:30.
Because you like it? Because you're happier giving it the odd ding than your Nautilus as in the OP's case? While many quartz beaters will soldier on without any servicing for decades it's not always the case that they're service free. Omega actually recommend a service for their AT quartz every couple of battery changes or so, if they are to stay within specs. GS will probably manage longer but may also need regulating to stay within specs in the long term, and after a decade I'd imagine you might want a bit of gentle refinishing. Obviously you can have a true beater as your daily wearer that you're gradually destroying and that gets no attention at all, but I'd rather have something I can enjoy. Quartz are low maintenance but even they need a bit of love.
To try and answer the OP's question, the only drawback I find with my Sinn UX is the lume. I cannot get it to last through the full length of a film at the cinema. Other than that, now that I've got it on a Chronissimo strap, I'm used to the 'heft' of its weight and really like being able to pick it up anytime without the need to check that it's showing the right time (save for when the clocks go back / forward). The temperature stabilised ETA 955.652 does a very good job.
Next to the Sinn I go for my Omega SMP 2264, but always check its setting.
Thank you for the very flattering offer, but it's long been a favourite and is one of the last I'd ever part with. Plus I think Verv's called dibs on this one already. :)
Well-looked-after examples do turn up occasionally, though. I'd be happy to help if you have any questions about a particular one.
Agreed. The flat-link, bevelled-edge bracelet is unique within the Rolex range and is an essential part of the watch's appeal.
Works fine for me in regular rotation, and I don't exactly baby it.
Not only does Rolex currently offer parts and training (it's part of their advanced watchmaker's course) on the 5035 and 5055 movements, but they're also obligated to maintain this support for at least a few more decades, as their records show the last one as being sold in 2007. :
It's worth noting that two of the watchmakers I know personally wear OQs themselves, and have nothing but praise for the watch and its unique movement, which combines the geartrain of the 30XX mechanical series with what's sort of the inverse of a traditional escapement, in which a stepper motor moves a pallet fork to directly drive the seconds-hand wheel with a backlash-free metallic snick-snack that hits the markers bang-on. It's pretty sweet. :)
No way I'd swap this out for a wimpy modern plastic movement.
Exactly; they were expressly designed to be the toughest movement Rolex has ever produced, and the number of them that are still being enjoyed thirty-nine years after they were introduced is good evidence of that. They're essentially impervious to magnetic fields, and their level of resistance to shock far exceeds anything with a rotor or balance wheel — which are the weak points of an all-mechanical movement, or other highly-mechanized quartz movements such as Seiko's Kinetic and Spring Drive series.
Likewise. The watch thing is about having something special on the wrist, and the OQ is arguably the most special watch Rolex has ever made, as nearly every single component is unique to the reference and it looks like nothing else.
Also, since you mentioned service costs earlier, I'd that the OQ is likely to offer the lowest yearly operating cost of any Rolex model. It has far longer service intervals than a mechanical movement; the lubrication isn't nearly as critical, due to the absence of a traditional escapement mechanism and the gear train not being under constant load. My 1993 model had its first apparent service last year, and that was only because the date setting mechanism was starting to get gummed up — it had no timekeeping issues.
Even accounting for the potential cost of a complete module or stepper motor replacement, it still works out to be less costly than getting a mechanical movement serviced even every ten years.
I simply can't think of a better quartz watch to complement something like a Nautilus/Aquanaut.
Posting Permissions
