What is it about manual wind vs automatic that people love so much?

[john_coburg]

I often hear people speak of manual wind as a 'feature', like it is superior to an automatic, particularly at the high end. I'm thinking references such as the Patek 5196 and 5170, but also the Speedy. Is it just the 'cleanness' of the thing? Or are they generally more accurate? Otherwise, I can't see how a watch you need to do more with in order to tell the time (and carry the risk of it stopping at a crucial moment if you forget!) could be considered superior? This applies to chronographs, as well as simple three-handers.
In short : am i missing something..?

[Der Amf]

You have to do something to autos to keep them running. Manual wind makes you more conscious of this effort. If you like not being conscious of the things you do in life, autos are you.

[Ghost Chilli]

You have to do something to autos to keep them running. Manual wind makes you more conscious of this effort. If you like not being conscious of the things you do in life, autos are you.

That last sentence is a load of rubbish.

I have both in my modest collection and enjoy both.

[Der Amf]

That last sentence is a load of rubbish.

I have both in my modest collection and enjoy both.

Your understanding of my grammar is the rubbish here. Would you like to calm down and have another go?

[Ghost Chilli]

Your understanding of my grammar is the rubbish here. Would you like to calm down and have another go?

Woah, calm down. I've just read what was written and disagree. No biggie.

[Jocke]

I often hear people speak of manual wind as a 'feature', like it is superior to an automatic, particularly at the high end. I'm thinking references such as the Patek 5196 and 5170, but also the Speedy. Is it just the 'cleanness' of the thing? Or are they generally more accurate? Otherwise, I can't see how a watch you need to do more with in order to tell the time (and carry the risk of it stopping at a crucial moment if you forget!) could be considered superior? This applies to chronographs, as well as simple three-handers.
In short : am i missing something..?

If the watch have glassback and a decorated movement why hide it with a clumsy rotor?
Furthermore, we love to play with our watches so why not wind it every morning?

[stefmcd]

Retro appeal; more interaction with a watch always welcome to a wis; sense of tradition/continuity.



Sent from my CLT-L09 using Tapatalk

[RAJEN]

I doubt if thoughts/feelings have changed much.

[number2]

I doubt if thoughts/feelings have changed much.

Was about to post something similar

[Papa Hotel]

I would rather dismissively talk about misty-eyed rose-hinted nostalgic nonsense being behind this love of manual over automatic... but then if that was the truth we'd all be wearing the latest Apple watch.

Some people like the daily interaction with the watch. Personally I prefer auto, I've had a few manual and could never get into the routine of winding them.

[2012]

My manuals have now far outstripped my autos and quartz. And I don't know why, other than I love winding them up.

They tend to be thinner (generally) which I like.

I suppose in the day, manual wind for the majority of watch wearers became a chore, hence the development of autos. That's what the public wanted. I seem to remember feeling this myself as a young lad, wishing I could afford an auto. I believe they were more expensive than manual equivalent models.

I suspect, for the higher end watch manufacturers, hand wind are more niche, and thus command a premium from those who prefer the HW, but apart from my Speedmaster Professional, all my hand winds are vintage Swiss and British makes.

And I tend to wear the vintage ones far more than the significantly expensive auto and quartz watches.

[murkeywaters]

Well I guess automatic was supposed to kill off manual wind, quartz was supposed to kill off automatic and smart watches were supposed to be master of them all - but here I sit getting a buzz out of winding up my 74 Speedmaster.

[barbosas]

Well I guess automatic was supposed to kill off manual wind, quartz was supposed to kill off automatic and smart watches were supposed to be master of them all - but here I sit getting a buzz out of winding up my 74 Speedmaster.

Same here, except for the 74 seamaster part.

Can't understand the smartwatch thing, having to charge them every couple days, at least a quartz last for months or years.

I can get it for those specific activity trackers, etc.. but not as a regular watch.

[walkerwek1958]

I don’t think the automatic movement was ever supposed to kill off hand- wounds. Back in the 60s and 70s manufacturers produced automatic and hand- wound movements that were extremely similar in design, with many interchangeable parts, essentially you could buy the same quality with or without auto- winding and the two existed side by side at different price points. The need for a deeper case to accomodate the rotor was usually addressed by using a slightly dished caseback.

By the mid- 80s, when mechanical watches were in the minority versus quartz, hand- wounds almost died out completely. I have a Rolex catalogue from 1986 that contains some hand- wounds but I don’t think they were available much later than that.

You have to be old enough to remember the days before quartz watches/ clocks to see hand- wound timepieces in context; I remember my mum winding the clock every morning, my dad winding his watch, it was a daily task that everyone had to do and its little wonder that quartz models were seen as a big leap forward. Different days, you had to be there to grasp the significance.

[abraxas]

Of note that hand-wounds should be wound fully in the morning and not in the evening.

[RAJEN]

Of note that hand-wounds should be wound fully in the morning and not in the evening.

Is it to form a habit or there is a mechanical reason to do it?

[M4tt]

Of note that hand-wounds should be wound fully in the morning and not in the evening.

Why is that? I just top up all the time.

[KAS118]

They can be thinner.

As others have said, if the watch has a display back you can see more of the movement.

If you sedentary - you may end up having to manually wind an Auto in any event

[stefmcd]

V good point re thinner. Forgot that! Partly why speedy is my favourite Chrono!

Sent from my CLT-L09 using Tapatalk

[rfrazier]

I almost always have to wind automatics anyway, as I switch between watches fairly frequently. I would only get a power winder if I had some really snazzy perpetual date, with the position of the stars displayed or somesuch. So, in general, I think of automatic winding as a complication that doesn't do any real work, increases size and weight, and decreases aesthetic value.

Best wishes,
Bob

PS Ditto for day and date. For similar reasons.
RLF

[downsman]

As I understand it, Rolex wanted automatic winding to stop owners from forgetting to screw the crown down after winding each day.

Manual wind is satisfying, before I bought a water resistant auto, I wore a 1928 Longines for ten years. No problem with the winding, but I forgot I had swapped from my Casio on the last of a holiday......dived into the pool, noticed my watch was gold, not black,and saw water half way up the face :(

[hafle]

Does it have any bearing on the ability to withstand greater acceleration or impacts? (I.e the rotor putting more strain on various parts)

[john_coburg]

I'm glad this seemingly overasked question generated a decent amount of commentary. It seems that a combination of tradition, aesthetics, and simply being more in touch with one's timepiece are mainly why manuals tend to be preferred, and this all makes sense. I manually wind my automatics anyway, but the point is taken on thickness and tradition.

My original question came from whether there was something more than this that i was overlooking. For example, i have heard the Rolex reference 6694 (currently one of the underappreciated mass-produced 34mm vintage pieces, which happens to be a manual wind) spoken of as a potential future classic, chiefly because it is a manual wind (quite aside from being affordable vs steel sports). This naturally made me wonder if there was something i was overlooking! But I sort of see the point.

Thank you all for the insights and comments.

[bubi]

Winders are thinner
Autos have screwdowns

Then there's panerai.

...
BUBI 0_0

[Motman]

Looked everywhere to get a starting crank handle for my car. Apparently they are all key start these days. Oh well, that’s progress I suppose.........

[snowman]

Looked everywhere to get a starting crank handle for my car. Apparently they are all key start these days. Oh well, that’s progress I suppose.........

Get with the programme, Grandad

Everything is button start these days (my Golf still uses a key, actually, but push to start is the trend).

I always find automatics feel 'gritty' when wound compared to a healthy manual wind, not that is really important as the autos only need a few winds to start them up and then look after themselves.

I do like the cleaner look of a manual wind movement though

M

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

[abraxas]

....

I do like the cleaner look of a manual wind movement though

M

Microrotors can look neat too...

[nunya]

Get with the programme, Grandad

Everything is button start these days (my Golf still uses a key, actually, but push to start is the trend).

I always find automatics feel 'gritty' when wound compared to a healthy manual wind, not that is really important as the autos only need a few winds to start them up and then look after themselves.

I do like the cleaner look of a manual wind movement though

M

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

I remember when the Honda S2000 was released and all the motoring press slagged off the unnecessary start button. Looks like they were wrong.

As to movements, I don't have a preference, although manual winds tend to be thinner and the movement is more pleasing to the eye.

[walkerwek1958]

The graph of torque vs time for a mainspring is as I remember it. The increased initial torque doesn`t last for long enough to have a significant effect on timekeeping, although it dopes depend how much amplitude the watch has. If the amplitude is going above 300° for a significant length of time it could cause some strange effects. In reality, this would only be a problem if the watch was left dial up immediately after winding, in normal everyday wear the watch wouldn't be in a flat position and consequently the amplitude would fall back into a range where the timekeeping should be more predictable. This will vary from watch to watch, and I don`t see it as a reason not to wind the watch last thing at night.

Regulating a hand-wound to give best performance can be more involved, I always do it on the basis that the watch will get wound morning and late at night so that's what I recommend owners to do. As ever, my advice when checking the timekeeping of a watch is to determine what rate it runs at 'on the wrist' during everyday wear, then determine the dial-up overnight rate. This'll give a useful picture of what the watch is doing.

Some folks get really hung up about timekeeping, others are more relaxed, but it's always useful to know what a watch is doing. Having worn an Omega SMP cal 1120 for a 2 week spell on holiday it was interesting to see it had gained 40 seconds. That sounds a lot, but it averages at +4 secs/day and this included sleeping in it (which introduces more variability). I checked it for a few more days, taking it off overnight, and the gain was more like +3 secs/day. Armed with this info I could've regulated it slightly to give a smaller gain but in truth I couldn't be bothered removing the bracelet and taking the back off! It's very rare that I wear the same watch for a full week so I can live with the gain.

[Wallasey Runner]

I just prefer automatics. I've had a couple of Speedmasters and I either forgot to wind them or was worried about over winding and occasionally they stopped. First world problems and totally my fault, but each to their own. I now only own automatics.

[timc]

For me it is about the overall package or my feelings about the watch, the winding mechanism is secondary. I have both.


Sent from my iPhone using TZ-UK mobile app

[M4tt]

Every watch is a compromise. Manual wind is simpler, easier to fix, has less to wear and, with few exceptions, is prettier. I agree that having to interact is a subtle intimacy that rapidly becomes a thing in itself.

Oddly, an old friend gave me a framed ‘poem on the underground’ poem called ‘prayer’ by Carol Anne Duffy. For a while reading it on the wall in my office reminded me to wind whatever I was wearing. Now when I wind a watch it reminds me of the poem.

http://poem-of-the-week.blogspot.com...ann-duffy.html

Which makes me smile.

[RAJEN]

Every watch is a compromise. Manual wind is simpler, easier to fix, has less to wear and, with few exceptions, is prettier. I agree that having to interact is a subtle intimacy that rapidly becomes a thing in itself.

Oddly, an old friend gave me a framed ‘poem on the underground’ poem called ‘prayer’ by Carol Anne Duffy. For a while reading it on the wall in my office reminded me to wind whatever I was wearing. Now when I wind a watch it reminds me of the poem.

http://poem-of-the-week.blogspot.com...ann-duffy.html

Which makes me smile.

“A man should hear a little music, read a little poetry, and see a fine picture every day of his life, in order that worldly cares may not obliterate the sense of the beautiful implanted in the human soul.” --Johann Wolfgang Goethe

Very profound even if not part of the poem. Add to it -and wind his watch.

[M4tt]

K

“A man should hear a little music, read a little poetry, and see a fine picture every day of his life, in order that worldly cares may not obliterate the sense of the beautiful implanted in the human soul.” --Johann Wolfgang Goethe

Very profound even if not part of the poem. Add to it -and wind his watch.

By way of an Easter gift, treat yourself to the book Angelmaker. I suspect you will enjoy it.

[walkerwek1958]

Those of us old enough will remember a time when most watches were hand- wound, automatics were significantly more expensive, and quartz watches hadn’t been invented. Winding your watch in a morning was almost a sub- conscious act, you did it without thinking. Generally, automatics are better timekeepers, there are well- documented technical reasons for this so there’s no point re-iterating them, but back in the days before the quartz revolution the majority of watches were hand- wound. By the late 60s/ early 70s automatics were far more common, and I think the price differentials probably shrunk, but I’m not old enough to remember such details.

In the context of modern ownership, hand- wounds will generally be owned as family heirlooms or as part of an enthusiast’s collection. Having to wind the watch daily has now become something of a novelty; I own two at the moment and I have to make a conscious effort to remember to wind them when they’re getting some wrist time.

When buying vintage watches there are benefits in buying hand- wound examples. They sell for slightly less than similar automatics, and there’s less risk of the watch needing expensive / rare parts to keep it running. The timekeeping argument doesn’t count for much if a watch is worn in rotation as part of a collection, I find that my hand- wound watches can be very accurate if they’re adjusted/ regulated carefully and wound twice/ day.

I find it strange that folks prefer them because they feel they’re interacting with the watch more, to me they are what they are and I don’t consider them any more or less desirable than a similar automatic. I also find it odd that folks can’t get along with a hand- wound simply because they have to remember to keep winding it!

[LondonNeil]

I've worn a vintage seamaster as a daily wearer for periods and oddly did find something relaxing about the ritual of winding, and checking/adjusting the time each morning. It sort of 'makes' you think about the watch and appreciate it....you give it some love.

[Justdate]

For a special occasion watch I think manual wound is great to add to the sense of occasion in using the watch. For day to day I enjoy an automatic with a good power reserve so if I don’t use it for a day or two for whatever reason, it’s still good to go the next day. For my outdoors beater watch which I use mountain biking and kayaking then a quartz is ideal as it is set and ready to go whenever I grab it a few times a week.

[endo]

Manual wind works for me,
Once your collection reaches a certain point with a fair bit of daily rotation you come to realise all mechnical watches are manual wind (regardless of being auto or not)

Advantage that most of my manuals have, is an 8-10 power reserve so a quick top up and their on the wrist and my day can start.
Usually there’s a bit of time/date setting along with a quick wind on autos to get them going (or a top up wind if they’ve been sat a couple of days.)

If I was to only have one watch, i’d prefer an auto as it would be one less thing to in the morning.

[dkpw]

I like the fact that with manuals, that you can wind them and leave them sitting, e.g not wearing them and they'll still keep as good time as they can. This is especially useful on holiday, at weekends or when you're not wearing a watch consistently. Shock, horror!

[chrisparker]

I don’t favour a manual over auto. I like both. Having worn a manual as a daily watch for near on a decade, winding quickly became a routine. I never forgot to do it. Forgetting would be like putting shoes on and forgetting to tie the laces.

If you wear in rotation a mix of auto/manual I guess forgetting to wind could happen occasionally.

[D4RW1N]

I've got a couple of manuals and some autos too. Depends on the watch but on some, it seems more "pure" to have manual wind.

I like manuals for all the reasons already mentioned too, plus a fair amount of nostalgia.

I was a kid when quartz and digital watches were introduced and had a steady stream of digital watches as a teenager once they had become cheap consumer items. I wind my manual watches at bedtime (most peoople seem to wind in a morning) as a result of my first watch as a young kid being a manual wind Timex and observing my grandad winding his watch before bedtime too. A ritual for him which lasted well beyond my teenage years. In not sure, but I think that watch was an omega of some sort. Thus, whenever I wind my watch at bedtime, it makes me think of him and is s connection to my childhood memories of him. I especially enjoy winding my speedy due to the omega connection, despite it being quite an awkward watch to wind!

A reverso is my other manual wind and that is so easy and smooth to wind and makes a lovely sound. Another watch that just seems right as a manual wind.

[Uglybug]

Manual wind is not just important but imperative when in orbit, not a huge consideration for most of us but it’s must have been important to Scott Carpenter when he had the Cosmonaute made.

[hughtrimble]

Manual wind is not just important but imperative when in orbit, not a huge consideration for most of us but it’s must have been important to Scott Carpenter when he had the Cosmonaute made.

Eh? Automatics work fine in space. Or is it just because of the reduced movement meaning the mainspring doesn't get enough charge?

[Uglybug]

Eh? Automatics work fine in space. Or is it just because of the reduced movement meaning the mainspring doesn't get enough charge?

Yeah in low gravity the rotor doesn’t turn as efficiently so I think there all still manual wind? Cosmonaute, Omega Moonwatch and Sturmanskie Gagarin are all still produced in manual wind as a nod to this I believe.

https://www.goldsmiths.co.uk/Breitli...7A/p/17531127/

https://www.goldsmiths.co.uk/Omega-S...91&fo_s=slisys

https://www.r2awatches.com/sturmansk...-2609-3725127/

[M4tt]

Yeah in low gravity the rotor doesn’t turn as efficiently so I think there all still manual wind? Cosmonaute, Omega Moonwatch and Sturmanskie Gagarin are all still produced in manual wind as a nod to this I believe.

https://www.goldsmiths.co.uk/Breitli...7A/p/17531127/

https://www.goldsmiths.co.uk/Omega-S...91&fo_s=slisys

https://www.r2awatches.com/sturmansk...-2609-3725127/

The mass remains the same, thus the inertia remains the same thus the winding action remains the same. Gravity doesn’t add any additional power to the system - it adds in one set of directions and subtracts In the other.

The watches you mention all only came in manual wind versions at the time they flew. In fact there were no Russian or chronograph automatics at the time of each flight.

[PhiloStan]

I simply enjoy mechanical watches in general, so I don't have a preference for manual wind or automatic. However, I think part of the charm is being able to see the inner workings of the movement, so manual watches would be more revealing naturally. The finishing and craftsmanship of the movement are what draws me in.

[Uglybug]

The mass remains the same, thus the inertia remains the same thus the winding action remains the same. Gravity doesn’t add any additional power to the system - it adds in one set of directions and subtracts In the other.

The watches you mention all only came in manual wind versions at the time they flew. In fact there were no Russian or chronograph automatics at the time of each flight.

Im not sure mate, this website (https://www.wickedcoolwatches.com/ca...work-in-space/) says they will work but not as efficiently as gravity is not keeping the rotor pointing down but it will still charge it to a degree and astronauts manually wind their timepieces to counter this effect.
But actually googling it gives just as many opinions one way as the other? Either way I’m sure it’s not of huge concern to anyone on this forum anytime soon hahaha

Gaz

[RAJEN]

https://www.google.com/amp/s/forums....2.html%3famp=1

[snowman]

True, but tend to be expensive!

M

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

[zenius]

The good thing about manual wind watch is you don't have to worry if you have worn it enough hours for it to be wound 30thl enough etc


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk