closing tag is in template navbar
Time Factors Watches



TZ-UK Fundraiser
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 50 of 64

Thread: Why mechanical watches?

  1. #1
    Master
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    1,025

    Why mechanical watches?

    Aren't mechanical watches obsolete technology? Why are so many sold? They cost more than quartz, cost more to maintain than quartz, are less accurate than quartz.

    But more than half my collection is mechanical. This is totally illogical behaviour.

    So why is it? In my case it's maybe a sentimental appreciation of mechanical engineering.

    Why do you buy mechanical watches?

  2. #2
    Master
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    England and Spain
    Posts
    4,953
    Yes it is totally illogical and quite frankly stupid. It is however, nice to have a technically intricate item on your wrist.

    What is even dafter is that the good ones such as Patek and Rolex appreciate in value.

    This is a nice forum about watches but it attracts some really argumentative types who would fight to the death over a sheet of toilet paper. Thus one has to wonder if the entire concept of mechanical watch is totally barmy in its entirety.
    Last edited by Mick P; 15th April 2021 at 09:18.

  3. #3
    Grand Master Wallasey Runner's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Merry Old England
    Posts
    12,610
    Quote Originally Posted by Mick P View Post
    This is a nice forum about watches but it attracts some really argumentative types who would fight to the death over their place on the Rolex waiting list
    FTFY Mick.

  4. #4
    Master
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    Bedfordshire, UK
    Posts
    1,249
    For me it's the 'romance' of the object, the sense of history, of a small work of mechanical art beating away on my wrist doing it's job.
    A quartz or 'smart' timepiece's invention is too close in history for any sort of 'emotional patina' to have built up around the idea of them.
    Once we all have 'eye-phones' that project the time constantly into the corner of our view I suspect an S1 Apple watch will have some of the same allure but until then a mechanical watch is it.
    Also they are cool as hell.

  5. #5
    Master Papa Hotel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Not Edinburgh
    Posts
    5,869
    I've been through a bit of a quartz phase, and it's boring. A quartz watch, while stunningly accurate and hugely impressive in its own way for that, just isn't an object to enjoy and interact with. It's just a device that tells the time.

    A watch that runs a little fast on the wrist during the day, but that I can learn the quirks of and have it run slow through the night with some careful positional regulation, is a much more interesting thing to own.

    It's fun to me that my Panerai runs maybe half a second a day slow but towards the end of the power reserve it speeds up, maintaining an average of 0spd.

    The same 0spd isn't fun on a Longines VHP. Oh look, it's telling the time. Again.

  6. #6
    Grand Master Wallasey Runner's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Merry Old England
    Posts
    12,610
    I still associate Quartz watches as the lower end of scale, certainly pricewise and I struggle with the concept of the likes of Omega and Grand Seiko putting Quartz movements in their watches that cost thousands. The thought that every three years or so the watch will just stop and will have to be sent away somewhere because you don't want the guy at the local Timpson scratching the hell out of the back of the case is just a faff.

    At least CWC put those little battery covers on their G10 that can be opened with a coin. Clearly some thought about the end user went into that design.

    Over time I have began to appreciate hand wound watches more, no messing, wind them up and over a day or two they run down. Automatics, whilst appearing to be the ideal design are subject to accuracy issues related to actual usage. As often stated, sit on the couch all day and your automatic won't keep good time.

    Personally, I'd rather have parts that interact and move rather than a lump of plastic that is controlled by a chip.

  7. #7
    Journeyman
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Location
    London/Surrey
    Posts
    63
    I love the engineering and craftsmanship that goes into mechanical watches. Battery operated watches have the place, but I do not connect with them. I use them mainly for occasions where I would not want to damage my autos e.g Gym, DIY etc...

  8. #8
    Grand Master MartynJC (UK)'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Surrey, UK. OdiŠxere or somewhere in-between
    Posts
    10,043
    Blog Entries
    20
    Mechanical watches are anachronistic. We hold onto history with them. Look at the brand marketing - typically connecting to times, wealth and achievements that are beyond us, but they think we aspire to.

    We are fools. But even fools are the most wise sometimes.

    Mechanical watches - nobody needs them.

    I think that is the nub of it. The difference between need and want. We have achieved beyond the necessary and so can chase trinkets and baubles. Such is modern life.

    Martyn

  9. #9
    Master
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    Sussex, UK
    Posts
    4,922
    It represents a wonderful snapshot of the development of mechanical engineering over centuries. All in miniature, on your wrist. A delight.

  10. #10
    I like the sweeping second... among other things.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  11. #11
    Master BSB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    2,713
    Blog Entries
    1
    If we look at the basic function of a watch in its simplest form, it measures the earth's movement in space. Therefore, for me, the allure of a mechanical watch is that a man with the right tools and a 'very special set of skills' can produce an instrument from scratch that sits on your wrist, is self-powered and can measure each turn of the earth broken down into eighty-six-thousand-four-hundreths of a turn and be accurate to within a handful of seconds each day is amazing.

    However, I would go on to say that whilst I would never have given house room to a quartz piece previously (with the exception of a 1511-calibre Omega Marine Chronometer), since joining this forum and seeing the level of knowledge about quartz movements, my stance has considerably eased. I now always have a 'rufty-tufty' G-Shock in the collection that has to be multi-band 6 and solar-powered (currently a GWG-1000 Mudmaster) and only last week, I added a brand new 9F Grand Seiko. I had started looking at videos with the intention of getting either a Spring Drive or a mechanical but was so amazed by the level of thought and craftsmanship that goes into their 9F movement, I wanted one of those more and I'm thoroughly delighted with it.

  12. #12
    Master alfat33's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    London
    Posts
    6,014
    I love my mechanical watches, but I feel that this thread under-appreciates quartz so far. Most of a decent quality quartz is still mechanical, and some of the early quartz innovations are a pleasurable diversion all of their own.

  13. #13
    Master Sinnlover's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    London
    Posts
    5,448
    I think a mechanical (inc auto) watch only really appeal to a certain type of person. People that like mechanical things that might be a bit geeky (like me)
    Most of the people I know who wear watch wear a quartz one, it does exactly what they want from the object, tell the time with the minimum of fuss.

    A few of them have ONE nice watch, which might be an auto from a well known brand, this is only worn on high days and holidays as jewellery. The majority don't wear a watch - they have a phone

    Are they obsolete? - YEP!
    is owning a collection of mechanical watches illogical? - NOPE! - you like them and you could argue they need less maintenance than a quartz as the battery does not go every other year. They are also better for the environment - no batteries hitting land fill!

    Why do I buy them?
    I am a geek
    I like them and find them interesting
    Its cheaper than a drug habit.

  14. #14
    Craftsman
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    635
    I prefer a watch that I can start and stop at will.

    I really hate having to arrange for a battery to be changed. And when a battery goes flat...I have solar powered watches and these are the best of both worlds, but for me as with some others here, having a piece of history on your wrist that has taken centuries to perfect with minute adjustment and invention is appealing.

    Also, for me, manual and automatics have always kept great time. I tend to set them a minute or two fast anyway, so usually early to where I want to be/have to go.

  15. #15
    Craftsman
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    635
    As for whether mechanical watches are obsolete, I would suggest not.

    They tell the time, and that's what I use them for.

  16. #16
    Craftsman
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    northern ireland
    Posts
    261
    I think the short answer is that we are human beings, not robots.

    Sometimes we choose wood over steel or plastic. Sometimes we pay extra for hand turned wood over CNC machined.

    We appreciate craftsmanship.

    Obviously doesn't apply to aircraft or hospital equipment. And if you need a watch that's ridiculously tough and accurate, you're covered.

  17. #17
    Master PreacherCain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    2,900
    I think it's partly an issue of scale, for me - I can see what goes on inside a mechanical watch, the interaction of springs, wheels and bearings makes intuitive sense and with an exhibition case back, one can actually see the mechanism doing its work. Add to that the layer of exclusivity/cost/heritage/marketing that has accreted around the technology over the past couple of decades, and it's an enticing proposition; I'd be lying if I claimed that no part of my enjoyment of a 1969 Speedmaster related to Apollo and space...

    Having said that, I should think my collection is about half-and-half mechanical and quartz; some of the early quartz movements (e.g. Omega's 1310) are very cool in their own right, and as a timekeeping technology it is magnificent. I have a couple in the collection which drift by only a handful of seconds per year, without any outside correction - and that, to me, is fundamentally extremely impressive.

    At root though, none of this is remotely "necessary" and none of it is linked to the performance of a function for me. Watches are jewellery, and they're technically interesting. So, best of all worlds for me.

  18. #18
    For me too it's the wonder of wearing a totally mechanical miniature object on the wrist that can keep time so accurately. I particularly like hand-wound watches as they give that contemplative moment in the morning when you wind them.

    We like mechanical watches for the same reason we like vintage cars or anything that is made with great mechanical design and skill.

  19. #19
    Craftsman
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    northern ireland
    Posts
    261
    Quote Originally Posted by PreacherCain View Post
    I think it's partly an issue of scale, for me - I can see what goes on inside a mechanical watch, the interaction of springs, wheels and bearings makes intuitive sense and with an exhibition case back, one can actually see the mechanism doing its work. Add to that the layer of exclusivity/cost/heritage/marketing that has accreted around the technology over the past couple of decades, and it's an enticing proposition; I'd be lying if I claimed that no part of my enjoyment of a 1969 Speedmaster related to Apollo and space...

    Having said that, I should think my collection is about half-and-half mechanical and quartz; some of the early quartz movements (e.g. Omega's 1310) are very cool in their own right, and as a timekeeping technology it is magnificent. I have a couple in the collection which drift by only a handful of seconds per year, without any outside correction - and that, to me, is fundamentally extremely impressive.

    At root though, none of this is remotely "necessary" and none of it is linked to the performance of a function for me. Watches are jewellery, and they're technically interesting. So, best of all worlds for me.
    I think describing watches as jewellery is problematic, hence you adding 'technically interesting'.

    Can't think of another example of functional jewellery. Not quite a belt, not quite a bracelet. I've confused myself again...

  20. #20
    Grand Master
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    North
    Posts
    16,084
    Blog Entries
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by Fender View Post
    I think describing watches as jewellery is problematic, hence you adding 'technically interesting'.

    Can't think of another example of functional jewellery. Not quite a belt, not quite a bracelet. I've confused myself again...
    I think every piece of jewellery is functional if we consider that decoration and communication are functions. I mean, its not *necessary* but for example wedding and engagement rings serve the purpose of indicating intent, and "possession" in a way.
    If you stick a big rock on your girlfriends finger it indicates an intent to marry, and once married the ring communicates that these individuals are no longer "on the market" (wandering excluded)
    Its been said that a watch and a wedding ring are items of jewellery that men can wear, which is why men have such an interest in watches whereas women have more freedom to adorn themselves with necklaces bangles earrings etc by way of communicating taste and on occasion status and wealth.
    I find it all very interesting, but have wandered off topic.

    I love mechanical watches because of the engineering. BSB summed it up perfectly for me earlier. I also like the sound of a mechanical watch if you hold it up to ear, all the movements sound different. The interaction is important also, if you don't wear it and power it, it stops, so it relies on you as much as you do it.

    I'm really sensitive to the quartz tick, it drives me round the bend if I can hear it constantly which is why Oysterquartz (even though its my favourite ever case and bracelet design) never remains with me on a permanent basis. I do fine with spring drive and digital though as they are tick-free.
    Last edited by verv; 15th April 2021 at 12:04.

  21. #21
    Grand Master abraxas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    London
    Posts
    32,798
    Quote Originally Posted by julian2002 View Post
    ....

    Once we all have 'eye-phones' that project the time constantly into the corner of our view ...
    It will be 'time' on the left and 'bank balance' on the right. It was in a book called Farewell Horizontal.
    Watches Are Now Jewellery, eeew !!!

  22. #22
    Craftsman enndriz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2020
    Location
    Newcastle UK
    Posts
    291
    Quote Originally Posted by Papa Hotel View Post
    I've been through a bit of a quartz phase, and it's boring. A quartz watch, while stunningly accurate and hugely impressive in its own way for that, just isn't an object to enjoy and interact with. It's just a device that tells the time.
    Yep, have one quartz which I love, but it never stays on the wrist for more than a few days - I always want to get back to one of my autos sooner than later. Never been able to think of a good reason reason why this is, but you have probably hit the nail on the head.

    Similar to cars I suppose - you can have a really dull motor that gets you from A to B, which some people are completely happy with. Or you can have something that gives you a twinge of excitement every time you look at it or drive it. Same story for me with watches. and cars come to think of it...


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  23. #23
    Grand Master abraxas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    London
    Posts
    32,798
    Let's try an analogy. Swords.

    Before the Iron Age there was the Bronze Age. Bronze swords, when compared with their Iron equivalents were heavy and soft. There are stories of having to stop in the middle of a battle to re-straighten a bronze sword before carrying on. At some point all battle swords were made of Iron. But Bronze swords did not vanish. They were relegated to being ceremonial and decorative for a couple of hundred years more before they completely disappeared.

    Today nobody will be seen dead using a mechanical device in order to time an important event. So, mechanical watches are not purchased to tell the time... They are purchased to perform decorative and ceremonial duties. What those might be for you, it is up to you. For me, I need all the decoration I can get.
    Watches Are Now Jewellery, eeew !!!

  24. #24
    Journeyman
    Join Date
    May 2020
    Location
    Wilen
    Posts
    75
    As someone whose collection is almost all mechanical, I do wonder about this, especially given that when I'm really in a rush or about to do a physical activity while wearing a watch, I'll often reach for one of my two quartz watches.

    One aspect of the current quartz watch market is that I don't feel there is nearly so much choice or desirability in terms of design when compared to the mechanical watch market - I rarely see a quartz watch I'd like whereas I could financially ruin myself on an almost daily basis with new mechanical offerings.

    But what if all the big Swiss brands offered exactly the same range as they currently, but with quartz movements, or even with a choice of movement. Would we really care, or choose a mechanical movement. The branding element would be the same and the watches would be just as attractive to look at. If they made the price the same, I think that would also account for a lot of the desirability and aspirational side of things, especially in this current instagram led market.

  25. #25
    Master
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    Stockton, Teesside, UK
    Posts
    1,388
    For me, mechanical watches are totally obsolete! Inaccurate, fragile, high servicing requirements. Quartz just does the job so much better and cheaper!!
    I'm sorry but I just don't understand the argument that Quartz are 'boring' or that mechanical watches are 'characterful' - I find correcting the time every day or so on a mechanical as irritating rather than interesting!

  26. #26
    Master Papa Hotel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Not Edinburgh
    Posts
    5,869
    1376 posts later and you finally realise this isn't the game for you.

  27. #27
    Craftsman Kevin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2020
    Location
    East Sussex
    Posts
    499
    If I only wanted to know the time I wouldn't bother owning a watch.

  28. #28
    Master
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Slovenia
    Posts
    2,547
    Quote Originally Posted by MartynJC (UK) View Post
    Mechanical watches - nobody needs them.
    +1



    Vanity is expensive.

  29. #29
    Master
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    Stockton, Teesside, UK
    Posts
    1,388
    Quote Originally Posted by Papa Hotel View Post
    1376 posts later and you finally realise this isn't the game for you.
    Why? I'm interestered in watches. Are you saying I have to be into Mechanical watches only?

  30. #30
    Master
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    Stockton, Teesside, UK
    Posts
    1,388
    Quote Originally Posted by Papa Hotel View Post
    1376 posts later and you finally realise this isn't the game for you.
    Why?? I'm interested in watches. Are you saying I HAVE to be interested in mechanical watches?

  31. #31
    Grand Master abraxas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    London
    Posts
    32,798
    For me, it is something I have always been interested in. It is "my constant". Why mechanical? As someone else said above, "because it is cool".
    Watches Are Now Jewellery, eeew !!!

  32. #32
    Master Yorkshiremadmick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Yorkshire man in Northumberland
    Posts
    2,157
    Iíve had mechanical longer than Quartz. Quartz need regular batteries and thus resealing again. In the apocalypse. Mechanical should still work. One of my Seikoís (5) is 40 years old. Not opened or serviced. Still works. Had a Seiko quartz that had countless batteries. It was then serviced. And restored. I subsequently lost it.
    But mechanical watches just seem right.
    Not owned a G Shock. So canít comment.


    Sent from my iPhone using TZ-UK mobile app

  33. #33
    Master Maysie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Middle of Nowhere (UK)
    Posts
    1,740
    I sold my old Omega Seamaster Pro co-axial as there is a very similar looking quartz version of the same watch and to me that just spoilt what was 'special' about the Seamaster.

    I appreciate that there is no logic to that at all.
    I still regret selling the watch to this day.
    I actually quite like a number of quartz watches.
    I have also sold quartz watches that I regret selling too.

    For me it is both emotive and irrational, but it is what it is.

  34. #34
    Craftsman Paradiddle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    London, United Kingdom
    Posts
    380
    Quote Originally Posted by Yorkshiremadmick View Post
    Iíve had mechanical longer than Quartz. Quartz need regular batteries and thus resealing again. In the apocalypse. Mechanical should still work. One of my Seikoís (5) is 40 years old. Not opened or serviced. Still works. Had a Seiko quartz that had countless batteries. It was then serviced. And restored. I subsequently lost it.
    But mechanical watches just seem right.
    Not owned a G Shock. So canít comment.
    This pretty much sums up my thoughts as well. I initially got into automatic watches as I like the idea that you don't need to change the batteries on a mechanical watch. Of course I found out later that you need to service it after some time..

    I also inherited the preference for mechanical watches from my dad. More so in his day, a good mechanical watch is a mark of quality and dare I say a status symbol. Of course now the Apple watch has replaced that image somewhat as lots of business leaders have it in place of luxury watches.

    I do still have a G-shock mostly because I need a tough sports watch and they have a good solar system.

  35. #35
    Grand Master Neil.C's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    SE England
    Posts
    25,151
    I like mechanical watches because I like anachronistic old things.

    As well as mechanical watches, I like, and use, fountain pens and books made out of paper rather than any e-book type thing.

    I own quite a few quartz watches but while OK they are essentially boring compared to mechanicals IMO.
    Cheers,
    Neil.

    My Speedmaster website:

    http://www.freewebs.com/neil271052

  36. #36
    Craftsman
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    Wiltshire UK
    Posts
    292
    Quote Originally Posted by MrGrumpy View Post
    For me, mechanical watches are totally obsolete! Inaccurate, fragile, high servicing requirements. Quartz just does the job so much better and cheaper!!
    I'm sorry but I just don't understand the argument that Quartz are 'boring' or that mechanical watches are 'characterful' - I find correcting the time every day or so on a mechanical as irritating rather than interesting!
    I agree.

    I'm 'done' with mechanical watches.

    Part of the reason is akin to the Townshend Whelen quote:

    "Only accurate rifles are interesting"

    But a major part is I'm bored of mechanical watch fragility and insane servicing costs.

  37. #37
    Master
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Cheshire
    Posts
    1,414
    Quote Originally Posted by PawG View Post
    I like the sweeping second... among other things.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Thatís what fascinated me about them when I was a nipper and knew only the digital count or the analogue tick, tick, tick......

    That smooth continued sweep had me hooked.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  38. #38
    Master Papa Hotel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Not Edinburgh
    Posts
    5,869
    Quote Originally Posted by MrGrumpy View Post
    Why? I'm interestered in watches. Are you saying I have to be into Mechanical watches only?
    Just imagine how much fun you'd have if you enjoyed mechanical watches too. That said, no-one in the history of the Internet has ever had their mind changed by someone on a forum so you're right, mechanical watches are irritating, quartz rocks.

  39. #39
    Craftsman
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    Wiltshire UK
    Posts
    292
    Quote Originally Posted by Papa Hotel View Post
    Just imagine how much fun you'd have if you enjoyed mechanical watches too. That said, no-one in the history of the Internet has ever had their mind changed by someone on a forum so you're right, mechanical watches are irritating, quartz rocks.
    Why do you feel your role is to change anyone's mind?
    Since 1990, I've owned two GMTs, a Submariner and a Seamaster and worn them doing things desk-dive types wince at. I enjoyed them while I had them, but one day, I simply stopped believing.
    Personally, my decision to step away from them is based on 3 decades of learning, often quite literally 'in the field'.... your insights maybe different, but they have no greater validity and, certainly for my lifestyle, less.

  40. #40
    Master Papa Hotel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Not Edinburgh
    Posts
    5,869
    Quote Originally Posted by Brauner Hund View Post
    Why do you feel your role is to change anyone's mind?
    Since 1990, I've owned two GMTs, a Submariner and a Seamaster and worn them doing things desk-dive types wince at. I enjoyed them while I had them, but one day, I simply stopped believing.
    Personally, my decision to step away from them is based on 3 decades of learning, often quite literally 'in the field'.... your insights maybe different, but they have no greater validity and, certainly for my lifestyle, less.
    I don't feel my role is to change anyone's mind, I'm not trying to do it. I made a statement, I was told I was wrong and I'm letting him have his victory; mechanical watches are irritating, quartz is best. I just find it odd that someone involved in a hobby that is predominantly about the enjoyment of mechanical timepieces finds them such an irritant.

  41. #41
    Master Sinnlover's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    London
    Posts
    5,448
    I don't subscribe to theory that all quartz watches are boring, but there are quartz movements and then there are quartz movements.
    Seiko have produced some very interesting quartz movements over the years. e.g. the 7c in the tuna is a fantastic quality movement that offers incredible levels of accuracy for years without the simplest bit of maintenance (batteries last for years). The thermo compensated movements in Breitlings are quite special, even more mundane (but quality) quartz movements can be used in innovative ways such as the Sinn UX.
    I do find quartz chronographs sterile though - even the mechanical quartz, in my mind they are a bit of a cheat and lack character.

  42. #42
    Craftsman
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    Wiltshire UK
    Posts
    292
    Interesting, reading the last two posts, I think I would have to put my hand up to missing a layer of what you're both getting. For me, the fascination is 'toolwatch'; and less about how that is delivered, but more about the finished fit-for-role article. I was definitely affected by the National Geographic 'watches for heroes and explorers' theme of the Rolex ads of my youth ...I think, now that I no longer perceive Rolex as being tool, my enjoyment comes from the hunt for something that fills that niche, today... and for me, that still requires an analogue face.

  43. #43
    Master Sinnlover's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    London
    Posts
    5,448
    Quote Originally Posted by Brauner Hund View Post
    Interesting, reading the last two posts, I think I would have to put my hand up to missing a layer of what you're both getting. For me, the fascination is 'toolwatch'; and less about how that is delivered, but more about the finished fit-for-role article. I was definitely affected by the National Geographic 'watches for heroes and explorers' theme of the Rolex ads of my youth ...I think, now that I no longer perceive Rolex as being tool, my enjoyment comes from the hunt for something that fills that niche, today... and for me, that still requires an analogue face.
    For me the Sinn UX is the ultimate tool watch, (the one on SC is very tempting) it is designed to do a job and it does it very well. If I were walking about at the bottom of the Marianas Trench I would want a UX on my wrist!

  44. #44
    Master PreacherCain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    2,900
    Quote Originally Posted by Fender View Post
    I think describing watches as jewellery is problematic, hence you adding 'technically interesting'.

    Can't think of another example of functional jewellery. Not quite a belt, not quite a bracelet. I've confused myself again...
    I have to say, I don't think it's problematic in the least - I mean, sure, a watch serves a function but then so do tie pins, cufflinks and signet rings (albeit the last example is archaic). Fundamentally, for me, a watch has to look good (to my eyes), work well, and make me feel good when I wear it. If it fails on any of those then it won't be long in my collection... The "feelgood factor" is a mercurial thing, which for me is always a combination of the aesthetic, the branding, the overall design and often some much more subtle signifiers and resonances which have meaning to me but nobody else.

    I dunno - I like a multi-wave or Bluetooth G-shock because it amuses me on a fairly basic level that my highest-tech and most technologically advanced watches are also pretty much the cheapest. I like my battered Speedy because it's from 1969 and looks exactly the righ tkind of "lived-in". I cherish my X-33 because of the functionality, the unique look, the Ti lightness and the Astronaut Factor. I like my Bremont because I got it just after my dad died, and it reminds me of him and of fresh starts. It's pretty well the most subjective thing there is, in my opinion.

  45. #45
    Journeyman
    Join Date
    Jan 2020
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    54
    Mechanical watches are marvels of technology imo. But so are digital movements that use as mentioned GPS trajectory and radio.

  46. #46
    Master
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    London
    Posts
    1,303
    Quote Originally Posted by paskinner View Post
    It represents a wonderful snapshot of the development of mechanical engineering over centuries. All in miniature, on your wrist. A delight.
    What a terrific summary! :thumbup:

  47. #47
    Master
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Unknown
    Posts
    2,916
    Blog Entries
    1
    In all other areas I'm generally an early adopter of technology ... I did my degree in Electronics and worked in design and marketing of tech companies for 20 years always focusing on high-tech innovation ... yet through all that I have always had a mechanical watch.

    I have always be fascinated and amazed that a tiny mechanical machine can live inside a small water & shock proof case and work for years un loved on your wrist.

    I take the view that the two greatest inventions of all time are the watch and the bicycle.

    My bike is the latest carbon bike with electronic gears, hydraulic brakes and tubeless tyres ... latest spec; yet my watch is still old school.

    The other point is my watch is probably the highest quality personal possession I own and will likely outlast any other item I have; it is nice to own one item (well a few) that is truly high quality in todays throw away society.

    The watch I have on today is 19 years old; it looks and functions like new and will hopefully be much the same in another twenty years ... I don't think anything else I own today will still be in daily use in 20 years time ...

    Here a photo ... just because ...


  48. #48
    Craftsman
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    UK, Maldives, Singapore
    Posts
    442
    Quote Originally Posted by Tiny View Post
    Aren't mechanical watches obsolete technology? Why are so many sold? They cost more than quartz, cost more to maintain than quartz, are less accurate than quartz.

    But more than half my collection is mechanical. This is totally illogical behaviour.

    So why is it? In my case it's maybe a sentimental appreciation of mechanical engineering.

    Why do you buy mechanical watches?
    The same reason Vinyl is still a thing
    And the and reason physical art will remain


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  49. #49
    Master
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Lancashire, UK
    Posts
    3,002
    I fly model aircraft and almost the entire club fly battery powered models these days whilst I fly models that run on fuel and smoke and are not as reliable, I do this wearing a mechanical watch, not a battery powered one! :)


    Sent from my iPhone using TZ-UK mobile app

  50. #50
    Craftsman
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    northern ireland
    Posts
    261
    I guess the quartz fans who can't stand mechanical watches really are just into the jewellery/aesthetic aspect.

    Otherwise, why not just use a digital watch? Or even simply rely on your phone?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Do Not Sell My Personal Information