Why mechanical watches?

[Montello]

I have to say if there was a 38-40mm Grand Seiko diver with a 9F movement I'd be pretty tempted ... but all the GS dive watches are huge.

[Brauner Hund]

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?

😂😂

I've written and deleted 3 answers that I would have said to you in a pub, because that assertion/question is such an excruciatingly couch-potato last-to-get-picked-for-the-team world view that it makes me want to snap a pencil 😂

So I've refined my answer to this:

If you ever find yourself doing something where you need to be able to tell the time with a quarter-second glance in physically awkward situations (be that sailing, climbing, pulling a sled or timing a fireplan at night) you need an analogue watch face in a robust waterproof watch: unlike a digital, that you literally have to read, analogue presents a 'picture' that your brain 'gets' at a glance; you don't actually have to read it (and you don't have to get it out of a pocket or worry about water🙄😂) ... which is why toolwatches, for people who need to know 'time' at a glance, will always be analogue and robust.

Probably the only time I would choose a mechanical watch over a quartz would be arctic or high mountain work as I would have a niggling (but probably unfounded,) concern over the effect of sustained 'very cold' on a quartz watch (but I never had to make that choice as I wore a 16710 on all my arctic adventures).

[Tiny]

The same reason Vinyl is still a thing
And the and reason physical art will remain

But the sound reproduction from a good vinyl setup is higher quality than digital, but that's another discussion for another forum.

If we're looking at mechanical watch movements as an art form, then that adds another angle not previously discussed. Very good.

[Fender]



I've written and deleted 3 answers that I would have said to you in a pub, because that assertion/question is such an excruciatingly couch-potato last-to-get-picked-for-the-team world view that it makes me want to snap a pencil 

So I've refined my answer to this:

If you ever find yourself doing something where you need to be able to tell the time with a quarter-second glance in physically awkward situations (be that sailing, climbing, pulling a sled or timing a fireplan at night) you need an analogue watch face in a robust waterproof watch: unlike a digital, that you literally have to read, analogue presents a 'picture' that your brain 'gets' at a glance; you don't actually have to read it (and you don't have to get it out of a pocket or worry about water) ... which is why toolwatches, for people who need to know 'time' at a glance, will always be analogue and robust.

Probably the only time I would choose a mechanical watch over a quartz would be arctic or high mountain work as I would have a niggling (but probably unfounded,) concern over the effect of sustained 'very cold' on a quartz watch (but I never had to make that choice as I wore a 16710 on all my arctic adventures).

You don't need a pencil when you have a mobile device.

[Chinnock]

Mechanical = Magical

[Brauner Hund]

You don't need a pencil when you have a mobile device.

😂😂😂 outstanding!

[verv]

You don't need a pencil when you have a mobile device.

But they're useful for when your mobile device loses signal or battery.

[Wooster]

I'm not quite sure time exists. But I love how a bunch of metal parts regulate movement so very precisely. Also, it's one of the few technologies I can still comprehend. Also, they're manifestations of beauty (some of them at least).

[forpetesake]

For day to day practical purposes, I now find my mechanical watches to have become irrelevant. Solar atomic G-Shock looks after me at work and Grand Seiko 9F/Citizen A660 quartz delivers a little effortless compensatory luxury on weekday evenings. At these times I really couldn't be bothered with power reserves.
My mechanicals have developed a niche role as a weekend recreational distraction. I like to ponder which to wear and tinker with such as strap changes. I like their longevity, their mechanical 'aesthetic', that they are inactive until I power them and their relatively relaxed beat rate thereafter.

For me, this simple pleasure could if allowed, be adulterated by the pervading aspirational marketing/branding which accompanies many mechanicals and the related endless considerations of signaling and investment. So I seem to have avoided certain brands and generally keep what's on my wrist to myself.

[snowman]

Anything mechanical is interesting to me

I can't pretend to understand exactly how a watch works, but I can appreciate the engineering that goes into making a mechanical watch work.

I don't question the superiority of quartz accuracy, but that's not the point. Quartz is inaccurate compared to atomic clocks!

Equally, though I don't discount quartz watches out of hand. I have a few, including some quality (read, expensive) ones, simply because I like the functionality or convenience of a quartz watch in some cases (eg a Moon phase complication).

M

Sent from my ASUS_X00PD using Tapatalk

[Tiny]

So it appears from the above comments that the primary reason for owning a mechanical watch is not for telling the time.

[Man of Kent]

I prefer quartz tbh. It has to be radio controlled and solar though as opening up for batteries is no good.
I do have a couple of mechanical watches but they are not accurate enough for my line of work, therefore redundant and remain as curios to tinker with.
I don't see much difference between a spring or a battery providing the power to the cogs that make the hands go round.

[JonRA]

I have generally preferred mechanical watches most of my life. The first quartz I bought was a solar g-shock in 2008ish, but soon returned to the mechanical fold. I have always had them serviced every five years (Tudor and Rolex being the two brands I relied on until 'discovering' Seiko and some micro-brands after joining here). As others have said, I enjoy knowing that there is a beautifully engineered mechanism inside, ticking away with astonishing accuracy for what it is. But I also appreciate excellence as far as quartz is concerned - namely the ultra robust 7c46, found in Tunas (I wish Seiko put it in a more conventionally styled diver), and the superbly over-engineered and accurate 9f series. My current favourite watch is an SBGX335 on an MN strap which reduces weight and adds security (I note the comment above about GS divers being large, but like MM300s they don't wear as big as the dimensions suggest).

[A440]

I love both mechanical and quartz watches. They're both marvels of engineering and flowers of the culture we're part of. The thought of the intricate mechanics behind a wristwatch is inspiring. I don't have the skills to make one, but people in my society do. That's extraordinary. It gives me buzz thinking about it. I love quartz and radio controlled watches for a similar reason. I couldn't build one but somehow people on this planet can. That's incredible and I think sometimes we take too much for granted. We are so lucky.