WATCH TALK FORUMS banner
1 - 10 of 10 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
35 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I buy my watches as if every purchase is going to be a heirloom, so I prefer mechanicals. I expect all my watches to be handed down to my kids and last for a lifetime. From what I have read and heard about Quartz movements they need to be replaced from between 10 to 20 years depending on the quality, some may even last longer, I most likely would not replace a quartz movement unless it was in a watch like a Breitling or a Rolex Oyster quartz. Now as far as cost, quartz would be more practical, because mechanicals from time to time will require maintenance, and depending on the watch it can be quite expensive, but some malfunction in my head steers me towards a mechinical movement that can last a lifetime even though I can probably be better off buying a new quartz watch at the same price as I would pay for a service.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
20,790 Posts
I tend to agree. The only quartz I would consider (outside the $100 or less beater) would be the Breitling SuperQuartz or a Rolex Oyster Quartz too. Maybe a Quartzmatic too (I think that's what it's called)...

But far & away, mechanical is the one for me. :thumbup1:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,800 Posts
Interesting thoughts. I see little difference in the quartz movements made for either Breitling or Renato or Rolex. All have to be either replaced or serviced at some point.

I look at the picture as the whole watch. A high end mechanical or automatic may not be as personally valuable as a lower end watch with a quartz movement. When Dad passed away and I picked up his collection, granted all were high end Swiss Made watches but that was the style then. I would hope when I die and the kids get my watches that they measure the value of them based on how much I valued each watch by my personal preference.

Just my .002 cents worth.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,743 Posts
I have 25 year old quartz watches that work fine.
I understand your point about mechanicals, but quartz revolutionized the watch industry. I suspect some of the early "junkers" will be very valuable in 50 years.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,102 Posts
To each his own, that's why we have choices in the free market.

I grew up when, unless you were rich, you wound your watch just prior to hitting the rack each night. If you forgot, you'd be late for something the next day.

In the late sixties and early seventies, I had a few self-winders, but two were stolen and one survives.

In those days, that was high technology. Battery-powered watches were out there, but the only people who wore them were the well-to-do and the railroad workers I knew, who owned Accutrons.

I understand the nostalgia component, but frankly, mechanical movements can go bad, too. Maybe replacing the entire movement is not needed, but parts do break.

Quartz watches are such that replacing parts is not really feasible. It's easier and cheaper to change out the movement.

Regardless, both are subject to wear and breakage and have to be fixed.

In some cases, replacing is cheaper than fixing, but that would be true of even mechanical movements, when parts are not readily available for whatever reason.

So, I think what is really at issue here is not so much the type of movement, but the manufacturer and whether or not they are likely to be prepared to replace parts on watches over a long period of time, like say, the International Watch Company, or if the manufacturer is always changing styles and technology and parts and movements may not be available for watches for more than, say, a decade.

Buy whatever watch suits you, but sometimes the rationalizations people use seem forced and, frankly, unnecessary.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,152 Posts
Rolex has said they won't service some watches that are over 20 years old (and I have one that's 17) so there may be a problem with heirlooms going forward. And Boscoe's right about the quartz movements. I have Seikos from the '70s and '80s that are in my drawer still ticking away one second at a time.
My preference is definitely mechanicals. I just hope there will be enough qualified watchmakers available to keep them going in the future.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,410 Posts
I prefer the mechanicals. But, have several quartz watches also. You can't beat the reliabilty of the quartz movements.

But, self-winders, automatics or what ever the latest name is are by far my favorite. Hey, what can I say....I'm a Gearhead !!!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
797 Posts
Quartz for me

I have one mechanical in my collection and it's a total PIA. If it was not so beautiful it would have been gone long ago. I really don't think they are at all practical if you have more than 2 watches in a rotation. My CLERC gets worn generally once a week. Keeping it going is a chore.
Sweet Quartz....no winding, accurate, hearty and always ready to go. The reality is as someone said somewhere, "any watch over $100 is jewelry". I agree somewhat.
There are many watch styles available in both Quartz and mechanical. An Omega Seamaster, Cartier Santos or my EBEL Discovery for example come both ways. To me the real beauty of the watch is NOT what is inside, but rather how it looks outside.
I can have the artistry, robust look, beauty and cache' of a Seamaster, Santos or Discovery etc. even in Quartz. You can have the same thing in a mechanical version. I am just paying less and enjoying it just as much...maybe even more.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,743 Posts
I have one mechanical in my collection and it's a total PIA. If it was not so beautiful it would have been gone long ago. I really don't think they are at all practical if you have more than 2 watches in a rotation. My CLERC gets worn generally once a week. Keeping it going is a chore.
Sweet Quartz....no winding, accurate, hearty and always ready to go. The reality is as someone said somewhere, "any watch over $100 is jewelry". I agree somewhat.
There are many watch styles available in both Quartz and mechanical. An Omega Seamaster, Cartier Santos or my EBEL Discovery for example come both ways. To me the real beauty of the watch is NOT what is inside, but rather how it looks outside.
I can have the artistry, robust look, beauty and cache' of a Seamaster, Santos or Discovery etc. even in Quartz. You can have the same thing in a mechanical version. I am just paying less and enjoying it just as much...maybe even more.
I change watches daily. I don't sweat winding, though setting the time in the am can be a pain if I'm in a hurry etc. Also, now I NEVER set the dates on my mechanical watches.

This is why I adore my Seiko Kinetic Perpetual. It can sit for days - or four years - and you pick it up, give it a shake and then the date, month, time etc. is automatically set correctly (including leap years). Now that's cool technology... for under $400 (at a serious deal).
 
1 - 10 of 10 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top