Quartz vs. Mechanical watches

[leonard smalls]

I'm with the quartz fraternity...
I've had a Casio alt-6000 mountaineering watch for 10 years now. It cost £90, has an altimeter, barometer, thermometer and compass, plus alarms for particular pressures and altitudes (and times, of course!).
It's had a particularly hard life having been used whenever I go climbing - if a watch can cope with being part of a fist-jam in a gritstone crack it's definitely solid!
In all that time, it loses about 1 second every 2 weeks, and has gone through 3 batteries and gaskets (100m water resistant), at £8 each time.
As far as I'm concerned that's value - if I had a £1000 Omega or the like I'd never wear it for fear of scratches!

 

[Sid and Coke]

Hi Sid,

Do you have any links you could post up about the Casio? I take it it's digital?

I've been searching for a digital radio controlled watch for years, but have never been able to find one. I remember once there was one in an Innovations catalogue a few years but it didn't even have an alarm, stop watch or any other basic features on it.

I can only think of 2 other brands which do radio controlled watches (suitable for use in the UK) and they are all analgoue faced. Much prefer digital readouts.

I've got a number of radio controlled clocks at home and love them. I've always found the quartz wrist watches I tend to have are accurate +/- 0.5 seconds a day, never come across anything more accurate than that.

Oh and on the subject of clocks on mobile phones, I'm guessing that time signals must be broadcast across mobile phone networks, so why don't we have mobile phones which sync up their clock with those time signals?

Henry Check out here :
http://www.argos.co.uk

and search for product codes;
254/5635 , 254/5628 , 254/3479 , 254/3503 , these look to be quite neat and affordable watches. there is also another one 254/7097 at just £14.99 Junghans is another brand to look out for in Radio controlled watches , although they are more expensive.

I don't know what my problem is regarding time, but for some reason i just can't stand timepeices that are not accurate to within say <5 seconds a month. There is absolutely no reason why I need this level of accuracy at all , i suposse its just another of my quirky little failings, perhaps i've got a 'Syndrome' . I have a radio controlled alarm clock and use it to cross check all of the other timepeices in the house , obsesive compulsive behaviour or what...

I was looking at the old 1970's red and (rarer) green LED watches a few weeks ago with a view to buying one. I just love the look of the old 1970's 'Digital' watches both the electronic LED digital and the Analogue styles. There seems to be quite a market, you can get newly built and designed LED watches , but they just seem to be missing something....( perhaps short battery life, too much accuracy and reliability ).

Check out here for a trip down memory lane:
http://www.theretroworld.com/otaga.html

 

[HenryT]

Thanks Sids, looks like I'll be getting one of those radio controlled Casios soon then.

I've always been obsessed with the accuracy of time pieces. I think it's got a lot to do with my reliance on public transport. Yes, most people woud say that public transport never runs on time in this country, but on the occassions that it does being 30 seconds late could mean catching that train and missing it.

Also use to be fascinated when I was a kid with how accurate time keeping is used in radio and television broadcasting. When I visited a local BBC studio I remember chating to one of studio managers who explained that the clocks around the building were synchronised via the time signal derived from the (Ceefax) teletext signal, but due to the delays introduced by the broadcast chain this could mean that the clocks could be upto 0.25 seconds out which in certain scenarios was unacceptable!

 

[domfjbrown]

LED watches RULE! I still want one; my 1984 Omac digital (LCD) from Ebay is the nearest I've got (it's the same as one I had in 1987, where the light got stuck on - I just had to have the sentimental bling item again!).

 

[michaelab]

There I was thinking that expensive Swiss mechanical watches run in the price range from about £500 to about £5000 and then maybe as much as £20-30K for the pointless diamond encrusted jobbies but oh no...that's just small fry:

I was flicking through a watch magazine I picked up at the jewellers and saw an advert for the Richard Mille RM002 which starts at €159,000 (about £105K) :yikes: . I have to say they look stunning to me.

Then I read about the Thomas Prescher Triple Axis Tourbillon watch which is sold in a collectors box containing a single, dual and triple axis tourbillon movement watch called "Tourbillon Trilogy". The price of the 3 watch set was a cool $750,000 . When he first showed them at a Basel watch show he sold eight sets straight away. Some people have waaaayyyy too much money.

Michael.

 

[IndyAudi]

There I was thinking that expensive Swiss mechanical watches run in the price range from about £500 to about £5000 and then maybe as much as £20-30K for the pointless diamond encrusted jobbies but oh no...that's just small fry:

Michael.

Here's some photo's of the last very small fry that I sold.


Just to make things a little more interesting I will send a little prize to the first person who can answer the following questions :-
(1)The make and type of watch this is.
(2)The year of manafacture.
(3)Which of the Services this watch would be issued to.
(4)Which Swiss movement was in The First Omega on the Moon.

The prize is a pair of unused/boxed RAF 12AT7 valves which are incidentially the 1983 Kevin Deals personal favourites.

http://www.upscaleaudio.com/rare/12AT7TubeList.htm

I have my answers written down in stone and these are final (right or wrong) and answers only from US/Canada/Europe/UK members please.

 

[tones]

There I was thinking that expensive Swiss mechanical watches run in the price range from about £500 to about £5000 and then maybe as much as £20-30K for the pointless diamond encrusted jobbies but oh no...that's just small fry:

I was flicking through a watch magazine I picked up at the jewellers and saw an advert for the Richard Mille RM002 which starts at €159,000 (about £105K) :yikes: . I have to say they look stunning to me.

Then I read about the Thomas Prescher Triple Axis Tourbillon watch which is sold in a collectors box containing a single, dual and triple axis tourbillon movement watch called "Tourbillon Trilogy". The price of the 3 watch set was a cool $750,000 . When he first showed them at a Basel watch show he sold eight sets straight away. Some people have waaaayyyy too much money.

Michael.

Michael, these are mere bagatelles beside The Real Thing. The latest Real Thing is Patek Philippe's Star Caliber 2000, a set of four big pocket watches:

http://wwp.greenwichmeantime.com/cl...patek-philippe/collections/star-caliber-2000/

Only five sets were made, at a mere (here please sit down) $US7.5 million per set. There was a set on show at the last Basel Uhrenmesse - magnificent, but they remind me a bit of Ettore Bugatti's famous comment on Rolls-Royce - the triumph of craftmanship over design. (At least one of those sets has been sold, and the star map indicates that it's en route to somewhere in the Southern Hemisphere).

If you prefer a wristwatch, check out the Sky Moon Tourbillon on the same link. You'd really be exclusive - PP only makes two a year.

P.S. The tourbillon mechanism (invented by the great Abraham-Louis Breguet 200 years ago) is totally unnecessary (it was designed to cancel out the effect of gravity on the balance wheel and ensure better accuracy, but none of the watches that win chronometer certificates have them). It's now just a fashionable "aren't I clever?" frill (they always make sure that the tourbillon in its rotating cage can be seen through the face or back of the watch).

 

[tones]

Here's some photo's of the last very small fry that I sold.


Just to make things a little more interesting I will send a little prize to the first person who can answer the following questions :-
(1)The make and type of watch this is.
(2)The year of manafacture.
(3)Which of the Services this watch would be issued to.
(4)Which Swiss movement was in The First Omega on the Moon.

The prize is a pair of unused/boxed RAF 12AT7 valves which are incidentially the 1983 Kevin Deals personal favourites.

http://www.upscaleaudio.com/rare/12AT7TubeList.htm

I have my answers written down in stone and these are final (right or wrong) and answers only from US/Canada/Europe/UK members please.

Don't actually know, but I'd guess that the watch is an IWC Pilot's Chronograph made for the RAF.

The Omega Speedmaster "Moon watch" used at least two different calibers, Omega 321 and 861. I'd guess at the older 321.

 

[michaelab]

P.S. The tourbillon mechanism (invented by the great Abraham-Louis Breguet 200 years ago) is totally unnecessary (it was designed to cancel out the effect of gravity on the balance wheel and ensure better accuracy, but none of the watches that win chronometer certificates have them).

Yes, I was reading about the Tourbillon movement on www.europastar.com as I didn't have a clue what it was. Seems like it makes accuracy errors caused by gravity harder to detect by conventional means but actually doesn't improve anything and only increases complexity and uses up more energy in rotating the tourbillon cage.

The skill of the micro engineering in the Thomas Prescher watches however is quite staggering!

Michael.

 

[michaelab]

Well, decided not to get a new watch for now. I already have 6 which is enough really. Put a new battery in a nice Davis quartz chronograph I have (similar to this one):

...and am using that for now. As for mechanical, I've got a lovely Russian Poljot chronograph which doesn't work terribly well (even if I wind it up every day) so I'm going to see if I can get it serviced/repaired and back to full working order. Anyone got any suggestions of where I might find someone who could repair such a watch?

A curious thing I noticed whilst browsing watches in shops: there seems to be a convention to set mechanical watches at 10 to 2 when on display. Anyone else noticed this?

Michael.

 

[stickman]

[/QUOTE]there seems to be a convention to set mechanical watches at 10 to 2 when on display. Anyone else noticed this?

Michael.[/QUOTE]

Or 10 past 10, as in your picture.
From memory, its always been this way; maybe thats seen as the best way to present the display of a watch.

 

[tones]

there seems to be a convention to set mechanical watches at 10 to 2 when on display. Anyone else noticed this?

Michael.

Or 10 past 10, as in your picture.
From memory, its always been this way; maybe thats seen as the best way to present the display of a watch.

But not Star Caliber 2000 in my link above! But then, if you're in that market segment, perhaps you don't even notice if the thing actually has hands.

 

[muffinman]

i got a breitling hercules as an anniversary present last year. being an automatic it loses time whenever it's not on my wrist. it looks fantastic though. when it's doing its chrongraph thing its as good as you could expect, but i'm not a pilot so i use it to time egg boiling etc. basically it comes down to pride of ownership and this being a hifi forum, i've heard that before.