Mechanical vs. Quartz Watches
By Rogers - usenet poster
Van Gogh probably painted some of his paintings in an afternoon. The value
of art or collectibles has nothing to do with the labor that went into
them - there are some item that require intensive labor and are almost
worthless and others that were dashed off and are worth millions. The same
thing with mechanical watches - yes, it costs Rolex a little more money and
labor to make a Submariner than it costs Seiko to make a quartz dive watch,
but not $3,000 more, or anything close to that.
ONE is the operative number here. I think if you had tried to place an order
for 10,000 with a Chinese factory you would have been pleasantly surprised.
Best Solution
posted on Aug 09, 2005
Kim1 - usenet poster
Rank:
Apprentice
Rating: 0%, 0 votes
ApprenticeRating: 0%, 0 votes
Simon, answering the questions a new collector asks is not a pointless
crusade, it is answering the question that a new watch collector asks.
Rather than respond on an individual basis to all the hogwash about
whether mechanical watches are "better" which was the common response
to this new collector's question (how better??? better at keeping
time-Nope, better at being shock resistant-Nope, Water
resistance-Nope, More features-Nope) I pointed out that even
prestigious manufacturers like Jaeger Lecoultre never say that
mechanical watches are better. They may say that they make mechanical
watches better than other manufacturers. But JL also says that they
use a quartz drive in their chronograph because chronographs are used
to measure time and since quartz is much more accurate and this is an
absolute fact the chronograph wearer should know.
Maybe you don't like facing facts, or perhaps you prefer to live your
life in denial. But when a new collector asks a reasonable question it
deserves an honest, complete and accurate answer. Worst of all the
watch manufacturers know that mechanical watches are mostly just
status symbols, and mechanicals are second rate as personal timepieces
no matter how pretty their innards are. The chairman of Swatchgroup
who owns Blancpain, Omega, Breguet, ETA, Valjoux and others, can wear
a cheap Swatch as a way to be cool but he never wears a cheesy
mechanical that sells for the same price, and he says so in
interviews.
There are old-tech things that can be collected and comparisons can
show that a few of the old things may be superior in a few ways. Vinyl
records and factory produced reel to reel tapes may not be better than
compact discs or DVD sound in many ways, but in a few ways their
superiority can actually be demonstrated. The same is possible with
cars from the 60s. In most ways they aren't better but a few examples
can still demonstrate superiority in a few ways. But with mechanical
watches it's fine to collect them, it's fine to wear them and show
them off as artistic forms of an old craft or art form. But mechanical
watches just aren't better at timekeeping or integrating themselves
conveniently into people's life. I encourage watch collecting and I
especially encourage new watch collectors in the columns I write for
WatchUSeek and Time4watcheS. But I don't mislead new collectors and I
try to explain why mechanical watches are old technology that most
people don't want any more than they want rotary dial telephones or
mechanical calculators.
By the way, it doesn't take much time to compose a response to the
same old inaccuracies that people use when saying that mechanical
watches are better than quartz drive watches. I have this thing called
a computer and as long as the same inaccuracies keep being repeated by
old-tech watch fans, my computer stores the responses to the same
crusade, it is answering the question that a new watch collector asks.
Rather than respond on an individual basis to all the hogwash about
whether mechanical watches are "better" which was the common response
to this new collector's question (how better??? better at keeping
time-Nope, better at being shock resistant-Nope, Water
resistance-Nope, More features-Nope) I pointed out that even
prestigious manufacturers like Jaeger Lecoultre never say that
mechanical watches are better. They may say that they make mechanical
watches better than other manufacturers. But JL also says that they
use a quartz drive in their chronograph because chronographs are used
to measure time and since quartz is much more accurate and this is an
absolute fact the chronograph wearer should know.
Maybe you don't like facing facts, or perhaps you prefer to live your
life in denial. But when a new collector asks a reasonable question it
deserves an honest, complete and accurate answer. Worst of all the
watch manufacturers know that mechanical watches are mostly just
status symbols, and mechanicals are second rate as personal timepieces
no matter how pretty their innards are. The chairman of Swatchgroup
who owns Blancpain, Omega, Breguet, ETA, Valjoux and others, can wear
a cheap Swatch as a way to be cool but he never wears a cheesy
mechanical that sells for the same price, and he says so in
interviews.
There are old-tech things that can be collected and comparisons can
show that a few of the old things may be superior in a few ways. Vinyl
records and factory produced reel to reel tapes may not be better than
compact discs or DVD sound in many ways, but in a few ways their
superiority can actually be demonstrated. The same is possible with
cars from the 60s. In most ways they aren't better but a few examples
can still demonstrate superiority in a few ways. But with mechanical
watches it's fine to collect them, it's fine to wear them and show
them off as artistic forms of an old craft or art form. But mechanical
watches just aren't better at timekeeping or integrating themselves
conveniently into people's life. I encourage watch collecting and I
especially encourage new watch collectors in the columns I write for
WatchUSeek and Time4watcheS. But I don't mislead new collectors and I
try to explain why mechanical watches are old technology that most
people don't want any more than they want rotary dial telephones or
mechanical calculators.
By the way, it doesn't take much time to compose a response to the
same old inaccuracies that people use when saying that mechanical
watches are better than quartz drive watches. I have this thing called
a computer and as long as the same inaccuracies keep being repeated by
old-tech watch fans, my computer stores the responses to the same
Was this solution helpful? Show your Appreciation by rating it:
Solution #2
posted on Aug 09, 2005
kcw573 - usenet poster
Rank: Apprentice
Rating: 0%, 0 votes
ApprenticeRating: 0%, 0 votes
A very compelling (and lengthy) essay, but open any issue of any watch
magazine and you'll see that you are shouting into the wind. The "problem"
with quartz is that even a $10 quartz watch will work pretty much as well as
an expensive one so it is hard to get consumers to perceive value in
expensive quartz watches, especially men's watches (outside of "jewelry
watches" such as Cartier). With a mechanical watch the manufacturers can at
least pretend that you are paying for craftsmanship and many people fall for
it - surely hunchbacked little Swiss gnomes with loupes put all those little
gears together. But while in some mechanical watches there is at least some
slight relationship between the cost of the movement and the cost of the
watch, in many quartz watches the consumer is right to perceive the utter
lack of value. Recently I was looking for a replacement movement for a
Tissot I had in a drawer. The ESA/ETA 980.163 movement it uses is about $25
retail. But I came across the fact that this same movement was used in a
Technomarine watch that retails for over $2600. This kind of markup is
inexecusable. (BTW, the Techomarine has a fraction of a carat worth of tiny
pave diamonds - these are worth a couple of hundred $, tops).
Of course mechanical watches have their own dirty little secrets - $1000
watches with $50 movements, etc. And the other secret of modern watchmaking
is that since the development of Nivarox springs and laser poised balances,
the gap between "fine" watches and "ordinary" movements has shrunk almost to
the point of insignificance, when actual performance on the wrist is
considered. So what is it that you are getting when you buy a $3000 diver
instead of a $300 one?
The same thing goes on in some other fields - a 50 cent rolling ball pen
works better than a fancy fountain pen, but people still buy fountain pens.
There are still people who buy Morgan sports cars, etc.
magazine and you'll see that you are shouting into the wind. The "problem"
with quartz is that even a $10 quartz watch will work pretty much as well as
an expensive one so it is hard to get consumers to perceive value in
expensive quartz watches, especially men's watches (outside of "jewelry
watches" such as Cartier). With a mechanical watch the manufacturers can at
least pretend that you are paying for craftsmanship and many people fall for
it - surely hunchbacked little Swiss gnomes with loupes put all those little
gears together. But while in some mechanical watches there is at least some
slight relationship between the cost of the movement and the cost of the
watch, in many quartz watches the consumer is right to perceive the utter
lack of value. Recently I was looking for a replacement movement for a
Tissot I had in a drawer. The ESA/ETA 980.163 movement it uses is about $25
retail. But I came across the fact that this same movement was used in a
Technomarine watch that retails for over $2600. This kind of markup is
inexecusable. (BTW, the Techomarine has a fraction of a carat worth of tiny
pave diamonds - these are worth a couple of hundred $, tops).
Of course mechanical watches have their own dirty little secrets - $1000
watches with $50 movements, etc. And the other secret of modern watchmaking
is that since the development of Nivarox springs and laser poised balances,
the gap between "fine" watches and "ordinary" movements has shrunk almost to
the point of insignificance, when actual performance on the wrist is
considered. So what is it that you are getting when you buy a $3000 diver
instead of a $300 one?
The same thing goes on in some other fields - a 50 cent rolling ball pen
works better than a fancy fountain pen, but people still buy fountain pens.
There are still people who buy Morgan sports cars, etc.
Was this solution helpful? Show your Appreciation by rating it:
Solution #3
posted on Aug 09, 2005
Charlie - usenet poster
Rank: Apprentice
Rating: 0%, 0 votes
ApprenticeRating: 0%, 0 votes
I would challenge the common assumption that mechanicals are
inherently much longer lived than quartz.
1) Most mechanicals don't last a long time. The better ones have that
potential, the mediocher ones don't unless they're lightly used. The
VAST majority of mechanicals from 50 years ago are dead.
2) To last that long, they need to be regularly (5 years) serviced by
a skilled technician, including disassembly and proper lubrication. If
this process is ignored, or worse, performed by someone with
insufficient skill, or if the wrong type of lube is used (for example
hi beat watches REQUIRE very special lube, Rolex watch performance is
dependent, in part on the factory specified lube) the watch will
simply die.
The big weakness for mechanicals is lubrication failure. Once this
happens, wear proceeds at an accelerated rate (this is even more fatal
for mechanical clocks, being less sealed, the lube actually attracts
dust and creates a grinding paste).
3) Comparing to quartz watches from the 60s or early 70s is not really
valid, because admittedly at that time chip technology was in its
infancy. The majority of quartz watch failures are due moisture
penetrating the chip enclosure and damage to contacts, two areas that
have markedly changed. Basically chip failure is a statistical
function, dependent to a large degree on the number of transisters in
the chip. Whereas now, computer CPU chips are in the millions of
transistors, and watches in the thousands, the statistical failure
advantage of a watch is about 1000 to 1, and yet CPU chips rarely
fail.
4) Plastic movements are not necessarily a problem. Indeed they enable
a quartz watch to run with zero lubrication and all the problems that
involves. The skill level (as well as cost) to replace the battery is
vastly less than the mechanical watch service. The need for incredible
precision, jewels, and lubrication in mechanicals is due to the
unfortunate confluence of high loads, extreme sensitivity to fricion
and extreme sensitivity to wear and misalignment. Plastic quartz
movements have extremely low loads, are not very sensitive to friction
(so large diameter shafts can be used), are not sensitve to tolerance
(so a bit of wear in a shaft hole is no biggie.
Basically, a reasonably cared for, reasonable quality quartz watch has
virtually nothing to wear out or to fail.
inherently much longer lived than quartz.
1) Most mechanicals don't last a long time. The better ones have that
potential, the mediocher ones don't unless they're lightly used. The
VAST majority of mechanicals from 50 years ago are dead.
2) To last that long, they need to be regularly (5 years) serviced by
a skilled technician, including disassembly and proper lubrication. If
this process is ignored, or worse, performed by someone with
insufficient skill, or if the wrong type of lube is used (for example
hi beat watches REQUIRE very special lube, Rolex watch performance is
dependent, in part on the factory specified lube) the watch will
simply die.
The big weakness for mechanicals is lubrication failure. Once this
happens, wear proceeds at an accelerated rate (this is even more fatal
for mechanical clocks, being less sealed, the lube actually attracts
dust and creates a grinding paste).
3) Comparing to quartz watches from the 60s or early 70s is not really
valid, because admittedly at that time chip technology was in its
infancy. The majority of quartz watch failures are due moisture
penetrating the chip enclosure and damage to contacts, two areas that
have markedly changed. Basically chip failure is a statistical
function, dependent to a large degree on the number of transisters in
the chip. Whereas now, computer CPU chips are in the millions of
transistors, and watches in the thousands, the statistical failure
advantage of a watch is about 1000 to 1, and yet CPU chips rarely
fail.
4) Plastic movements are not necessarily a problem. Indeed they enable
a quartz watch to run with zero lubrication and all the problems that
involves. The skill level (as well as cost) to replace the battery is
vastly less than the mechanical watch service. The need for incredible
precision, jewels, and lubrication in mechanicals is due to the
unfortunate confluence of high loads, extreme sensitivity to fricion
and extreme sensitivity to wear and misalignment. Plastic quartz
movements have extremely low loads, are not very sensitive to friction
(so large diameter shafts can be used), are not sensitve to tolerance
(so a bit of wear in a shaft hole is no biggie.
Basically, a reasonably cared for, reasonable quality quartz watch has
virtually nothing to wear out or to fail.
Was this solution helpful? Show your Appreciation by rating it:
Solution #4
posted on Aug 09, 2005
lawyer - usenet poster
Rank: Apprentice
Rating: 0%, 0 votes
ApprenticeRating: 0%, 0 votes
Me thinks Me Lord Protest too much.
One thing for sure you must have lots of free time on your quartz hand to
write the same diatribe over and over in all soapbox fire and brimstone
quartzology relegio fanaticism variation sermon. So in turn I will post once
again my reply to your last quartzology preaching which this time almost
sounded like a rant.
Your Majesty Watchking ---
Suit yourself but my definition includes the words :The science of measuring
time, or the principles and art of designing and constructing instruments
for measuring and indicating portions of time, as clocks, watches, dials,
etc.
But be as it may. I would venture that none of your soapbox hell fire and
brimstone 'quartzology' (maybe the Watchking's -- it seems the title may
have been taken too seriously in spite of the subjects of the Horological
Kingdom no listening and above all not caring -- version of Horological
Scientology) sermons reached, nevermind convincing a single individual with
a love and appreciation of everything concerning and associated with
mechanical watches to run out and buy a quartz watches or even accept any of
your repeating sermonizing. You're simply spitting in the wind of people
who have no kinship or affinity with your foolhardy diatribe about the
benefits of quartz.
The vehemence of your repetitions seems like a warning for those who you
believe have strayed from the true faith of the heavenly reward of
quartzology -- and those who deny and ignore your message are living in
Horological Sin that will lead them to the hell of horological financial
destitution missing the great rewards of Quartz Heaven.
Good luck in your pointless crusade.
Simon Bryquer
One thing for sure you must have lots of free time on your quartz hand to
write the same diatribe over and over in all soapbox fire and brimstone
quartzology relegio fanaticism variation sermon. So in turn I will post once
again my reply to your last quartzology preaching which this time almost
sounded like a rant.
Your Majesty Watchking ---
Suit yourself but my definition includes the words :The science of measuring
time, or the principles and art of designing and constructing instruments
for measuring and indicating portions of time, as clocks, watches, dials,
etc.
But be as it may. I would venture that none of your soapbox hell fire and
brimstone 'quartzology' (maybe the Watchking's -- it seems the title may
have been taken too seriously in spite of the subjects of the Horological
Kingdom no listening and above all not caring -- version of Horological
Scientology) sermons reached, nevermind convincing a single individual with
a love and appreciation of everything concerning and associated with
mechanical watches to run out and buy a quartz watches or even accept any of
your repeating sermonizing. You're simply spitting in the wind of people
who have no kinship or affinity with your foolhardy diatribe about the
benefits of quartz.
The vehemence of your repetitions seems like a warning for those who you
believe have strayed from the true faith of the heavenly reward of
quartzology -- and those who deny and ignore your message are living in
Horological Sin that will lead them to the hell of horological financial
destitution missing the great rewards of Quartz Heaven.
Good luck in your pointless crusade.
Simon Bryquer
Was this solution helpful? Show your Appreciation by rating it:
Solution #5
posted on Aug 09, 2005
Perkins - usenet poster
Rank: Apprentice
Rating: 0%, 0 votes
ApprenticeRating: 0%, 0 votes
"Terence Lynock MSW" <Modelshipwrig @zetnet.co.uk> schreef in bericht
Why have a watch approximate time, when it can tell accurate time?
I think as long as a watch isn't extremely accurate, the problem exists how
unaccurate is it allowed to be.
And how do people in Hawaii tell when it's winter in your view of things?
Greetinx,
Robert
Why have a watch approximate time, when it can tell accurate time?
I think as long as a watch isn't extremely accurate, the problem exists how
unaccurate is it allowed to be.
And how do people in Hawaii tell when it's winter in your view of things?
Greetinx,
Robert
Was this solution helpful? Show your Appreciation by rating it:
Solution #6
posted on Aug 09, 2005
maartenw - usenet poster
Rank: Apprentice
Rating: 0%, 0 votes
ApprenticeRating: 0%, 0 votes
Funny for a device with nothing to fail, they fail pretty often - I've had
several fail over the years.
several fail over the years.
Was this solution helpful? Show your Appreciation by rating it:
Solution #7
posted on Aug 09, 2005
paulrmc - usenet poster
Rank: Apprentice
Rating: 0%, 0 votes
ApprenticeRating: 0%, 0 votes
On Sat, 27 Mar 2004 23:22:10 -0500, "Jack Denver"
Indeed. Analogues are just as prone to failures as mechanicals.
In fact not having a huge amount of force driving them, they are not
at all as "self repairing" as mechanicals. Sadly a lot of those with a
decent size spring, will struggle on even when dry and wear themselves
out. The old "Had this watch for 25 years and it never stopped" thing,
which is where i say "if it does stop, please don't bring it to me."
;-)
What exactly is a "quality" quartz movement ? A divider chip bundled
on top of maybe 6 wheels covered by a flimsy .2mm plate ? Pleeaase..
I won't argue the superiority of quartz over mechanicals as far as
practicality goes, then again the Swatch and the Flik-Flaks (to
mention just a couple) did create a craze that is hard to explain from
a strictly practical point of view.
However, buying a quality mechanical watch, you can be ascertained
that both the design and workmanship that went into it's internals is
far more impressive than that of quartz watches. Even if done on the
assembly line.
Of course, if someone needs seconds accuracy over even a day, then the
choice is obvious, but i will never be impressed by a quartz watch (a
few exceptions to be expected), when compared to a similarly equipped
mechanical watch.
Even a quartz chrono is still just a few more wheels being flicked
about by a bit of code. As far as software engineering goes it's lack
lustre and as far as mechanical engineering goes, it's not even as
exciting as a hammer.
...but that's just my 2 cents.. I make good money from repairing the
myriads of quartz watches and i prefer them for their simplicity. I
can probably do 3:1 timewise, so may quartz live forever ! ;-)
--
Regards, Frank
Indeed. Analogues are just as prone to failures as mechanicals.
In fact not having a huge amount of force driving them, they are not
at all as "self repairing" as mechanicals. Sadly a lot of those with a
decent size spring, will struggle on even when dry and wear themselves
out. The old "Had this watch for 25 years and it never stopped" thing,
which is where i say "if it does stop, please don't bring it to me."
;-)
What exactly is a "quality" quartz movement ? A divider chip bundled
on top of maybe 6 wheels covered by a flimsy .2mm plate ? Pleeaase..
I won't argue the superiority of quartz over mechanicals as far as
practicality goes, then again the Swatch and the Flik-Flaks (to
mention just a couple) did create a craze that is hard to explain from
a strictly practical point of view.
However, buying a quality mechanical watch, you can be ascertained
that both the design and workmanship that went into it's internals is
far more impressive than that of quartz watches. Even if done on the
assembly line.
Of course, if someone needs seconds accuracy over even a day, then the
choice is obvious, but i will never be impressed by a quartz watch (a
few exceptions to be expected), when compared to a similarly equipped
mechanical watch.
Even a quartz chrono is still just a few more wheels being flicked
about by a bit of code. As far as software engineering goes it's lack
lustre and as far as mechanical engineering goes, it's not even as
exciting as a hammer.
...but that's just my 2 cents.. I make good money from repairing the
myriads of quartz watches and i prefer them for their simplicity. I
can probably do 3:1 timewise, so may quartz live forever ! ;-)
--
Regards, Frank
Was this solution helpful? Show your Appreciation by rating it:
Solution #8
posted on Aug 09, 2005
Janice - usenet poster
Rank: Apprentice
Rating: 0%, 0 votes
ApprenticeRating: 0%, 0 votes
I did hear from a jeweller that some of the gears in the Accutron were
plastic-toothed, and that many were starting to wear down about now. Don't
know how true this is, mind! (I wish I'd kept mine; - owned it for
half-a-day then returned it, as the humming put me off when I was sitting
quietly, reading....)
Ten years seems par for the course for many appliances in the UK. A cunning
ploy by the manufacturers and sales-people. As watches don't seem to suffer
the same amount of built-in obsolescence, a clever sales pitch is required,
so that thing on your arm makes you better at sex, business, diving,
shooting, hanging about looking cool, etc - until a new model is introduced.
I don't think you do in the US, but here over the pond we (or many of us)
tend to hoard things, make them eke out, and are dismayed when appliances,
etc, fail prematurely. It may be inbred and something to do with WWII -
austerity, scrimping and saving, and all that....
I get the impression that many people buy a watch and become emotionally
attached to it (at least initially) and 'want it to last forever'. They
look it up on the NG's and the manufacturers' sites, compare it, seek
others' opinions on the model, hunt out forums to chat to like-minded
individuals about the brand, what it means to them, etc. Harmless fun and
part of the fascination and magic. I also suspect (as it has been
mentioned - was it by 'Watchking?') that many attach individuality to their
watch, and suspect it to have been lovingly created by little gnomes in
Zurich tapping away by hand, and they don't wish to see that little piece of
individuality eroded by finding out that their nice shiny new timepieces
have been churned out by robots.
Then they see a better model and the bedside drawer awaits (see above
comments about built-in obsolescence). It may also be that - having been
presented with a watch to mark a salient point in their lives, they see the
watch as an heirloom to be passed down to future generations.
"Time value of money" means that a dollar of utility in
I can only think of sentimental reasons.
--
Regds,
Russell W. B.
plastic-toothed, and that many were starting to wear down about now. Don't
know how true this is, mind! (I wish I'd kept mine; - owned it for
half-a-day then returned it, as the humming put me off when I was sitting
quietly, reading....)
Ten years seems par for the course for many appliances in the UK. A cunning
ploy by the manufacturers and sales-people. As watches don't seem to suffer
the same amount of built-in obsolescence, a clever sales pitch is required,
so that thing on your arm makes you better at sex, business, diving,
shooting, hanging about looking cool, etc - until a new model is introduced.
I don't think you do in the US, but here over the pond we (or many of us)
tend to hoard things, make them eke out, and are dismayed when appliances,
etc, fail prematurely. It may be inbred and something to do with WWII -
austerity, scrimping and saving, and all that....
I get the impression that many people buy a watch and become emotionally
attached to it (at least initially) and 'want it to last forever'. They
look it up on the NG's and the manufacturers' sites, compare it, seek
others' opinions on the model, hunt out forums to chat to like-minded
individuals about the brand, what it means to them, etc. Harmless fun and
part of the fascination and magic. I also suspect (as it has been
mentioned - was it by 'Watchking?') that many attach individuality to their
watch, and suspect it to have been lovingly created by little gnomes in
Zurich tapping away by hand, and they don't wish to see that little piece of
individuality eroded by finding out that their nice shiny new timepieces
have been churned out by robots.
Then they see a better model and the bedside drawer awaits (see above
comments about built-in obsolescence). It may also be that - having been
presented with a watch to mark a salient point in their lives, they see the
watch as an heirloom to be passed down to future generations.
"Time value of money" means that a dollar of utility in
I can only think of sentimental reasons.
--
Regds,
Russell W. B.
Was this solution helpful? Show your Appreciation by rating it:
Solution #9
posted on Aug 09, 2005
Horner - usenet poster
Rank: Apprentice
Rating: 0%, 0 votes
ApprenticeRating: 0%, 0 votes
But this is the point - all quartz movements are "cheap". Why should you
ever pay more than say $100 for a watch that has a $20 movement in it?
ever pay more than say $100 for a watch that has a $20 movement in it?
Was this solution helpful? Show your Appreciation by rating it:
Solution #10
posted on Aug 09, 2005
lawyer - usenet poster
Rank: Apprentice
Rating: 0%, 0 votes
ApprenticeRating: 0%, 0 votes
Jack, you are absolutely right about the fact that consumers should be
looking for good value for their money and it just so happens that
quartz watches have been one of the great technological innovations of
the last 200 years. But there are many many things people get with a
watch purchased from a real company or even a retailer that they can't
get with a no brand watch, quartz or mechanical.
For one thing there is much more to a watch than the movement.
Breitling for example puts allot of design time and research into
their bracelets and they have 3 different bracelets that are extremely
comfortable. Hand finishing a bracelet can make it a pleasure to wear
from day one. I've tried many many watches at the request of the
manufacturers, with bracelets so uncomfortable that they convinced me
these inexpensive watch companies really weren't selling a product
that made the user's life easier. I like the Seiko company but I've
had some bad experiences with some of their bracelets, it's just so
unpredictable that I'd hesitate to buy one mail-order because I'd need
to test the bracelet and case finish before I'd ever want to buy the
watch. I've had some very nicely finished Seiko cases and bracelets
but I've had some bad one's too. Casios have been equally as
unpredictable except with Casios I always got better bracelets when I
bought more expensive models (same for Citizen). So at least I knew
what to expect. Comfortable but solid gold watch cases and bands are
another quantum leap more expensive again.
Breitling is another company that assembles and sells quartz and
mechanical watches. Breitling also developed the Emergency and there
is no mechanical counterpart to that watch. Tissot's T-Touch is also a
very user friendly device. Both Tissot and Breitling sell two timers
as well. This is a watch that has the analog time and a secondary LCD
window set that can be used for day/date, second time zone, alarm etc.
This is just a small part of what people can get from quality
manufacturer. Rado is another one of these. Their watches might be 90%
quartz models but their cases and bracelets are amazing. Not only are
most Rado bracelets comfortable but their watch cases and bracelets
look new nearly forever. This takes allot of research. Research costs
money, especially since Rado is making something unique and so their
economies of scale are minimal. In spite of pricing that is high to
write off the R&D costs Rado watches are still the largest selling
brand in Switzerland. So if you want a watch to look new practically
forever buy a Rado and probably a quartz model.
I know quite a few Jaeger Lecoultre and Piaget owners. I have seen
Jaeger make repairs to their quartz chronograph watches for free
during the warranty period
even though the mountain climbing, hang gliding, yachting and race car
driving owners of the watches pro
looking for good value for their money and it just so happens that
quartz watches have been one of the great technological innovations of
the last 200 years. But there are many many things people get with a
watch purchased from a real company or even a retailer that they can't
get with a no brand watch, quartz or mechanical.
For one thing there is much more to a watch than the movement.
Breitling for example puts allot of design time and research into
their bracelets and they have 3 different bracelets that are extremely
comfortable. Hand finishing a bracelet can make it a pleasure to wear
from day one. I've tried many many watches at the request of the
manufacturers, with bracelets so uncomfortable that they convinced me
these inexpensive watch companies really weren't selling a product
that made the user's life easier. I like the Seiko company but I've
had some bad experiences with some of their bracelets, it's just so
unpredictable that I'd hesitate to buy one mail-order because I'd need
to test the bracelet and case finish before I'd ever want to buy the
watch. I've had some very nicely finished Seiko cases and bracelets
but I've had some bad one's too. Casios have been equally as
unpredictable except with Casios I always got better bracelets when I
bought more expensive models (same for Citizen). So at least I knew
what to expect. Comfortable but solid gold watch cases and bands are
another quantum leap more expensive again.
Breitling is another company that assembles and sells quartz and
mechanical watches. Breitling also developed the Emergency and there
is no mechanical counterpart to that watch. Tissot's T-Touch is also a
very user friendly device. Both Tissot and Breitling sell two timers
as well. This is a watch that has the analog time and a secondary LCD
window set that can be used for day/date, second time zone, alarm etc.
This is just a small part of what people can get from quality
manufacturer. Rado is another one of these. Their watches might be 90%
quartz models but their cases and bracelets are amazing. Not only are
most Rado bracelets comfortable but their watch cases and bracelets
look new nearly forever. This takes allot of research. Research costs
money, especially since Rado is making something unique and so their
economies of scale are minimal. In spite of pricing that is high to
write off the R&D costs Rado watches are still the largest selling
brand in Switzerland. So if you want a watch to look new practically
forever buy a Rado and probably a quartz model.
I know quite a few Jaeger Lecoultre and Piaget owners. I have seen
Jaeger make repairs to their quartz chronograph watches for free
during the warranty period
even though the mountain climbing, hang gliding, yachting and race car
driving owners of the watches pro
Was this solution helpful? Show your Appreciation by rating it:
Solution #11
posted on Aug 09, 2005
man1 - usenet poster
Rank: Apprentice
Rating: 0%, 0 votes
ApprenticeRating: 0%, 0 votes
It's possible, but in the case of the Accutron tuning fork watches (now 40
yrs. old) the market has responded by producing adapters. The Accutrons pose
a special problem because the mercury cells that they used ran at a lower
voltage than the current watch batteries and are no longer produced due to
environmental consideration. So the adapters change not only the form factor
but drop the voltage too.
Watch batteries are now a mature technology and it is unlikely that the
voltage will change in our lifetime. What is possible to change is the form
factor - typically the direction is toward greater miniaturization so it
should always be possible to get a smaller battery and build a larger
adapter for it, even if the original is NLA. But for any device that was
produced in large quantity, parts remain available for an amazingly long
time - there are still people making replacement parts for Ford Model Ts. I
don't see this as a problem.
I also don't understand this whole obsession with watches lasting forever.
We don't demand this of anything else we buy. Computers are obsolete in 2 to
5 years. 5 1/4 floppies are almost impossible to get, though they were
current technology 15 years ago, but no one cares. Most other devices (cars,
TVs, appliances, etc.) have a lifespan of perhaps 10 to 15 years. Why is is
that a watch is supposed to last long enough to serve our grandchildren and
why should we care? "Time value of money" means that a dollar of utility in
the future is worth much less than a dollar now. If we have the choice
between a watch that costs X and lasts 20 years and one that costs Y and
lasts 80 years, discounting for present value means that the utility from
years 21 to 80 count for very little - the reason being that you could take
the difference between X and Y, invest it and at the end of 20 years you
would have (depending on investment returns) say quadrupled it due to the
magic of compound interest. Not to mention of course that if you count in
the cost of cleaning, the "forever" mechanical watch will cost even more
over it's life cycle. Your car would last forever too if you tore it down
and rebuilt it every 5 years but no one does this because it's cheaper to
just replace the whole thing. The same would be true of mechanical watches
if they were not so outrageously marked up - what is the sense of spending
$100 to clean a watch with a $50 movement?
"Russell W. Barnes" <rwbar @DOGglobalnet.co.uk> wrote in message
yrs. old) the market has responded by producing adapters. The Accutrons pose
a special problem because the mercury cells that they used ran at a lower
voltage than the current watch batteries and are no longer produced due to
environmental consideration. So the adapters change not only the form factor
but drop the voltage too.
Watch batteries are now a mature technology and it is unlikely that the
voltage will change in our lifetime. What is possible to change is the form
factor - typically the direction is toward greater miniaturization so it
should always be possible to get a smaller battery and build a larger
adapter for it, even if the original is NLA. But for any device that was
produced in large quantity, parts remain available for an amazingly long
time - there are still people making replacement parts for Ford Model Ts. I
don't see this as a problem.
I also don't understand this whole obsession with watches lasting forever.
We don't demand this of anything else we buy. Computers are obsolete in 2 to
5 years. 5 1/4 floppies are almost impossible to get, though they were
current technology 15 years ago, but no one cares. Most other devices (cars,
TVs, appliances, etc.) have a lifespan of perhaps 10 to 15 years. Why is is
that a watch is supposed to last long enough to serve our grandchildren and
why should we care? "Time value of money" means that a dollar of utility in
the future is worth much less than a dollar now. If we have the choice
between a watch that costs X and lasts 20 years and one that costs Y and
lasts 80 years, discounting for present value means that the utility from
years 21 to 80 count for very little - the reason being that you could take
the difference between X and Y, invest it and at the end of 20 years you
would have (depending on investment returns) say quadrupled it due to the
magic of compound interest. Not to mention of course that if you count in
the cost of cleaning, the "forever" mechanical watch will cost even more
over it's life cycle. Your car would last forever too if you tore it down
and rebuilt it every 5 years but no one does this because it's cheaper to
just replace the whole thing. The same would be true of mechanical watches
if they were not so outrageously marked up - what is the sense of spending
$100 to clean a watch with a $50 movement?
"Russell W. Barnes" <rwbar @DOGglobalnet.co.uk> wrote in message
Was this solution helpful? Show your Appreciation by rating it:
Solution #12
posted on Aug 09, 2005
Ross - usenet poster
Rank: Apprentice
Rating: 0%, 0 votes
ApprenticeRating: 0%, 0 votes
<big snip>
Are quartz owners assured of continual replacement cell production for their
models? If quartz mov'ts have popular size cells fitted, the market will
probably continue to produce them. Surely, though, there are bound to be
some (older) quartz models, though, where it would be uneconomic for the
battery manufacturers to go on producing replacement cells?
--
Regds,
Russell W. B.
http://www.huttonrow.co.uk
Please take out dog before replying by Email!
Are quartz owners assured of continual replacement cell production for their
models? If quartz mov'ts have popular size cells fitted, the market will
probably continue to produce them. Surely, though, there are bound to be
some (older) quartz models, though, where it would be uneconomic for the
battery manufacturers to go on producing replacement cells?
--
Regds,
Russell W. B.
http://www.huttonrow.co.uk
Please take out dog before replying by Email!
Was this solution helpful? Show your Appreciation by rating it:
Solution #13
posted on Aug 09, 2005
Bouncy - usenet poster
Rank: Apprentice
Rating: 0%, 0 votes
ApprenticeRating: 0%, 0 votes
Thorsten, it is unfortunate that many of the people in this forum are
being so misleading in their answers to what seem like two questions
you have posed. The first being whether quartz watches are more
accurate than mechanical watches, and this does not even begin to
cover all of the many ways that quartz watches are vastly superior to
mechanical watches. Your second question seems to ask why
manufacturers of expensive watches advertise or produce a large array
of mechanical watches but not as many models of quartz watches. A bit
of additional information should be included in this discussion, which
is why so many people who have been conned by the makers of mechanical
watches, have their choice of wearing a mechanical watch so bound up
with their egos.
To start with quartz watches are inherently superior to mechanicals in
so many ways it takes a long list to specify these major
superiorities. We'll stick to analog quartz watches that may look
similar if not almost identical to their mechanical counterparts (like
the near matching Omega Seamasters, one quartz and one mechanical). It
will help explain why the vast majority of watch buyers for the last
30 years have bought quartz watches, and why there are still so many
models of quartz watches made by high end watch companies today.
Yes quartz watches are generally more accurate than any mechanical
watch ever made, and substantially more accurate, on an order of about
50:1. Jaeger LeCoultre says in their own literature that the reason
they use a quartz drive in their chronograph is because it is almost
100 times as accurate as a mechanical movement with a mainspring
escapement. Thus the JL chronograph is a quartz watch, and I'll take
their word for it. Rolex makes huge profits on their mechanical
watches but they also make a quartz watch and many of the Rolex
service management trainers wear this watch BECAUSE it is more
accurate and they don't need to fiddle with it all the time. For
people like watchmakers quartz watches are preferred because many
watchmakers don't have ego and self esteem issues that they try to
assuage by wearing a watch "that pretends to make them more special"
than someone who doesn't wear a watch as expensive or anachronistic.
One only need to look at the "chronometer" rating to see the
ridiculously low accuracy of the mechanical movement. The standard
that is used to rate a quartz drive watch as a chronometer is so
difficult to meet that COSC test techs I have talked to, all agree
that if the same standard were applied to a mechanical watch THERE
WOULD NEVER BE a mechanical watch that could ever be rated as a
chronometer ever again. And yet thousands of quartz drive watches pass
the chronometer test every year, thus doing something a mechanical
watch could never do.
But why stop at accuracy. The better made quartz silicone filled dive
w
being so misleading in their answers to what seem like two questions
you have posed. The first being whether quartz watches are more
accurate than mechanical watches, and this does not even begin to
cover all of the many ways that quartz watches are vastly superior to
mechanical watches. Your second question seems to ask why
manufacturers of expensive watches advertise or produce a large array
of mechanical watches but not as many models of quartz watches. A bit
of additional information should be included in this discussion, which
is why so many people who have been conned by the makers of mechanical
watches, have their choice of wearing a mechanical watch so bound up
with their egos.
To start with quartz watches are inherently superior to mechanicals in
so many ways it takes a long list to specify these major
superiorities. We'll stick to analog quartz watches that may look
similar if not almost identical to their mechanical counterparts (like
the near matching Omega Seamasters, one quartz and one mechanical). It
will help explain why the vast majority of watch buyers for the last
30 years have bought quartz watches, and why there are still so many
models of quartz watches made by high end watch companies today.
Yes quartz watches are generally more accurate than any mechanical
watch ever made, and substantially more accurate, on an order of about
50:1. Jaeger LeCoultre says in their own literature that the reason
they use a quartz drive in their chronograph is because it is almost
100 times as accurate as a mechanical movement with a mainspring
escapement. Thus the JL chronograph is a quartz watch, and I'll take
their word for it. Rolex makes huge profits on their mechanical
watches but they also make a quartz watch and many of the Rolex
service management trainers wear this watch BECAUSE it is more
accurate and they don't need to fiddle with it all the time. For
people like watchmakers quartz watches are preferred because many
watchmakers don't have ego and self esteem issues that they try to
assuage by wearing a watch "that pretends to make them more special"
than someone who doesn't wear a watch as expensive or anachronistic.
One only need to look at the "chronometer" rating to see the
ridiculously low accuracy of the mechanical movement. The standard
that is used to rate a quartz drive watch as a chronometer is so
difficult to meet that COSC test techs I have talked to, all agree
that if the same standard were applied to a mechanical watch THERE
WOULD NEVER BE a mechanical watch that could ever be rated as a
chronometer ever again. And yet thousands of quartz drive watches pass
the chronometer test every year, thus doing something a mechanical
watch could never do.
But why stop at accuracy. The better made quartz silicone filled dive
w
Was this solution helpful? Show your Appreciation by rating it:
Solution #14
posted on Aug 09, 2005
Putty - usenet poster
Rank: Apprentice
Rating: 0%, 0 votes
ApprenticeRating: 0%, 0 votes
Whats the need for all those ake Rolexes then?
Was this solution helpful? Show your Appreciation by rating it:
Solution #15
posted on Aug 09, 2005
pawa - usenet poster
Rank: Apprentice
Rating: 0%, 0 votes
ApprenticeRating: 0%, 0 votes
What you say makes a lot of sense in theory - the energy needed to flip some
crystal's orientation a microscopic distance is a lot less than the energy
you need to drive a set of relatively massive hands. However, the devil is
always in the details - real world implemenations of LCD may come nowhere
close to theoretical efficiency - and increasing that efficiency would
require massive R&D or high manufacturing cost (e.g. you'd need ultrapure
materials that are costly to refine to a high state of purity or gold
contacts, etc.). And perhaps micromotors as a more mature and well
understood technology come closer to their theoretical best performance. The
point is that the winner on paper is not always the winner in real life - if
this were true all our cars would be electric or have rotary engines.
crystal's orientation a microscopic distance is a lot less than the energy
you need to drive a set of relatively massive hands. However, the devil is
always in the details - real world implemenations of LCD may come nowhere
close to theoretical efficiency - and increasing that efficiency would
require massive R&D or high manufacturing cost (e.g. you'd need ultrapure
materials that are costly to refine to a high state of purity or gold
contacts, etc.). And perhaps micromotors as a more mature and well
understood technology come closer to their theoretical best performance. The
point is that the winner on paper is not always the winner in real life - if
this were true all our cars would be electric or have rotary engines.
Was this solution helpful? Show your Appreciation by rating it:
Solution #16
posted on Aug 09, 2005
M0nica L - usenet poster
Rank: Apprentice
Rating: 0%, 0 votes
ApprenticeRating: 0%, 0 votes
In article <fYCdnbMV1PlsTMTdRVn @comcast.com>, Jack Denver
Funny.... I read in a book about John Harrison how he was worried about
the harsh environmental conditions aboard ships, so he undertook the
trip in person to keep an eye on its precious creation on its first
voyage.
--
germ Remove "nospam" to reply
Funny.... I read in a book about John Harrison how he was worried about
the harsh environmental conditions aboard ships, so he undertook the
trip in person to keep an eye on its precious creation on its first
voyage.
--
germ Remove "nospam" to reply
Was this solution helpful? Show your Appreciation by rating it:
Solution #17
posted on Aug 09, 2005
kcw573 - usenet poster
Rank: Apprentice
Rating: 0%, 0 votes
ApprenticeRating: 0%, 0 votes
go hire or buy the DVD or video of "Longitude"
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obi dos/tg/detail/-/B00004U2K1/ref =ase_imdb...
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obi dos/tg/detail/-/B00004U2K1/ref =ase_imdb...
Was this solution helpful? Show your Appreciation by rating it:
Solution #18
posted on Aug 09, 2005
Joey2 - usenet poster
Rank: Apprentice
Rating: 0%, 0 votes
ApprenticeRating: 0%, 0 votes
In article <180320042147082377%germina @nospam.fastmail.fm>,
Go find the book about Harrison. You won't be able to put it down.
--
Usenet special: on cases of any filters for BMW: http://u.bmwz.org
http://www.mbz.org | Mailing lists: http://lists.mbz.org
633CSi 250SE/C 300SD | Orkut:RS79 Classifieds: http://ads.mbz.org
2 X 280SE | Watches list: http://watches.list.mbz.org
Go find the book about Harrison. You won't be able to put it down.
--
Usenet special: on cases of any filters for BMW: http://u.bmwz.org
http://www.mbz.org | Mailing lists: http://lists.mbz.org
633CSi 250SE/C 300SD | Orkut:RS79 Classifieds: http://ads.mbz.org
2 X 280SE | Watches list: http://watches.list.mbz.org
Was this solution helpful? Show your Appreciation by rating it:
Solution #19
posted on Aug 09, 2005
Jimmy NY - usenet poster
Rank: Apprentice
Rating: 0%, 0 votes
ApprenticeRating: 0%, 0 votes
You've hit upon many of the main causes, but there are others - temperature
also has an influence on performance, though much less so since the
discovery of Invar and other materials that have low co-efficients of
expansion. In watches equipped with a regulator, the hairspring can contact
the curb pins at different points depending on position as the spring sags
with gravity and if the pins are not exactly parallel this will cause the
spring to have a different effective length depending on position. The
balance wheel may be improperly poised - i.e. heavier on one side than
another, like an out of balance tire. There are many others - some of which
can be corrected in the process known as "adjustment for position" and
others which are irreducible, again especially in a watch that is worn on
the wrist. Something like a marine chronometer is fundamentally no different
than a wristwatch but keeps better time because it is kept under more
controlled conditions.
also has an influence on performance, though much less so since the
discovery of Invar and other materials that have low co-efficients of
expansion. In watches equipped with a regulator, the hairspring can contact
the curb pins at different points depending on position as the spring sags
with gravity and if the pins are not exactly parallel this will cause the
spring to have a different effective length depending on position. The
balance wheel may be improperly poised - i.e. heavier on one side than
another, like an out of balance tire. There are many others - some of which
can be corrected in the process known as "adjustment for position" and
others which are irreducible, again especially in a watch that is worn on
the wrist. Something like a marine chronometer is fundamentally no different
than a wristwatch but keeps better time because it is kept under more
controlled conditions.
Was this solution helpful? Show your Appreciation by rating it:
Solution #20
posted on Aug 09, 2005
kioner - usenet poster
Rank: Apprentice
Rating: 0%, 0 votes
ApprenticeRating: 0%, 0 votes
The frequency of a quartz crystal is NOT constant. It varies with
temperature and also as the crystal ages. If you enclose the crystal in an
"oven" as some lab grade clocks do, the frequency becomes more constant but
still not as good as cesium ("atomic") clocks. No clock is "constant", not
even the cesium. The question is what is the proportion of the error. Is it
one part in 10 to the 9th or one in 10 to the 12th, etc. There is no such
thing as "constant", only varying degrees of error - it's just that the
error in a cesium clock is infinitessimally small, while in the very best
quartz clocks it's only very small. If the cesium clock had not been
developed, no doubt by now we'd have very high grade quartz clocks that
would be almost, but not quite as good as cesium, as their designers went
after and tried to eliminate the major causes of error. But this kind of
work costs money. In most home grade clocks, very little effort is made to
achieve superior accuracy, in keeping with their very low price point.
Regarding the influence of beat frequency, we had this discussion here some
months ago and someone pointed out that the Shortt clock, which only had a
frequency of 1BPS, was one of the best timekeepers on earth, much better
than most modern quartz watches . The "secret" was that the pendulums were
kept in underground concrete vaults, in a vacuum chamber, at constant temp.,
so that they were free from all perturbance. Watches live a much harder
life. While they rarely skip beats altogether, shocks and changes in
position cause them to change the length of each beat considerably - the
most obvious effect being that the amplitude of the balance wheel drops due
to higher friction when the watch is in a vertical position, and shorter
swings complete in less time. Quartz crystals are indifferent to position.
temperature and also as the crystal ages. If you enclose the crystal in an
"oven" as some lab grade clocks do, the frequency becomes more constant but
still not as good as cesium ("atomic") clocks. No clock is "constant", not
even the cesium. The question is what is the proportion of the error. Is it
one part in 10 to the 9th or one in 10 to the 12th, etc. There is no such
thing as "constant", only varying degrees of error - it's just that the
error in a cesium clock is infinitessimally small, while in the very best
quartz clocks it's only very small. If the cesium clock had not been
developed, no doubt by now we'd have very high grade quartz clocks that
would be almost, but not quite as good as cesium, as their designers went
after and tried to eliminate the major causes of error. But this kind of
work costs money. In most home grade clocks, very little effort is made to
achieve superior accuracy, in keeping with their very low price point.
Regarding the influence of beat frequency, we had this discussion here some
months ago and someone pointed out that the Shortt clock, which only had a
frequency of 1BPS, was one of the best timekeepers on earth, much better
than most modern quartz watches . The "secret" was that the pendulums were
kept in underground concrete vaults, in a vacuum chamber, at constant temp.,
so that they were free from all perturbance. Watches live a much harder
life. While they rarely skip beats altogether, shocks and changes in
position cause them to change the length of each beat considerably - the
most obvious effect being that the amplitude of the balance wheel drops due
to higher friction when the watch is in a vertical position, and shorter
swings complete in less time. Quartz crystals are indifferent to position.
Was this solution helpful? Show your Appreciation by rating it:
Solution #21
posted on Aug 09, 2005
Riddle - usenet poster
Rank: Apprentice
Rating: 0%, 0 votes
ApprenticeRating: 0%, 0 votes
OK, here's my attempt at an explanation of why watches go slow or fast.
For quartz watches, the frequency of oscillation is determined by the
dimensions of the crystal and its mechanical properties. Think of it
like a musical string, which produces standing waves (sounds) at a
frequency that is related to the length of the string and the
"stiffness" of its material. If none of these variables changes over
time, then the frequency will stay the same. But in practice, you will
have temperature variations, humidity variations, etc. All these
environmental variations will cause changes in the length of the string
(thermal expansion) and possibly in its mechanical stiffness as well.
Therefore the frequency will vary. A quartz crystal is hard and inert,
therefore I believe temperature is the main factor. (Some extremely
stable quartz oscillators, used as frequency standards, have
incorporated oven with stabilized temperature controllers to guarantee
the constancy of the frequency over time). High-quality quartz watches
have some sort of temperature compensation built in.
As for mechanical watches, you can think of many more reasons for
variations in their rate of oscillation. For example:
- during the discharge of the spring, the force that it applies to the
mechanism is not constant as it progressively looses tension
- mechanical parts are subject to gravity. The friction is probably
different in different positions of the watch.
- maybe the oil used to lubricate the mechanism will slowly flow
towards the "bottom", again modifying the friction over time
-variations in air pressure (altitude, wheather) will change the drag
that rotating parts feel
- ...
I am sure people who know more about mechanical watches can add to this
list.
The art of mechanical watches consists of reducing all these variations
as far as possible.
--
germ Remove "nospam" to reply
For quartz watches, the frequency of oscillation is determined by the
dimensions of the crystal and its mechanical properties. Think of it
like a musical string, which produces standing waves (sounds) at a
frequency that is related to the length of the string and the
"stiffness" of its material. If none of these variables changes over
time, then the frequency will stay the same. But in practice, you will
have temperature variations, humidity variations, etc. All these
environmental variations will cause changes in the length of the string
(thermal expansion) and possibly in its mechanical stiffness as well.
Therefore the frequency will vary. A quartz crystal is hard and inert,
therefore I believe temperature is the main factor. (Some extremely
stable quartz oscillators, used as frequency standards, have
incorporated oven with stabilized temperature controllers to guarantee
the constancy of the frequency over time). High-quality quartz watches
have some sort of temperature compensation built in.
As for mechanical watches, you can think of many more reasons for
variations in their rate of oscillation. For example:
- during the discharge of the spring, the force that it applies to the
mechanism is not constant as it progressively looses tension
- mechanical parts are subject to gravity. The friction is probably
different in different positions of the watch.
- maybe the oil used to lubricate the mechanism will slowly flow
towards the "bottom", again modifying the friction over time
-variations in air pressure (altitude, wheather) will change the drag
that rotating parts feel
- ...
I am sure people who know more about mechanical watches can add to this
list.
The art of mechanical watches consists of reducing all these variations
as far as possible.
--
germ Remove "nospam" to reply
Was this solution helpful? Show your Appreciation by rating it:
Solution #22
posted on Aug 09, 2005
Rachel007 - usenet poster
Rank: Apprentice
Rating: 0%, 0 votes
ApprenticeRating: 0%, 0 votes
In article <UtCdnSwNpvncE8Xd4p2 @comcast.com>,
Well sure, they spend a fortune on advertising and distribtion,
manipulate demand and turn what should be an $800 watch into
a $3K "must have". That's one business model and you can hardly
fail to admire them for that.
If you want a painting for your living room do you want one
of 10,000 of the same one made in China?
--
Usenet special: on cases of any filters for BMW: http://u.bmwz.org
http://www.mbz.org | Mailing lists: http://lists.mbz.org
633CSi 250SE/C 300SD | Orkut:RS79 Classifieds: http://ads.mbz.org
2 X 280SE | Watches list: http://watches.list.mbz.org
Well sure, they spend a fortune on advertising and distribtion,
manipulate demand and turn what should be an $800 watch into
a $3K "must have". That's one business model and you can hardly
fail to admire them for that.
If you want a painting for your living room do you want one
of 10,000 of the same one made in China?
--
Usenet special: on cases of any filters for BMW: http://u.bmwz.org
http://www.mbz.org | Mailing lists: http://lists.mbz.org
633CSi 250SE/C 300SD | Orkut:RS79 Classifieds: http://ads.mbz.org
2 X 280SE | Watches list: http://watches.list.mbz.org
Was this solution helpful? Show your Appreciation by rating it:
Solution #24
posted on Aug 09, 2005
kcw573 - usenet poster
Rank: Apprentice
Rating: 0%, 0 votes
ApprenticeRating: 0%, 0 votes
[...]
Thorsten wrote in another thread that he was looking for an analogue
watch with a day/date function, so something rather classic. I can't
imagine that a Casio G-Shock (or something to that effect) would be a
real alternative.
Kind regards,
Olaf
--
E-Mail only to reply-to address, please.
Thorsten wrote in another thread that he was looking for an analogue
watch with a day/date function, so something rather classic. I can't
imagine that a Casio G-Shock (or something to that effect) would be a
real alternative.
Kind regards,
Olaf
--
E-Mail only to reply-to address, please.
Was this solution helpful? Show your Appreciation by rating it:
Suggest a new solution for this problem
Post a New problem for TechnoMarine Maori Key Ring Key Ring
Email this problem
Post a New problem for TechnoMarine Maori Key Ring Key Ring
Email this problem
Can you Help with these Watches problems?
TechnoMarine Maori Key Ring Key Ring Watch -...
regulator clock (replica)...
regulator clock (replica)...
I have a quartz regulator wall... Answer This...
Repair Service
Find Watch Repairman Near You: