Watch Recommendations

I've been very happy with my speedmaster professional (mine has the glass back so you can see the mechanism which is quite nice). As John says, they are waterproof, but I thought the figure was 30M, either way, more than enough unless you're going diving. Yes, you have to wind it, but you soon get used to that.

regards, Tam

quote:

Originally posted by David Slater:
Now I can understand why people would want a expensive Hi-Fi, TV, PC, car or house but....
Can someone explain to me why these watches are better than a £30 Timex or Accurist? Are they better at telling the time?

Have you seen the film Pulp Fiction and the episode with Butch's fathers watch? I have a watch that my grandfather bought after his return from the trenches of the first world war, and I have my fathers watch that I remember being on his wrist when I was a toddler, which are among my few memories of him and is all that I have that was his. I have one photo of him, and it's there on his wrist. It isn't about telling the time.
Watches stay on your wrist day after day and become as attached as a wedding ring; you change you clothes, but the watch remains year after year and when passed down, it is something immensely personal.
When I was a kid I loved the look of divers watches and my first was a cheap thing from a gift shop that my mother bought me, and I wore it to school until it just stopped working. I replaced it with another divers watch, a Timex, and it was only later that I realised that all these divers watches were modelled on the Rolex Submariner introduced in 1958 and basically unchanged to this day. Once I knew that, I had to one day have the watch that I had wanted all my life but hadn't known it. So now finally I have one. I also have a son who will have it after me knowing that I have worn it every day of my life from then on, that I love it and treat it with care and respect, and hopefully in say 30 years time will remind him of me and mean something to him because of that. This watch, I was told by the jeweller when I bought it, will probably need a replacement bracelet in around 30 years time, and that's about it.
If you think it's about having the right time, then you just don't get it. But that's OK too.

Clocks and watches certainly have a certain magic by association with the peolpe who have owned them. Imagine how many times human hands have wound my 30 hour longcase clock from 1720.

How many times it has beeen moved on to another place or passed down in the family. Pride of place in any household. Built with care and the skill of a trained craftsman. Think of the changes of dress code and frail human fashions and ways and of princesses and princes and kings and queeens. Timber frame, peat fire and thatch then brick and tile alike have sheltered the clock. The musical styles that came and have soon gone again in pomp and circumstance and abject grinding poverty of a coarse violin by the cold hearth. The endless births and deaths. The riches and poverty of health and those cut down by sickness before they could flower.

The creak of oxen cart beyond the draughty window and passing horses trotting proudly to the ends of their days. The tears and pointless wars and the unbearable heartbreak of tragic loss. The warmth of peaceful summers and young love and the knowing smile of grey age as golden-haired children explore the cottage garden in wonder an delight as kittens play at their feet.

Great trees have risen and fallen in countless numbers unnoticed by the clock. Always with its back to the wall against life's clumsy dangers and passing fashion. Harvests have been brought in and the people fed in feast or famine. The great move from the land to grimy city. The dark satanic mills and the slavery of physical exhaustion into old age. Canals and railways and traction engines leaking steam into the cold sky slowly made way for the internal combustion engine and a new tarmac offering both freedom or hell alike. Then quite suddenly glittering towers furnished with PC screens to a ceaseless, roaring torrent of traffic.

A clock is never owned but merely loaned for the duration of your ownership. Unmoved by the mortal concerns of man and the times and lives he wasted or held so dear... the clock ticks on... and is wound again.

Although I can understand why people wish to carry a 'nice watch' on e.g. a wrist, I find that my several analogue-dial/mostly wind-up watchwork movement samples (including original ancient Swatch in case) intrude into my lifestyle by -
a) showing time passing.
b) by actually getting 'in the way' - because of things I do, an expensive item on my wrist frequently would have to be removed.
c) If I needed to 'know'time, I would resume using pocket or fob or pendant watch.

I do however believe that the wearer of watch should choose to don style/colour etc that coordinates suitably with wearer's clothing etc. I do think that nice watchwork mechanism is nice engineering.

My first watch when I was as old as 14 was an Ingersoll 7-jewel chronometer, and to impress viewers I had opened it up and added a 'Letraset' derived integer before the number 7.

'Chronosport' in Bath used to sell some impressive looking chronographs for about £7, and one of those was my favourite until I learned to appreciate watches wives - mine - bought me as a personal-object much like a locket, and not a materialist artefact to impress others. I always fancied a Seiko rather than an expensive Rolex etc.

A clock is never owned but merely loaned for the duration of your ownership. [/QUOTE]

How does the Patek Phillippe advert read..

"You never actually own a Patek Phillipe. You are merely looking after it for the next generation."

For £1200 I would go for an Omega Seamaster automatic, though I have seen a fair number in circulation. Most of these are probably the electronic quartz version which costs a bit less. If you're not too bothered about having an automatic movement you should take a look at the Breitling Colt range which are quite smart.

A Rolex Submariner is a classic watch but I was put off buying one because there are shedloads of fake Rolexes and copies around. Instead I chose a Breitling Chronomat on a pilot bracelet. I once read that the automatic movement in these watches should easily last for 50-60 years without the need for any major maintenance. They are now fairly pricey to buy new but it may be possible to get a used one for a reasonable sum.

quote:

Originally posted by Stewart Platts:
A Rolex Submariner is a classic watch but I was put off buying one because there are shedloads of fake Rolexes and copies around.

It's true, and it crossed my mind at the time. I concluded eventually that I wasn't interested in letting that sort of unfortunate materialistic association spoil the experience of owning that watch, the one I'd always wanted. There are always going to be elements of society who exploit and cheapen things, but the best thing to do is to go with your own judgment and ignore the spoilers. They miss the point anyway.
At Rolex, they have a card system where they record the date and place and purchaser of each individual watch, record every service, and can recall at any time the full history just from a serial number, where it was bought, which jeweller, who bought it next and where, etc etc.. They are the only watch manufacturer to do this, and it isn't a computerised system either - it is actually an ancient card system. The inner workings of the watch and history of the movement and design are what these watches are about, and fakes may appear to look the same, but buying one is entirely missing the point. There are books written on the history and development of the Submariner, and how it all came about. The mechanics are wonderful and beautifully built (I'm an engineer, so I'm a sucker for this sort of stuff). There isn't that romance in a mass produced Japenese ETA movement. There are good years and bad years, times when the finishing of the mechanics suffered slightly, and modern movements that are technically better and far more accurate. It's like hi-fi in many ways. You wouldn't dismiss a famous painting just because there are countless prints of it; it doesn't detract from the original at all, and it hasn't been copied so much for no reason.

I like watches also, and have one or two special pieces, and a few others that are more fun.

I am strictly a mechanical watch person, but I am happy with both Auto or Manual wind. If you wear a manual watch for any length of time, you will get used to it. I have two manual wind watches, and when I wear them, I cannot remember winding them up, but I do it from time to time without thinking, and I dont ever forget to wind them, so I do not think it is a major problem.

I think the biggest problem you will face is your budget, you are in a funny middle ground populated mainly buy overpriced quartz rubbish from the likes of Tag Heur Gucci and other fashion watches. But at £1200 you still want to buy a "Proper Watch". If you spent circa £2000 you could afford a whole host of JLC's Rolex's
Breitling, Bell and Ross etc. Alternativly you could drop down to the lower end mechanical watches from such makers as Seiko, Citizen or the varios russian watches. I have two mechanical Seikos, an "Orange Monster" and also a vintage "Bullhead", both of which cost less than £300, but both of which give me as much pleaseur as watches 10 times that price, but for some reason they do not have the heirloom factor that one craves from an exspensive watch.

The other option is second hand or Vintage.

I once bought a Jaeger Le Coultre Memovox from circa 1950, it is a manual wind alarm watch and I paid about £1000 for it in 18K gold, it is twice as old as me and runs like it is new, in my opinon a great value quality watch.

I would recomend either stretching the budget to circa £1800-- or £2k for a new watch, (I quite like the Rolx Explorer 1 even though I am not a rolex person) or looking vintagce Rolex, Cartier (Cartier Tank for example) or my favorite Jaeger Le Coultre (I want a Futurmatic like this one next http://shop.joseph-watches.com/joseph/en/FMPro?-db=gaj....mat=index.html&-view )

Kind regards

Simon

quote:

Originally posted by Rasher:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Stewart Platts:
A Rolex Submariner is a classic watch but I was put off buying one because there are shedloads of fake Rolexes and copies around.

It's true, and it crossed my mind at the time. I concluded eventually that I wasn't interested in letting that sort of unfortunate materialistic association spoil the experience of owning that watch, the one I'd always wanted. There are always going to be elements of society who exploit and cheapen things, but the best thing to do is to go with your own judgment and ignore the spoilers. They miss the point anyway.

You are of course absolutely right and I fully agree with your comments on the heritage and integrity of the originals.

I'd always aspired to a Rolex Submariner but 17 years ago I needed a new watch and I bought myself and quartz Tag Heuer during a visit to Singapore. This was the genuine article and I managed to save a fair amount on the UK price at the time. After I'd owned it for a couple of months someone noticed it and said, " Nice TAG Heuer copy."

In the 6 years I owned this watch I lost count of the number of people who said it was a good example of a fake. But it WAS a GENUINE TAG Heuer! There were lots of fakes around at the time and from a distance some other people assumed mine was a "snide". I got sick of it so I sold it for £100 more than I paid for it and after considering the Submariner, I felt that I would get the same sort of comments so I bought the Breitling. No one has ever made any such comment about that watch.

At the end of the day it is all about how you feel about your own item, be it a wristwatch, car, hi-fi or whatever and I am pleased that you are so satisfied with your Rolex.

I'd say the huge number of Rolex fakes has the advantage of making you less vulnerable to being mugged for a Rolex.

Simon makes a good point, the £1200 slot is a funny area and you tend to still be in quartz territory, but only a little way short of the mechanicals. The Russian watches are a real bargain and extremely robust, as well as being great mechanical watches with a unique character. You save your money for a wiser investment at a later time. Take a look at the Poljot chronographs here.

Or . . . .

Keep your current watch and give £1200 to charity.

Then, every time you look at your (old) watch you will get a good feeling that no piece of overpriced jewelery can give you.

Douglas

I liked this one enought to buy it.

http://www.tagheuer.com/the-collection/carrera/index.lbl

Frankly, I don't think you can go wrong with a Rolex, Omega, Breitling or TAG.

Aric

I would recommend Poljot. I've owned one for years, they are beautifully built and excellent value for money as well as a good conversation piece. I had mine fitted with a glass back so you can admire the movement in all it's glory.

Spock

quote:

Originally posted by Aric:
I liked this one enought to buy it.

http://www.tagheuer.com/the-collection/carrera/index.lbl

Frankly, I don't think you can go wrong with a Rolex, Omega, Breitling or TAG.

Aric

I should have added that automatic TAGs are a good buy. I would agree their quartz movements are overpriced.

Most watches use either a Valjoux 7750/7751 or ETA movements. These are generic movements. Brietling/Omega/Tutima/Franck Muller/Benz/Panerai whatever use these. Some modify the Valjoux movement.
You pay alot for the name.

I would recommend firstly a mechanical watch and then, Oris gets my vote. They don't pretend. Their designs are very elegant. And they don't go out of fashion.

http://www.timedesign.de/home_e.html

This website will blow your mind
Scroll down to 2000 links and click.


regds
Jag

Those Oris watches certainly have a grand style and look to have managed to make chronographs in compact packages. I'll check one of those out for my sixtieth.
Subject to listening tests of course.

Howard

For a watch muppet like me would anyone care to explain the difference between automatic and quartz? Yours nonplussed
Simon

Simon

A quartz watch has a battery inside which essentially drives a motor which turns the watch hands. The quartz crystal is used to regulate the speed of the motor, when a voltage is put across the quartz, it oscillates at a known frequency and this can be used to make quartz watches much more accurate than other watches.

An automatic watch is a mechanical watch, essentially clockwork, it has a weight or rotor in the back of it which moves or spins as you move your wrist, and this winds the watch up for you, eliminating the need for manual winding.

Mechanical watches are less accurate, although some expensive chronometers are quite accurate. So in theory a quartz watch is better at telling the time, however they tent to be mass produced and cheap. Mechanical watches are often hand made and some people like to marvel at the craftsmanship, personally I am fascinated by small mechanical things hence my watch interest.Seiko have recently made a watch which essentialy a hybrid , ie a mechanical movement with a quartz regulator instead of the traditional escapement mechanism. I am not sure yet how I feel about this watch, but it is one of the first real developments in mechanical watchmaking for some time, so it is quite intereting.

Simon

Shall I deal with this?
Simon, "Quartz" is a battery jobbie, and automatic refers to an automatic mechanical winding mechanism, so you wear it and it winds itself by the movement of your wrist. It generally uses a pendulum mechanism and is very cool for miniturised clockwork. It's the difference between real craftsmanship and engineering, and basically a piece of shit with a battery.

You beat me to it Simon.
Have a look here and seek out and marvel at the co-axial movement, which is what I would consider to be the greatest leap forward in automatic movement development for a generation.

Hi All

Thanks for the many, many pointers given on this subject. After having a look in Goldsmiths the other day, I think the advice to extend the budget would probably prove to be a good decision as it open the market even more.

So far, I have tried on the Omega seamaster (auto) and the feel of the watch was very nice compared to a slightly cheaper Tag I also tried on. Initially I have been put off the Tag range but the carrera model above is certainly a looker.

I have also decided that I'm not going to entertain the idea of a Rolex. Reasons, well, I agree that there are a LOT of fakes out there. Ok, in my mind I know it will be real but there is a small doubt all the same.

To conclude my rambling, It now looks to be between, the Omega range, Tag carrera and possibly a Breitling. Just taking my time to pick the right one for me!

Thanks

SWP

Thanks for the answers to my question. So presumably the order of desirability of these different mechanisms as follows?

Automatic
Manual wind up
Quartz

Also, are Chronos considered vulgar and useless or desirable and having a practical use?
Cheers
Simon

Like the look of the Breitlings

Rasher - The Omega Co-Ax movement does indeed look clever, I am always amazed at how small they make these things, particularly when you consider they are often assembeld by hand. I wonder how much more accurate this mechanism is. I have a Paneri which is COSC certified and it keeps the best time out of any of my mech watches albeit it probably has one of the cheapest most simple movement in it apart from maybe my Seiko's.

I am always facinated by tourbillons, but unfortunatly no one makes an affordable one it seems. It would be interesting to know what other complications peole have on their watches. I have a JLC Memovox which has an alarm, I also have a Seiko 6138 Bullhead, which is a chronograph, I like this watch as it is an auto, but it still has a stopwhatch function. I quite fancy a watch with a power reserve indicator.

Simon

quote:

Originally posted by SWP:
Hi All

Thanks for the many, many pointers given on this subject. After having a look in Goldsmiths the other day, I think the advice to extend the budget would probably prove to be a good decision as it open the market even more.

So far, I have tried on the Omega seamaster (auto) and the feel of the watch was very nice compared to a slightly cheaper Tag I also tried on. Initially I have been put off the Tag range but the carrera model above is certainly a looker.

I have also decided that I'm not going to entertain the idea of a Rolex. Reasons, well, I agree that there are a LOT of fakes out there. Ok, in my mind I know it will be real but there is a small doubt all the same.

To conclude my rambling, It now looks to be between, the Omega range, Tag carrera and possibly a Breitling. Just taking my time to pick the right one for me!

Thanks

SWP

As you know from my earlier post, I settled on the Carrera and after a week I must say I am very pleased. It really does have a great look about it, and while I don't have the biggest of wrists, my height is able to carry the slightly larger face.

I bought from a reputable jeweler and was able to get a discounted price as I did not use their financing option. I guess it was about 13% off, so consider any discounts before deciding.

I too briefly considered Rolex, but the starting price of the entry model was more than I was willing to dole out. So for me the only competition was the Omegas, which are very nice, but for the price the Carrera was the watch for me.

Good luck.

Aric

quote:

It's the difference between real craftsmanship and engineering, and basically a piece of shit with a battery.

Whilst I too admire the amazing enginnering and craftsmanship of mechanical watches to dismiss the science based skill that gave birth to quartz based timing as "shit with a battery" is ignorant in the extreme.

Expensive mechanical watches are jewelery for men, nothing wrong with that, but as timepieces they are an anachronism.

Douglas