Automatic vs quartz

[NemesisX]

Originally Posted by RR-NYC

Am I bitter about your posts? No but I am annoyed at your level of ignorance on the matter. You rely so heavily on skewed data. Conspicuous consumption... did you conned out of $$$ by those get rich in real estate courses and then find religion in those financial self-help books that focus on anti-consumerism?

You cite this book in several watch threads with the sole purpose of (1) talking about them as being for wannabe millionaires or (2) finding someone else who, along with you, doesn't see the value in spending >$1000 on a watch. If you don't like watches or think that spending money on a watch is stupid, why are you on these threads?

I certainly wouldn't call it a statistic. Dr. Stanley's data nothing more than a poll that he designed to prove his point and nothing else. I can design a similar "statistic" that would show the exact opposite: My millionaires poll only wear >$10,000 watches yet don't own a primary home and where no millionaire drives a car let alone owns a car but belong to a car club that allows them to drive every exotic car under the sun. Their net worth is $3M+ vs Stanley's $1.6M (in his first book, he does include primary home in that number). Granted, these are all kids in Manhattan with heavy portfolios and 7 digit wall street bonus checks so it isn't indicative of the population at large but neither is Stanley's.

Oh, and Stanley's millionaires average a whopping $131k a year at 50+ years old... its no wonder he doesn't want them to buy anything because they are all too busy not spending money in order to be in his "Millionaire" club". Yet, he disparages those making $500k a year for buying things they enjoy and can afford but didn't want to divulge their net worth to a quackjob PhD

Originally Posted by RR-NYC

You are proving nothing but showing ignorance.

Look at a movement on a $500 automatic and compare it with any Rolex movement. The $500 movement might look nice, but thats all its designed to do. It will be a useless scrap of cheap metal in a couple years if that whereas the Rolex movement is rather ugly to look at but will last 30+ years without anything more than occasional service.

Just keep telling yourself that the cheap watch on your wrist is the same and you might find someone to believe it--- and thats who will buy your bridge.

Yep, you sound incredibly bitter

[originalgoods13]

Originally Posted by Rmk392

I have long been into watches but I am far from a collector, more of an admirer. I am looking to buy a nice Hamilton automatic as those are in my price range. Now, I wouldn't wear this watch often besides the weekends when I go out and occasionally on a weekday night. So the watch would just sit in its box (potentially a winder) for 5/7 days of the week. For my purposes it seems a Quartz would be fine but I understand the allure of an automatic. Just want to gets thoughts on this ...

also if anyone can recommend some nice open heart watches that would be great. Not looking to spend over $800

I'd look into Tissot also as they have some nice automatics under 1k and has some good quartz as well the t touch series

[mb135is]

Yikes! We've got some bunched panties in this thread!

Anyway, as relatively new to the watch bug, I've gotten two automatics to go along with several quartz watches. The IDEA of the automatic watch really appealed to me - the fact that the mechanism works all on its own is unfathomable to me because I have no clue how it works. I get that engines suck, bang and blow (woohoo!) in order to turn the flywheel. How the hell does a watch movement work? No clue.

In reality, though, I think I will end up being more in the camp of using watches to tell time, regardless of the movement. I like the automatic watches I have very much, simply because I love their designs, how they feel, etc... But I cannot say I would enjoy them any less if they were quartz. Matter of fact, I might enjoy them more since I wouldn't have to worry about keeping them going (or not keeping them going, depending on which forum post you read).

In an ironic twist, it seems that buying an automatic watch is quite like purchasing a 6-speed manual transmission. There is a more efficient and better performing option available, but that doesn't mean it's everyone's choice.

So I guess I'm saying I like my transmissions manual and, in contradiction, my watches quartz.

[NemesisX]

Originally Posted by mb135is

Yikes! We've got some bunched panties in this thread!

Anyway, as relatively new to the watch bug, I've gotten two automatics to go along with several quartz watches. The IDEA of the automatic watch really appealed to me - the fact that the mechanism works all on its own is unfathomable to me because I have no clue how it works. I get that engines suck, bang and blow (woohoo!) in order to turn the flywheel. How the hell does a watch movement work? No clue.

In reality, though, I think I will end up being more in the camp of using watches to tell time, regardless of the movement. I like the automatic watches I have very much, simply because I love their designs, how they feel, etc... But I cannot say I would enjoy them any less if they were quartz. Matter of fact, I might enjoy them more since I wouldn't have to worry about keeping them going (or not keeping them going, depending on which forum post you read).

In an ironic twist, it seems that buying an automatic watch is quite like purchasing a 6-speed manual transmission. There is a more efficient and better performing option available, but that doesn't mean it's everyone's choice.

So I guess I'm saying I like my transmissions manual and, in contradiction, my watches quartz.

Yeah I completely agree with this.

[RR-NYC]

Originally Posted by NemesisX

Yep, you sound incredibly bitter

I may sound bitter to a fool when in fact, you're getting pissy because you just found out that the information you thought was correct was just bullshit to get you to buy a book. You make negative comments in threads that you clearly have no interest in and I called you out on it. You think you know the "secret" of millionaires when in fact it's a stupid philosophy one one who barely qualifies as a millionaire.

[i dunno]

Originally Posted by Rookie84

I think a fair comparison would be 6.0L V8 producing 400hp and 3.8L flat six producing 400hp. Both produce similar results, but the technology is far more advanced in 3.8L engine, and the sensation you get from it is totally different. Some might prefer the simpler, cheaper solution of a bigger engine, but to others, the thrill of taking a small, high-revving engine to the redline is much more appreciated, along with the latter being lighter in weight. The engine is inside the car so you can't see it most of the time, and you can't even see the beautiful work that goes into the internal parts to create a high-revving NA engine with over 100hp per liter. But does it make a difference, hell yeah it does.

the problem with the engine to watch comparison is that you interact with a car engine far much more than a watch movement. at least for me, the driver engagement of a car offers a much deeper emotional connection than looking at a watch tick. right hand on the wheel, left hand on the shifter, one foot for the clutch, and the other for the gas/brake - every appendage is linked. but what do I know? i'm not a watch guy. tbh, I just wear a calculator watch most of the time haha. but I've been in love with cars (and not just german ones) since I was born.

not saying that spending a lot of money on watches is stupid. just that its not my thing.

fun fact: gm ls v8s are usually lighter than Porsche flat 6s. there are guys who have done Porsche v8 swaps

[phrozen06]

Originally Posted by Rookie84

I do understand Invicta does make some quality watches. However, their practice of ripping off designs from high-end watchmakers have ruined their brand image, at least for me, which is a reason why I will never buy a watch from them. Like I have mentioned, some of their practices in order to make their watches appear more sophisticated than they actually are, are downright lame.

Many of the watch makers on the lower end of the cost spectrum sell designs that rip off high end watch makers. Invicta just does it more than others. LOL.

[justinnum1]

i have a quartz seamaster and love it

[Rookie84]

Originally Posted by phrozen06

Many of the watch makers on the lower end of the cost spectrum sell designs that rip off high end watch makers. Invicta just does it more than others. LOL.

I have never bought and never will buy any so called "hommage" watches. I hate it with a passion. I never take the brands that do "hommage" watches seriously. Invicta is very shameless about it as they basically copy the watches and slap their logo on. Other "hommage" watches at least make an effort not to look exactly the same.

[Rookie84]

Originally Posted by i dunno

the problem with the engine to watch comparison is that you interact with a car engine far much more than a watch movement. at least for me, the driver engagement of a car offers a much deeper emotional connection than looking at a watch tick. right hand on the wheel, left hand on the shifter, one foot for the clutch, and the other for the gas/brake - every appendage is linked. but what do I know? i'm not a watch guy. tbh, I just wear a calculator watch most of the time haha. but I've been in love with cars (and not just german ones) since I was born.

not saying that spending a lot of money on watches is stupid. just that its not my thing.

fun fact: gm ls v8s are usually lighter than Porsche flat 6s. there are guys who have done Porsche v8 swaps

The fact that GM LSX engines are lighter than the Porsche flat 6s make my argument even better. Despite the cheaper costs and same or less weight, some still prefer the high-revving flat 6s.

Anyway, just like different engines and different cars cannot be exactly compared to other objects, same goes for watches. I just made the comparison to help those uninterested in watches understand a little bit about some people's passion with horology.

[i dunno]

Originally Posted by Rookie84

The fact that GM LSX engines are lighter than the Porsche flat 6s make my argument even better. Despite the cheaper costs and same or less weight, some still prefer the high-revving flat 6s.

your argument would work if porsche had both v8 911s and flat 6 versions, but they dont have that option.

[phrozen06]

Originally Posted by Rookie84

I have never bought and never will buy any so called "hommage" watches. I hate it with a passion. I never take the brands that do "hommage" watches seriously. Invicta is very shameless about it as they basically copy the watches and slap their logo on. Other "hommage" watches at least make an effort not to look exactly the same.

agreed. Invicta's Subaqua Series is pretty original.