Automatic vs quartz

[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

[RR-NYC]

An automatic with a date complication takes all but two minutes to wind and set the date and time. My Daytona takes 30 seconds to set but there isn't a date. My panerai takes a few minutes longer because setting the date requires moving the hour hand.

A quartz is a lifeless piece of utility which at that point, use your cell phone to tell time

The women's quartz market continues to grow because they aren't willing to spare the few minutes it takes to set it .

[amanda hor$t]

the battery changing part definitely sucks.

[Rookie84]

It just depends on what you prefer. I used to wear Quartz watches only as they were convenient and cheap. But since I decided to try my first automatic, I've since become fascinated by the movements and how beautifully some of these watches are made. I don't think I will go back to Quartz now. But for practicality, there is no denying that Quartz is better than Automatic. It's more durable, more accurate, and does not require overhaul every few years. I think there always is a place for a coupe of good quartz watches in every collection.

OP, for your price range, Hamilton or Tissot would be good choices.

[Rmk392]

thanks for the replies! I agree that a Quartz watch does have its place but I'm ready to start diving into the automatics.

[filip75]

Get an automatic and pick up a watch winder. You can pick one up for about $50. You need to keep automatics wound up, so they stay lubricated.

[Rookie84]

Originally Posted by filip75

Get an automatic and pick up a watch winder. You can pick one up for about $50. You need to keep automatics wound up, so they stay lubricated.

There has been a lot of debate about needing winders or not. One side of argument is that winders cause the watches to run constantly, causing more wear eventually.

Since modern automatics use synthetic oils for lubrication, I don't think winders are necessary. I view winders as more of a convenience tool so that you don't have to set the time again after letting the watch sit for a few days.

There are some watchmakers who do not recommend use of winders at all. I just think it's a matter of personal preference as long as you pick up a quality winder that you can custom set a # of revolutions per day. For me, I don't think I will need a winder.

[tom rothschild]

i have a football buddy who went with movado and it looks pretty good for a quartz. i don't like watches (unless a cell phone is considered a pocket watch)

[filip75]

Originally Posted by Rookie84

There has been a lot of debate about needing winders or not. One side of argument is that winders cause the watches to run constantly, causing more wear eventually.

Since modern automatics use synthetic oils for lubrication, I don't think winders are necessary. I view winders as more of a convenience tool so that you don't have to set the time again after letting the watch sit for a few days.

There are some watchmakers who do not recommend use of winders at all. I just think it's a matter of personal preference as long as you pick up a quality winder that you can custom set a # of revolutions per day. For me, I don't think I will need a winder.

I guess for me it's more of a convenience factor plus it keeps the watches constantly moving and lubricated.

[madman]

They're not the best in the world, but Invicta make some OK watches. Many of them with Swiss movement.

I've got the Pro Diver 9937OB, automatic. It's good enough for me.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Invicta-9937...&keywords=9937

[NemesisX]

They both keep time to precision that is more than acceptable for anything you'll be using your watch for.

Quartz watches are infinitely more convenient and cost a boatload less than automatics. For this reason, automatic watches are viewed as more prestigious (not necessarily because of the automatic movement per se but because these watches cost more).

In bizarro world if quartz watches cost more than automatics I'd be willing to bet you that some people who are diehard automatic watch fans would switch over to quartz because quartz would viewed as more prestigious (since it costs more).

I know some people claim to be passionate about the watch movement itself but this seems a little strange to me because it's not as though you're interacting with the watch movement itself on a daily basis. For all intents and purposes you're mostly using your watch as jewelry and the internal mechanism of time keeping doesn't really play a role here.

The only way it plays a role has to do with the prestige factor I mentioned above. Automatics cost more and tend to be associated with brands that are more prestigious (because they cost more).

Personally I don't care much about watches but I've always been a food guy and I admittedly fall into this trap myself. Sometimes I'm convinced that certain restaurants offer higher quality food because they cost more. And, to a rough approximation this is usually true but it's not a 1:1 correlation or anything. It's not like a $1000 plate of food tastes 10 times better than a $100 plate of food.

[NemesisX]

Originally Posted by madman

They're not the best in the world, but Invicta make some OK watches. Many of them with Swiss movement.

I've got the Pro Diver 9937OB, automatic. It's good enough for me.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Invicta-9937...&keywords=9937

Looks great to me.

From the outside that watch looks indistinguishable from the ~$10,000 Rolex submariner (other than the brand name, of course). In fact, I think that watch is intended to be a look-a-like to the rolex submariner.

If I fancied the look of the Rolex submariner I'd totally get that invicta. It tells time just as well as the Rolex. It looks exactly like the Rolex (which I don't care about. I don't care about it looking like a Rolex. I simply fancy the design). And it costs like $50 or $100 versus $7,000-$10,000.

[NemesisX]

But yeah I think that invicta is a great example illustrating the fact that you're not paying a premium for automatic vs quartz (to get back to the topic). You're paying a premium for "rolex" vs "invicta" - not because the Rolex is of "higher quality" but because the Rolex is marked up by 10,000% because people want to be associated with the name "Rolex"

In bizarro world you could easily reverse the situation and have Invicta be the prestigious brand and Rolex be the cheap knockoff and many people wouldn't be able to tell the difference. They'd arbitrarily rationalize to themselves that the Invicta is a real, soulful timepiece with immaculate attention to detail and the Rolex is a cheap knockoff and this is why the Invicta costs $10,000 and the Rolex costs $100.

[madman]

I paid about £300 for mine but you can get similar looking models for much less. I just wanted the swiss automatic movement.

Invicta do a HUGE range of watches of all shapes and sizes.

Had mine a few years and although I don't wear it a lot when I do it keeps good time and has a very nice sweep.

[originalgoods13]

Originally Posted by NemesisX

But yeah I think that invicta is a great example illustrating the fact that you're not paying a premium for automatic vs quartz (to get back to the topic). You're paying a premium for "rolex" vs "invicta" - not because the Rolex is of "higher quality" but because the Rolex is marked up by 10,000% because people want to be associated with the name "Rolex"

In bizarro world you could easily reverse the situation and have Invicta be the prestigious brand and Rolex be the cheap knockoff and many people wouldn't be able to tell the difference. They'd arbitrarily rationalize to themselves that the Invicta is a real, soulful timepiece with immaculate attention to detail and the Rolex is a cheap knockoff and this is why the Invicta costs $10,000 and the Rolex costs $100.

There is more to the Rolex than just the brand name

[NemesisX]

Originally Posted by originalgoods13

There is more to the Rolex than just the brand name

I'm sure there is, but if I had to guess (and this is a wild but educated guess) I'd say most of the money that goes towards paying for a Rolex goes towards paying for the name and not necessarily for the quality of the materials or the method of manufacturing the watch.

If watches were priced purely on quality, the Invicta would cost, I don't know, $75 and the Rolex would cost $180.

But the retail price of the Invicta is $200 and the retail price of the Rolex is $10,000.

I have no problem believing that the Rolex is actually superior to the Invicta from a quality standpoint, but it's probably not $10,000 superior. It's probably not even $5000 superior or $3000 superior.

[Rookie84]

Ah. Don't get me started on Invicta. They blatantly rip off designs from high-end watchmakers and use cheap movements. They have so many copies of watches from so many different companies. They are thieves, IMO.

If you want reasonably priced, relatively high-quality automatics, there are many good brands out there such as Hamilton, Tissot, Epos, etc. They are more expensive than Invictas, but you're paying more for an original design with quality Swiss made movements.

If you actually took time to put an Invicta and an original that's been copied off of side by side, you'd be quite surprised on how much quality difference there is just from outside.

Buying Invicta is like buying Ebay parts. You know they work well for the money, but you also know that they copied the parts from companies that actually spent the time and money to research, design, and develop the parts.

[NemesisX]

Originally Posted by Rookie84

Ah. Don't get me started on Invicta. They blatantly rip off designs from high-end watchmakers and use cheap movements. They have so many copies of watches from so many different companies. They are thieves, IMO.

If you want reasonably priced, relatively high-quality automatics, there are many good brands out there such as Hamilton, Tissot, Epos, etc. They are more expensive than Invictas, but you're paying more for an original design with quality Swiss made movements.

If you actually took time to put an Invicta and an original that's been copied off of side by side, you'd be quite surprised on how much quality difference there is just from outside.

Buying Invicta is like buying Ebay parts. You know they work well for the money, but you also know that they copied the parts from companies that actually spent the time and money to research, design, and develop the parts.

I agree but let's be honest is it $10,000 (or, rather, retail price of the submariner minus retail price of the invicta) worth of quality difference?

I mean honestly maybe there is. I'm not a watch guy so I don't know. But, even if there is a $10,000 difference in quality it almost seems as though that quality is going towards things that neither appreciably enhance the accuracy of the watch nor augment the aesthetics, and I'd argue that aesthetics and accuracy are two of the most important factors when it comes to deciding on a watch.

Here's sort of a silly example to drive the point home - imagine you had a set of rims where the inside surface of the rims (away from view unless you're underneath the car) was coated in diamonds. The rims would be more expensive but would the diamond plating add to functionality or aesthetics? Probably not. Would the rims technically be of higher quality? Sure, but it's not "functionally" higher quality because the diamond plating doesn't really make the rims any sturdier nor does it enhance the outward appearance in an appreciable way.

[Rookie84]

Originally Posted by NemesisX

I agree but let's be honest is it $10,000 (or, rather, retail price of the submariner minus retail price of the invicta) worth of quality difference?

I mean honestly maybe there is. I'm not a watch guy so I don't know. But, even if there is a $10,000 difference in quality it almost seems as though that quality is going towards things that neither appreciably enhance the accuracy of the watch nor augment the aesthetics, and I'd argue that aesthetics and accuracy are two of the most important factors when it comes to deciding on a watch.

Here's sort of a silly example to drive the point home - imagine you had a set of rims where the inside surface of the rims (away from view unless you're underneath the car) was coated in diamonds. The rims would be more expensive but would the diamond plating add to functionality or aesthetics? Probably not. Would the rims technically be of higher quality? Sure, but it's not "functionally" higher quality because the diamond plating doesn't really make the rims any sturdier nor does it enhance the outward appearance in an appreciable way.

Rolex, along with other watchmakers with rich history, invests a lot of money into developing their own movements. Sure, they invest a lot of money in marketing as well, but they do have a lot to show for when it comes to technological advancements in mechanical watches.

If we were talking on functionality alone, there is no reason to buy a mechanical watch. Quartz is more accurate most of the time and does not require expensive overhaul which costs hundreds or dollars every few years.

I don't think you should be so quick to jump to a conclusion when you are not that familiar with how mechanical watches work and what kind of work goes into creating a new movement, along with craftsmanship that goes into it. There are so many details that go into smallest parts, along with different materials used for the aesthetics. No, it is not the same as putting diamond plating on the inside of the rim which has no point and nobody will ever see. 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 Invicta is that they try to profit off of someone else's designs. The watches look similar to the most part, but the finish, along with the craftsmanship and technology that goes inside it, is totally different.

Let me pick one great example to show how Invicta tries to pass off their movements to look similar to those from high-end makers. They put a sticker on the rotor instead of decorating it to make it look like they have decorated it. That is very lame.



I don't have problems with quality watches that provide a lot of bang for your buck. However, like I said, it is like Ebay parts. They did not do their designs, but instead copied someone else's design to make profit. Sure, they will look similar and function similarly, but the quality is never the same.

I do agree that high-end watches are overpriced for the most part. However, there are many better choices out there if you want a reasonably priced mechanical watch with good movements instead of a rip-off design with cheaper movements.

Invicta does sell watches of their own design, but they are much more expensive than their rip-off designs. It just shows you that how much costs are involved in making a good own design instead of stealing a design.

[NemesisX]

Originally Posted by Rookie84

Rolex, along with other watchmakers with rich history, invests a lot of money into developing their own movements. Sure, they invest a lot of money in marketing as well, but they do have a lot to show for when it comes to technological advancements in mechanical watches.

If we were talking on functionality alone, there is no reason to buy a mechanical watch. Quartz is more accurate most of the time and does not require expensive overhaul which costs hundreds or dollars every few years.

I don't think you should be so quick to jump to a conclusion when you are not that familiar with how mechanical watches work and what kind of work goes into creating a new movement, along with craftsmanship that goes into it. There are so many details that go into smallest parts, along with different materials used for the aesthetics. No, it is not the same as putting diamond plating on the inside of the rim which has no point and nobody will ever see. 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 Invicta is that they try to profit off of someone else's designs. The watches look similar to the most part, but the finish, along with the craftsmanship and technology that goes inside it, is totally different.

Let me pick one great example to show how Invicta tries to pass off their movements to look similar to those from high-end makers. They put a sticker on the rotor instead of decorating it to make it look like they have decorated it. That is very lame.



I don't have problems with quality watches that provide a lot of bang for your buck. However, like I said, it is like Ebay parts. They did not do their designs, but instead copied someone else's design to make profit. Sure, they will look similar and function similarly, but the quality is never the same.

I do agree that high-end watches are overpriced for the most part. However, there are many better choices out there if you want a reasonably priced mechanical watch with good movements instead of a rip-off design with cheaper movements.

Invicta does sell watches of their own design, but they are much more expensive than their rip-off designs. It just shows you that how much costs are involved in making a good own design instead of stealing a design.

Nice post. Very informative

[filip75]

Originally Posted by Rookie84

Rolex, along with other watchmakers with rich history, invests a lot of money into developing their own movements. Sure, they invest a lot of money in marketing as well, but they do have a lot to show for when it comes to technological advancements in mechanical watches.

If we were talking on functionality alone, there is no reason to buy a mechanical watch. Quartz is more accurate most of the time and does not require expensive overhaul which costs hundreds or dollars every few years.

I don't think you should be so quick to jump to a conclusion when you are not that familiar with how mechanical watches work and what kind of work goes into creating a new movement, along with craftsmanship that goes into it. There are so many details that go into smallest parts, along with different materials used for the aesthetics. No, it is not the same as putting diamond plating on the inside of the rim which has no point and nobody will ever see. 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 Invicta is that they try to profit off of someone else's designs. The watches look similar to the most part, but the finish, along with the craftsmanship and technology that goes inside it, is totally different.

Let me pick one great example to show how Invicta tries to pass off their movements to look similar to those from high-end makers. They put a sticker on the rotor instead of decorating it to make it look like they have decorated it. That is very lame.



I don't have problems with quality watches that provide a lot of bang for your buck. However, like I said, it is like Ebay parts. They did not do their designs, but instead copied someone else's design to make profit. Sure, they will look similar and function similarly, but the quality is never the same.

I do agree that high-end watches are overpriced for the most part. However, there are many better choices out there if you want a reasonably priced mechanical watch with good movements instead of a rip-off design with cheaper movements.

Invicta does sell watches of their own design, but they are much more expensive than their rip-off designs. It just shows you that how much costs are involved in making a good own design instead of stealing a design.

Great post and comparison to engines. I will use that from now on in these conversations, which occur at least a couple of times a year.

[NemesisX]

Yeah I liked the engine analogy. I can see why that's more appropriate in this scenario. It's kind of like comparing a 3.8L flat 6 in a Porsche to a 6.0L V8 American muscle car that costs 1/4 as much.

Although with cars the different engines are something that you can feel by driving the car, whereas I would still argue that you're not necessarily feeling the difference in craftsmanship when it comes to the quality of internal movements of the watch.

But again I found Rookie's post to be very informative and it was nice trying to understand the watch obsession from an aficionado's perspective (like I mentioned watches just don't do it for me, I'm more of a food guy).