For me, my mechanical watch obsession started when I inherited my father’s mid-70s Rolex. Back then, they weren’t as insanely out of reach as they’ve become; they were a very robust watch that would Just Work for a long, long time, and which looked nice. (Remember, this was only about 15 years after Sean Connery wore a Submariner in Dr No; Rolex was even LESS upmarket in the 60s, which was a time when very few watches were waterproof AT ALL.)
Then the dot-com boom happened, and I had a little money, and I bought an Omega (which I’m actually wearing right now). It’s a late-90s Seamaster, like the one they put on Pierce Brosnan’s wrist for Goldeneye around the same time. (Incidentally, snooty jewelers do not think you are funny if you ask how to make the laser shoot out.)
There are others, too, but the Omega is the nicest one I own. They are all EMP-proof, spring-driven marvels. Most have dates, but none show days or months. I do enjoy that there ARE mechanical movements with perpetual calendars, though, even if they do cost as much as a cheap house.
About 5 years ago, I fell down the AppleWatch hole after buying one to use while running and biking, and finding it so useful that I wore it to the exclusion of all the other watches. I have a nicer Apple Watch now (titanium S6) that I wear MOST of the time, but several times a month I’ll pull one of the others out to wear. With this usage pattern, they’re all “oh, shiny!” to me, too, which is neat.
It makes me sad sometimes, as the mechanical marvel of watches is beautiful, but in the end, I had a Seiko SKX-007 that needed some maintenance, and I was quoted $600. It was a $200 watch and they were going to swab the movement. That watch has emotional value, but I can't keep it running at 3x the replacement cost.
Maybe someday I'll find a way to wear another mechanical, and get all the health tracking I appreciate otherwise. Or maybe, technology finally replaced history for me. The funny thing is, I almost never would have considered a quartz watch lol.
I had a Seiko SKX-007 that needed some
maintenance, and I was quoted $600.
That price is awfully high. They were either trying to rip you off... or simply drive you away, which is possible if they were a shop that prefers to work on high-value watches for wealthy customers. Maybe they are an authorized Rolex service center and prefer to collect those hefty prices.But, there's definitely not $500+ of labor involved at any reasonable market rate.
Those Seiko 7S26 movements are something like $50 new and even an amateur can perform the swap in a short amount of time without specialized tools (edit: well, maybe a hand puller, but that's cheap) and there are plenty of videos showing how.
There's no actual watchmaking knowledge required. That would only be required if trying to repair a module rather than simply swap it out.
The SKXxxx models are something of a classic but are hard to find now that they've been discontinued for a while; if you still have your broken model it may be worth more than you paid for it.
I build industrial automation equipment, so I'm in part to blame for the problem, however, I'm also in a position to advocate for easier repair processes and more sensible assembly stackups. It's simply a fact that the six figures in initial equipment capital divided by, hopefully, a similar number of unit sales, plus the few dozen seconds of operator hands-on time per unit, always going to produce an end product which costs less than hours of diagnosis and maintenance by a local, high-skill repairman. The math simply doesn't add permit any other arrangement, no matter how standardized your tooling is, how open your repair manual is, or how efficient your aftermarket parts ecosystem is.
Repairing and maintaining something for more money than it cost to produce it puts those activities firmly in the realm of luxury goods. The better we get at producing useful things cheaply, the more we have to multiply the value of human labor, and the less it makes sense to repair cheap things with this expensive labor.
One interesting option today is that you can get an electronic watch and get access to all the internals as well:
https://open-smartwatch.github.io/
However, its operation depends on electrons and bits instead of springs and escapements, and you can see those bits moving about in PlatformIO code instead of under a magnifier.
also, where are you that an EMP is a realistic concern?
On normal days I just wear an Apple Watch and I can't ever bring myself to wear one of my fancy watches because I love the fitness tracking features.
in the event an EMP knocks out all your electronics,
is having a functioning watch something that really
matters?
If you know what time it is, you can use your watch as a fairly accurate compass in an emergency.https://www.citizenwatch-global.com/s/support/exterior/direc...
On a more serious note, as a bit of a "prepper" - it's not hard to cover the essentials. Once past that, working timepieces greatly simplify coordination and other group efforts. Additionally, I would expect decent trade value out of them, should the unlikely but tragic circumstances occur.
I'm failing to understand why this is so contentious outside of "anti-prepper" attitudes.
It’s something I’d like to get into, hopefully with some hand holding. I’m curious what resources you’re using, and if there’s some kind of loose curriculum to ease the beginning efforts.
So I'm likely down the same path as you, eventual "failure", if looking at it as a career choice. But I'm also ~a year behind you, starting a similar path with no handholidng and likely no profit. I watch this guy on youtube, occasionally, and his paid series has been mentioned here and elsewhere, as being worthwhile, but I have not paid for those videos (yet). https://www.watchfix.com/ (formerly known as http://watchrepairlessons.com/ )
Side note: you do have to relocate yourself/your family to the school’s location.
On one hand, you can marvel at how little they drift during a single power reserve. Could be seconds, which is barely noticeable in everyday life.
On the other hand, some others (Seiko 5...) can drift minutes in a single reserve... And so what? In a day and age when we measure everything with maniac precision even during a random person's day, it's beautiful to lose some control and gain back some leeway with regards to time.
I love that it is "about 22:00" rather than 22:03:37.
'Initially set to the same time, these identical battery-powered clocks will eventually fall out of sync, or may stop entirely. Conceived shortly after Gonzalez-Torres’s partner was diagnosed with AIDS, this work uses everyday objects to track and measure the inevitable flow of time. When one of the clocks stops or breaks, they can both be reset, thereby resuming perfect synchrony. In 1991, Gonzalez-Torres reflected, "Time is something that scares me. . . or used to. This piece I made with the two clocks was the scariest thing I have ever done. I wanted to face it. I wanted those two clocks right in front of me, ticking."'
I'm usually the guy willing to defend contemporary art, but there's not much I can do here. The work lacks any craft and the insights are shallow, better expressed by the label than the piece.
Clearly the curators of these very famous museums disagree with me. But when people mock "modern art" (which this technically isn't), this is what they're thinking about.
If I glimpse another consciousness and walk away a different and more empathic person, then who am I to mock it?
Agreed. I view myself as a pretty casual person, someone who's not overly concerned with the minutae of modern life. But with a digital watch, it's "12:47" and not "a quarter to one", which to me sounds infinitely cooler. With a slightly inaccurate mechanical movement, I fall into the latter manner of speaking, which is more what I want to be. Weird psychological preferences, but something that counts, to me.
That's pretty amazing to me that basically a spring and some gears can be that good at keeping time.
Just let me collect my tiny mechanical toys, dammit, don't ask questions.
Thickness is always going to be an issue with automatic watches. You can get thinner watches if they are manual wind since they don't have a rotor. Usually, the thinner they get, the more expensive they get though, so keep that in mind. You can get super thin manual wind watches but they will cost hundreds to thousands of dollars usually.
About Orient: they are pretty much poised to take the spot that Seiko has occupied for entry level mechanical watches, as Seiko themselves move further up market. I love the design of their Bambino and some of the OrientStar offerings but they have a few quirks I'm not fond of.
I definitely recommend also trying a hand-wound watch because the slimness is wonderful and the winding has a charm to itself as well. I have RSI issues so the lightness and slimness is certainly a big plus, combined with the fact that most vintage or vintage-inspired manual wind watches have small dials and cases too.
I've heard from watch geeks with friends in "the business" that Seiko is aware of the issue thanks to the negative online word-of-mouth these issues have generated, but I don't know how reliable that hearsay is. (Really, though, Seiko would have to be blind not to be aware of the issues...)
We'll see if Seiko is actually aware and if that actually results in an improvement. If so I suspect that it will take some time for results to be seen given the lag time between manufacture date and watches winding up in consumers' hands.
Agreed, but then again much of the point of wearing watches nowadays is cosmetic. Plus, their terrible hollow rolled-link bracelets and press-clasps aren't really cosmetic issues, just poor quality that they haven't bothered upgrading. The movements themselves though seem to still be solid, and they are a huge provider of movements (eg the NH35/36) to several microbrands.
> Seiko is aware of the issue
Yeah, it's weird. They not only seem to be aware of it, but also say they have "hand-checked" units sent out to reviewers or units that are purchased from boutiques if you ask specifically- only for them to have the same issues as always. Not sure what it will take. The Just One More Watch YouTube channel does a ton of Seiko reviews but he's been extremely jaded because of these issues.
It's not like they're a public company being squeezed for profit at the cost of quality by a private equity firm or something. I have some faith they will right their ship but who knows.
There are few different dial and strap combos, I just ordered a steel bracelet for mine.
It’s a bit thinner than the Seiko 5 SNK803 or SKX007, is a reasonable size (38mm) and the hand wound movement reduces the thickness since there’s no rotor. There isn’t a day/date complication either, just a three hand watch.
https://www.hodinkee.com/articles/piaget-altiplano-ultimate-...
The degree mechanical watches push the boundary of miniaturization (outside of lithography) is amazing.
Also, some of the microbrands are pretty interesting at the $500-$1500 range. I like many of the designs Farer is doing.
Be warned I was looking at a sub from them, and got sucked down the rabbit hole and now have a Tudor BB58 Pepsi GMT.
Tudors the feeder brand for Rolex BTW.
When I was a kid, my grandfather and I tore down some old watches as a rainy afternoon activity one day. I was fascinated. It wasn't until I listened to the podcast Shit Town (S-Town) that I thought about horology as a hobby again.
One interesting thing I learned, is that if you're looking for a career change, you can become a certified watch maker for free. Many of the schools are sponsored by the big name watch manufacturers, and tuition is free. It's a full time education, so you'll need enough financial runway to survive for a year or two, but you'll come out with no debt as a certified watch builder/repairperson.