Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

WeirdEngineerDude t1_j4eamd5 wrote

Reply to comment by FLTDI in 1970s Mechanical Timex 🙂 Loses a minute a day, but absolutely bulletproof! by jmp3r96

For a mechanical watch, and an old one, a minute a day is pretty good. That’s off by less than 0.1%.

That’s why a vibrating quartz element was such a game-changer.

107

F-21 t1_j4ez30d wrote

Also, if you didn't loose a quartz watch from the 70's (or maybe 80's when they gott really widespread), it still runs today as well. New Casios last a decade on one battery and are more accurate than a rolex...

39

JMAC426 t1_j4g4s7u wrote

Yeah but Rolex are also overpriced and overhyped (though certainly not bad watches)

Edit: oh no fanboys found me

26

F-21 t1_j4g5zl4 wrote

That's quite literally any mechanical watch. Even the cheapest one is terribly overpriced and inferior to a much cheaper quartz casio in functionality. It's jewelry :)

I have nothing against them, and enjoy a good mechanical watch, but that's what they are. For style and performance, something like a Citizen Ecodrive is probably the best balance.

18

JMAC426 t1_j4g65c1 wrote

You mis-spelled Longines

−1

F-21 t1_j4h5czt wrote

Longines, patek philippe, tag heuer, rolex, citizen, seiko... does not matter, functionally a mechanical watch is obsolete. There is nothing that it could do better. For example, a citizen ecodrive is cheaper, slimmer, more elegant, way more accurate, lighter, more durable and completely maintenance free (I think it uses some sort of capacitors instead of a battery, only needs short term battery anyway, if most battery watches last for 8-10 years on a single battery the ecodrive only needs to last a week or a month so it's really tiny as it is constantly recharged). For more extreme durability, there's g-shock. A mechanical watch is an incredibly complex piece of fragile engineering, quartz is an amazing technology from a functional standpoint. But a mechanical watch is art.

3

JMAC426 t1_j4h64ik wrote

Just a joke, comrade. I’m well aware of the pros and cons of various watch types. I was just saying Rolex is those things, in comparison to other mechanical watches.

0

F-21 t1_j4h8hk5 wrote

Rolex is probably the most overhyped since it is so famous :) But probably retains value better? I don't know. I bet lots of people want a Rolex even over some "better" or equivelant brands just cause they only know rolex.

1

Dear_Watson t1_j4grs5g wrote

I have a early Seiko Quartz 0624 LCD from 1974 that still functions perfectly along with an early Zenith Defy Quartz from 1975 that also keeps great time. If you maintain older Quartz watches and make sure to regularly change the battery so the internals don’t get ruined they literally pretty much last forever. The massive exception to the rule being LED watches as eventually the LED anode will deteriorate with regular use, especially with older LEDs.

2

throwawaycanadian2 t1_j4elisf wrote

For an old one maybe. Mechanical is usually accurate to way more precise measurements than that. Even back then it would be measured in a few seconds. Not a minute.

Getting this was serviced by someone who knows what they re doing may make it way more accurate.

16

F-21 t1_j4eyxdf wrote

As another guy said, this was one of the cheapest mechanical movements on the market at the time. The shafts run on bearings that wear out and get sloppy...

18

RokieVetran t1_j4fut6j wrote

Timex watches of the day were not made to be serviced

8