Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
Hobbies & Interests
Watches / Timepieces
School Me O Wise Watch Ones
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="thor447" data-source="post: 4040972" data-attributes="member: 24867"><p>I agree with [USER=40794]@rockchalk06[/USER]. For me personally, if were just about having an accurate timepiece, I'd get a mutli-band G-Shock or Citizen that syncs with the atomic clock each night, and just forget about it. For me, there's just something about the precision of that mechanical device on your wrist. In the a mechanical/automatic watch, there's no electricity, no batteries or capacitors, everything from the time, the day, date, moon-phase, chronograph, or any other complication is all driven mechanically from a mainspring. An automatic will use the motion of your arm during your normal daily activities to drive a rotor and mechanically wind the watch. The mathematics and precision craftsmanship involved to create a machine that can keep time accurately to within a couple of seconds a day, and will last for lifetimes if properly serviced is just appealing to me. After I get over the mechanics of it, I appreciate the time and effort involved making the dials and cases. You don't see the insides of a watch when you're wearing it, so they have to be pleasing to the eye as well.</p><p></p><p>Yes, a $20 Casio quartz will keep better time than the nicest Rolex, Patek Phillipe, Audemars Piguet, etc. There are clocks all around us and we all have a phone in our pocket (swampratt excluded) if we need to tell the time. It's more about what it takes to make the watch than it is just telling the time. You feel good (at least I do) when you're wearing a cool watch.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="thor447, post: 4040972, member: 24867"] I agree with [USER=40794]@rockchalk06[/USER]. For me personally, if were just about having an accurate timepiece, I'd get a mutli-band G-Shock or Citizen that syncs with the atomic clock each night, and just forget about it. For me, there's just something about the precision of that mechanical device on your wrist. In the a mechanical/automatic watch, there's no electricity, no batteries or capacitors, everything from the time, the day, date, moon-phase, chronograph, or any other complication is all driven mechanically from a mainspring. An automatic will use the motion of your arm during your normal daily activities to drive a rotor and mechanically wind the watch. The mathematics and precision craftsmanship involved to create a machine that can keep time accurately to within a couple of seconds a day, and will last for lifetimes if properly serviced is just appealing to me. After I get over the mechanics of it, I appreciate the time and effort involved making the dials and cases. You don't see the insides of a watch when you're wearing it, so they have to be pleasing to the eye as well. Yes, a $20 Casio quartz will keep better time than the nicest Rolex, Patek Phillipe, Audemars Piguet, etc. There are clocks all around us and we all have a phone in our pocket (swampratt excluded) if we need to tell the time. It's more about what it takes to make the watch than it is just telling the time. You feel good (at least I do) when you're wearing a cool watch. [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
Hobbies & Interests
Watches / Timepieces
School Me O Wise Watch Ones
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom