or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Automatic vs. quartz
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Automatic vs. quartz - Page 2

post #16 of 54
Getting back to the original topic (and yes I realize that this thread has been dead for six years), but I anyways, I digress.

I know that on Rolex automatic models (I don't even know if they even produce any quartz models) that the second hand has a "sweeping" motion as opposed to a more standard "ticking" motion. Is the sweeping motion fairly common among automatic watches, or is this just a Rolex thing?

Are there watch makers out there who make a quartz watch that also has a sweeping motion?

LK, I know that you've been active on this thread once, here's hoping that you see this and can impart some of your wisdom on me.
post #17 of 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stu View Post
I'm looking at some nice Omega dress watches, but can't decide whether to get automatic or quartz. The price difference is significant, with quartz much cheaper. The salesmen have differing opinions. One thinks automatic is problematic and doesn't work as well. The other thinks automatic is better, because it requires more engineering than does a quartz and is thus a finer piece of jewelry. What's the lowdown on this. Are automatic watches problematic, or are they more accurate than quartz? BTW: I assume manual winding watches are another thing alltogether, correct?
Like another poster said, both salesman are correct. If this is going to be your one fine watch that you hope to keep for a long while, I'd splurge for the automatic. There's just something about it, and in case you ever decide to sell it, will likely have a higher resale value (as a percentage of original price). On the other hand, if you just want a watch that tells time and money is an issue, nothing wrong with quartz--although personally, if you're going the quartz I'd buy a less expensive watch than an Omega. Unless there is a certain design that you must have, it's harder to justify a ton of money on a quartz watch. I'd instead look into something like Oris or Hamilton.
post #18 of 54
Most (maybe all? not sure about this) automatic watches sweep. It's not a Rolex specific thing, but Rolex movements are generally of high quality and are very accurate. If you look at the specs of an automatic movement, it will have reading for BPH which is indicative of the accuracy of the movement. Generally higher BPH watches are the most accurate, while lower BPH watches can be a little more reliable because the movements require less powerful mainsprings among other things. All in all, all decent quartz watches are much more accurate than even the best mechanicals/automatics. Also, I don't think Oris makes a quartz watch. Pretty sure they just add a nice red rotor to some ETA/Valjoux movements.
post #19 of 54
quartz is more accurate and more reliable but a mechanical watch is a real work of art something you hand down to your children, a quartz watch hasn't been made by an artisan and is about as special and disposable as a mobile phone or an ipod.
post #20 of 54
No offense to NSH, but I love how I took the time to search for this thread, made specific mention in my reply that the thread had been dead for SIX years, and yet still the responses for the most part pertain to the OP's questions.

Jefe, thanks for the info. I appreciate it.
post #21 of 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by Biggskip View Post
Getting back to the original topic (and yes I realize that this thread has been dead for six years), but I anyways, I digress.

I know that on Rolex automatic models (I don't even know if they even produce any quartz models) that the second hand has a "sweeping" motion as opposed to a more standard "ticking" motion. Is the sweeping motion fairly common among automatic watches, or is this just a Rolex thing?

Are there watch makers out there who make a quartz watch that also has a sweeping motion?

LK, I know that you've been active on this thread once, here's hoping that you see this and can impart some of your wisdom on me.

Rolex no longer produces their "Oysterquartz" movement.
They stopped production a few years ago. You can still sometimes find NOS pieces as it wasn't a very popular product.

Actually, automatic watches are "ticking" much like quartz, only at a faster rate. Most are 8 ticks per second. It's more obvious when you look at some of the slower beat movements in a big case like the IWC Big Pilot.

There have been some automatics with a stepping second like a quartz.
One that I can think of off hand is a Panerai special edition from several years ago.
http://www.panerai.com/s_special_edi...d_categoria=46

I think there's no technical question as to whether they could make a quartz watch with a smooth sweeping seconds hand except that it would use the battery quicker.
post #22 of 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by Biggskip View Post
I know that on Rolex automatic models (I don't even know if they even produce any quartz models) that the second hand has a "sweeping" motion as opposed to a more standard "ticking" motion. Is the sweeping motion fairly common among automatic watches, or is this just a Rolex thing?
My late father owned a Rolex Oysterquartz, which has made its way into my possession. It's second hand "ticks". On the rare occasion when I wear it, the ticking second hand leads many to comment, "nice fake".
post #23 of 54
My $250 Seiko automatic sweeps. I'm not sure but I think it is 8bps

My friend's $1500 breitling quartz diver does not sweep, it ticks once per second.
post #24 of 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by zippyh View Post
I think there's no technical question as to whether they could make a quartz watch with a smooth sweeping seconds hand except that it would use the battery quicker.
Seiko actually used to make a quartz wristwatch movement with a smooth-sweeping second hand, though it's out of production now. Their current Spring Drive movements (a mechanically-powered, quartz regulated hybrid) also have a totally smooth second-hand sweep.
post #25 of 54
Spending more than $150 on a quartz watch is profligacy.
post #26 of 54
Didn't the quartz Accutrons sweep?
post #27 of 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tarmac View Post
Didn't the quartz Accutrons sweep?

The tuning fork ones did.
post #28 of 54
Quartz? You won´t see any serious bussinessman on Europe wearing quartz watches man! That is one of the basic visual test about style!! ( some cheapo salesmen from big markets on a fat suits and a black plastic Casio from th 80´s...) IWC,Vacheron,Zenith,Longines.. etc That is the daily menu
post #29 of 54
i feel as automatic and especially manual pieces are way out of touch in current, modern days. quartz movements present technological breakthrough that, by far, surpasses even mechanical perpetual calendars and sonneirie complications.

may i suggest that you go with a timeless elegance of a gold movado? any knowledgeable salesman will agree.





Quote:
Originally Posted by Stu View Post
I'm looking at some nice Omega dress watches, but can't decide whether to get automatic or quartz. The price difference is significant, with quartz much cheaper. The salesmen have differing opinions. One thinks automatic is problematic and doesn't work as well. The other thinks automatic is better, because it requires more engineering than does a quartz and is thus a finer piece of jewelry.
post #30 of 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by Biggskip View Post
I realize that this thread has been dead for six years


i wish i could ban you. i can't believe you can get on the internets in ohio.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Automatic vs. quartz