1. And... we're back. You'll notice that all of your images are back as well, as are our beloved emoticons, including the infamous :foo: We have also worked with our server folks and developers to fix the issues that were slowing down the site.

    There is still work to be done - the images in existing sigs are not yet linked, for example, and we are working on a way to get the images to load faster - which will improve the performance of the site, especially on the pages with a ton of images, and we will continue to work diligently on that and keep you updated.

    Cheers,

    Fok on behalf of the entire Styleforum team
    Dismiss Notice

good value watch for under $300

Discussion in 'Classic Menswear' started by mr.loverman, Sep 10, 2008.

  1. shoesies

    shoesies Senior member

    Messages:
    165
    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2008
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    I dig my Citizen Eco-Drive > solar powered, retail is $600 but you can find it for less!
     
  2. Jferg4350

    Jferg4350 Senior member

    Messages:
    412
    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2008
    Location:
    Alabama
    I recently purchased this watch http://tinyurl.com/4bhujg (looks a lot better in person) not a bad watch for only 95 dollars
     
  3. Frank Bullitt

    Frank Bullitt Member

    Messages:
    19
    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2008
  4. 330CK

    330CK Senior member

    Messages:
    2,349
    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2008
    Anything from Tissot, Seiko, or Swatch will serve you well.
     
  5. TBSDSpaniard

    TBSDSpaniard Senior member

    Messages:
    651
    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2008
    stowa second hand.....hamilton, tissot, seiko spirit
     
  6. Willsw

    Willsw Senior member

    Messages:
    1,221
    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2007
    Location:
    DC
    I think this for about $300:

    [​IMG]

    And this for about $400:

    [​IMG]

    Are incredibly attractive.
     
  7. Metlin

    Metlin Senior member

    Messages:
    3,043
    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2008
    No quartz please. If your budget is $30, OK sure. If your budget is $300, then definitely not.
    And why not? Simpler (and certainly more advanced) technology, bigger bang for buck, more features (at a cheaper price) and so on, ad infinitum. If anything, going quartz or quasi-digital for that price will give you some really good options (e.g. Tissot T-touch). I've never understood going with a wind-up or an automatic watch, unless you are planning on going to the moon or to a place where you are magically going to be away from a battery store for the next few years. And even then, just carry another bloody watch. If you want brand name and elitism, then fine, go with an automatic or whatever. But if you want good functionality and superior technology at a cheaper price, nothing can beat quartz.
     
  8. Willsw

    Willsw Senior member

    Messages:
    1,221
    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2007
    Location:
    DC
    Metlin, I suggest you buy your rubber wellies now, and give up all those nice shoes. Automatics are better because movements are beautiful.
     
  9. misterbowles

    misterbowles Senior member

    Messages:
    268
    Joined:
    May 7, 2004
    Location:
    Burlington, VT
  10. acidboy

    acidboy Senior member

    Messages:
    21,170
    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2006

    And this for about $400:

    [​IMG]

    Are incredibly attractive.


    That one is amazingly attractive. Very elegant, even compared to watches at higher price levels.
     
  11. whacked

    whacked Senior member

    Messages:
    7,364
    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2006
    And why not? Simpler (and certainly more advanced) technology, bigger bang for buck, more features (at a cheaper price) and so on, ad infinitum.

    If anything, going quartz or quasi-digital for that price will give you some really good options (e.g. Tissot T-touch).

    I've never understood going with a wind-up or an automatic watch, unless you are planning on going to the moon or to a place where you are magically going to be away from a battery store for the next few years. And even then, just carry another bloody watch.

    If you want brand name and elitism, then fine, go with an automatic or whatever. But if you want good functionality and superior technology at a cheaper price, nothing can beat quartz.


    some people just don't understand watches.


    Oh, and once you get bored with your quartz pieces (like some inevitably do), good luck with selling them anywhere near the percentage of original price accessible to mechanical watch owners.
     
  12. mr monty

    mr monty Senior member

    Messages:
    6,795
    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2002
    Location:
    Naptown (Indianapolis)
  13. 0b5cur1ty

    0b5cur1ty Senior member

    Messages:
    2,004
    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2008
    Location:
    Netherlands
    Yes. and ?

    Timekeeping is the purpose of a wristwatch.

    Your personal choice to reject quartz is just that - a personal choice to which you are, of course, entitled. A blanket rejection of quartz for anyone is hardly justified. For what it's worth, I have several mechanicals and several quartz watches and love them both for different reasons.
     
  14. Aureus

    Aureus Senior member

    Messages:
    230
    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2006
    Location:
    So. Cal.
    Timekeeping is the purpose of a wristwatch.

    Your personal choice to reject quartz is just that - a personal choice to which you are, of course, entitled. A blanket rejection of quartz for anyone is hardly justified. For what it's worth, I have several mechanicals and several quartz watches and love them both for different reasons.


    Jewelery is the purpose of a wristwatch. Time keeping is better left to your cell-phone or a radio-clock that synchronizes with the WWVB radio signal that broadcasts America's official time via Atomic Clock.
     
  15. Matt

    Matt Senior member

    Messages:
    11,179
    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2005
    Location:
    Sunny Saigon
    I just bought this Hamilton Khaki today for about $340 (tks to the forum guys who PMed me on it btw). Go through the Overstock.com Paypal link and there are 10% discounts there for paying via Paypal, as well as $2.95 US shipping (big thanks to CTGuy for taking that for me!). There are a bunch of other Hamiltons starting from under $120 once the Paypal discount is applied, so some really good deals.
    Casio digital it is then! OP - you should find yourself with around $290 change. BTW - not saying I disagree with the assertion, but by that logic, the purpose of shoes is to avoid bare feet (close shoeporn threads), and the purpose of clothes is to provide warmth in winter and conceal nudity in summer (close entire forum, moderators go home, get some rest).
     
  16. Cary Grant

    Cary Grant Senior member

    Messages:
    9,672
    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2008
    Location:
    Knee deep in curds
    Looking at Overstock.com... am I the only one that finds it humorous that you can save $23,000 on a watch? [​IMG]
     
  17. gdl203

    gdl203 Senior member Dubiously Honored Affiliate Vendor

    Messages:
    36,650
    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2005
    Location:
    New York
    metlin and obscurity - I have nothing against quartz watches if your budget is really low and all you're looking for is the time keeping functionality of a watch. If one is interested in watches and the way they are made, the way they work, there is no good reason to spend more than $50 on a quartz watch IMO.

    What fascinates me in watches is how they work and the fact that with a few wounds of a spring, it actually can keep nearly perfect time. You don't have to share my passion, but this is how I feel. I'm more interested in a mechanical watch that can keep time at +/- 3 seconds a day on the sole basis of a mainspring and a few wheels, than in a watch than can keep time at +/- 1 second a week because it is driven by an electronic circuit (or an atomic clock). I have absolutely zero interest in the latter. If all I need is time, it's everywhere around me. Watches are just more than simply time keeping for me - it is how they keep time that interest me.
     
  18. 0b5cur1ty

    0b5cur1ty Senior member

    Messages:
    2,004
    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2008
    Location:
    Netherlands
    metlin and obscurity - I have nothing against quartz watches if your budget is really low and all you're looking for is the time keeping functionality of a watch. If one is interested in watches and the way they are made, the way they work, there is no good reason to spend more than $50 on a quartz watch IMO.

    What fascinates me in watches is how they work and the fact that with a few wounds of a spring, it actually can keep nearly perfect time. You don't have to share my passion, but this is how I feel. I'm more interested in a mechanical watch that can keep time at +/- 3 seconds a day on the sole basis of a mainspring and a few wheels, than in a watch than can keep time at +/- 1 second a week because it is driven by an electronic circuit (or an atomic clock). I have absolutely zero interest in the latter. If all I need is time, it's everywhere around me. Watches are just more than simply time keeping for me - it is how they keep time that interest me.

    The thing is, I do share your passion - and you describe it perfectly: it is how watches keep time that is important and interesting. It is indeed amazing that high quality mechanicals can perform to within a few seconds a day "on the sole basis of a mainspring and a few wheels" and I love them for that too.

    My point (and the objection to your original post) is that you treat all quartz as alike, and equally uninteresting, when that isn't so. There's a world of difference between a standard quartz movement that will keep time to within say 15 seconds a month and a movement that, by dint of a specially formed high-frequency crystal or thermocompensation or any of the other high-end quartz technologies used through the years, can give that sort of accuracy (or better) per year. It's those quartz watches that interest me greatly - they are the modern exponents of the relentless quest for accuracy that motivated the original development of the mechnical movements you enjoy today. That's why I posted the two Seikos next to each other - to try and show how both are interesting and valid ways to spend the OP's money.

    That you personally wouldn't want to invest in a quartz watch is, of course, your own affair; but to state "there is no good reason to spend more than $50 on a quartz watch" is incorrect. There are plenty of good reasons - they just don't happen to appeal to you.
     
  19. gdl203

    gdl203 Senior member Dubiously Honored Affiliate Vendor

    Messages:
    36,650
    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2005
    Location:
    New York
    That you personally wouldn't want to invest in a quartz watch is, of course, your own affair; but to state "there is no good reason to spend more than $50 on a quartz watch" is incorrect. There are plenty of good reasons - they just don't happen to appeal to you.
    Hence the "IMO" which you left out of my quote...
    there is no good reason to spend more than $50 on a quartz watch IMO.

    Of course, people have plenty of good reasons to collect anything. Some people collect antique spoons or exotic toilet covers and I'm sure they're willing to pay large sums of money for them. Doesn't mean that I think it makes sense to me.
     

Share This Page

Styleforum is proudly sponsored by