radicaldog
Distinguished Member
- Joined
- Feb 11, 2009
- Messages
- 3,239
- Reaction score
- 982
A Cartier, say. With an in-house movement, but quartz. On the relatively cheap side -- under 5k, say. Yay or nay, and more importantly, why?
STYLE. COMMUNITY. GREAT CLOTHING.
Bored of counting likes on social networks? At Styleforum, you’ll find rousing discussions that go beyond strings of emojis.
Click Here to join Styleforum's thousands of style enthusiasts today!
Styleforum is supported in part by commission earning affiliate links sitewide. Please support us by using them. You may learn more here.
Why not ask in the watch thread where very knowledgable members post/comment/update every day?
Since if all I care about is reliability and precise timekeeping, I could get a Chinese made quartz watch for under $100 at Walmart, which would likely be more durable, reliable, and accurate, than a $20,000 Patek Philippe mechanical wristwatch.
Not to nitpick or anything: agree on the accurate, disagree on the durable and reliable parts. A Walmart quartz watch is a throwaway item; its movement is largely made of plastic. A PP on the other hand is made to last generations.
A PP can last for generations, but to do so it really ought to be serviced every so often. Let's say once per decade, more or less. (I honestly don't know, offhand, what the recommended service interval is for, say, a PP Grand Complication Perpetual.)
So yeah, if you want to always have a reliable wristwatch, I would still maintain that an inexpensive "solid state" watch wins out over an expensive mechanical.
But the replacement might well cost considerably less than does servicing the PP.
[...] Whereas nobody bothers keeping cheap, outdated quartz wristwatches functional. It just wouldn't make any financial sense to do so.
A quartz is no more reliable than a mechanical; I would argue it's less.