What is the point of watch deployment clasps?

[haganah]

What exactly is the point of a deployment clasp?

Does it help the band last longer or does that not affect it at all?

 

[coolpapa]

I have one on one of my Breitlings because it allows me to adjust the strap to precisely the size I want. Using a tang/buckle sometimes leaves me sort of in between the right size for my wrist.

 

[Dmax]

The correct name is actually "deployant". They do put less wear on the strap, IMHO. It also takes less time to put the watch on or take it off and the overall look is cleaner.

 

[DrZRM]

Because the end of the watch is never actually free from the buckle (the deployant allows you to open the size of the strap "loop" without actually freeing the end) and you slide it closed over your hand and then fasten it like a bracelet, you are much less likely to drop your watch putting it on.

It also leads to much less wear and tear on the hole, and that pulling motion that gets the tang into the hole, breaks in the part of the strap around the hole without a deployant. So yes, your strap does last longer.

oh, and I think both deployant and deployment are correct.

 

[gdl203]

Mostly safety (harder to drop the watch when you put it on and take it off) and convenience (always right sized for your wrist). Also true that it band will last longer as the friction of tightening a band to the right hole and taking it off wears that part of the band (as well as the hole area) more.

 

[Hany]

It is for casual/sport watches only. A formal watch should not be on a deployant.

 

[jc138]

Less likely to drop.

 

[DrZRM]

Maybe I'm not sure how one defines the difference between dress and casual, but many watches I think of as dress watches (Zeneth, IWC, etc.) come on deployants.

For example, is this a sports watch? It comes on a deployant.

: http://www.thewatchquote.com/IWC-Por...ic-No_4091.htm

Originally Posted by Hany

It is for casual/sport watches only. A formal watch should not be on a deployant.

 

[Hany]

Originally Posted by DrZRM

Maybe I'm not sure how one defines the difference between dress and casual, but many watches I think of as dress watches (Zeneth, IWC, etc.) come on deployants.

For example, is this a sports watch? It comes on a deployant.

: http://www.thewatchquote.com/IWC-Por...ic-No_4091.htm
The Portuguese is very casual. So are most Zenith.

But, for example, a tourbillon on a deployant is a faux pas.

 

[Journeyman]

Originally Posted by Hany

The Portuguese is very casual. So are most Zenith.

But, for example, a tourbillon on a deployant is a faux pas.

The number of people likely to realise that you are wearing a watch with a deployant strap/buckle arrangement is even smaller than the number of people who would notice that you were wearing a notch-lapel tuxedo to a formal event (and who would care about it).

I don't want to Cruiser-ize SF with an "anything goes as long as you like it" philosophy, but I do think that some rules are meant to be broken and to be quite frank, I think that "no deployant on a formal watch" is one such rule (leaving aside the vexed discussion of just what is a "formal watch").

 

[dopey]

Originally Posted by Hany

It is for casual/sport watches only. A formal watch should not be on a deployant.

What is the basis for this statement?

 

[fcuknu]

What is the basis for most menswear rules? Its just the way it is.

 

[Pundit]

Harder for the watch to be stolen off your wrist - to the extent such things happen anymore.

 

[haganah]

I see them on ebay for about 10 bucks including shipping. Anywhere to get them cheaper?

I just don't like the idea of replacing the strap every year if I can pay 10 now and increase the useful life.

 

[Hany]

Originally Posted by Journeyman

The number of people likely to realise that you are wearing a watch with a deployant strap/buckle arrangement is even smaller than the number of people who would notice that you were wearing a notch-lapel tuxedo to a formal event (and who would care about it).

I don't want to Cruiser-ize SF with an "anything goes as long as you like it" philosophy, but I do think that some rules are meant to be broken and to be quite frank, I think that "no deployant on a formal watch" is one such rule (leaving aside the vexed discussion of just what is a "formal watch").
At the end of the day you do what you please (at least I hope) but it is a tradition.

Originally Posted by dopey

What is the basis for this statement?
As I said, tradition. But also aesthetics since the deployant adds bulk while dress watches tend to be as thin as possible. Also the concept of a deployant is easy on easy off which tends to make it sporty.
There are probably more reasons but I can't think of any for the moment.