Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How Watches Work

fratellowatches.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 140 posts

Re: How Watches Work

#111

Post by psychomugs »

desine wrote: post #25

I recently fell into this rabbit hole. I bought a cheap automatic watch - a Seiko 5, for both practical reasons and otherwise (will work after an EMP attack/solar event, but it's also just cool as hell mechanical engineering using 200 year old technology). Then I started putting watch repair youtube videos on in the background as I did chores or wrote code. Then I started actually watching the watch repair videos. La…

Really interesting to hear that last bit about the certification. As a high school I joked around with the idea of being a watch maker despite not caring about watches at all but just being interested in the mechanics, but a few mechanical engineering degrees and a burgeoning photography hobby later I'd realistically consider learning camera repair.

Re: How Watches Work

#112

Post by SilverRed »

CydeWeys wrote: post #6

I got pretty into watches during the pandemic. It's definitely one of those expensive hobbies.

I started to get in to watches but then I got an Apple watch for fitness tracking and I just never wear any of my other watches because I love having the features of the AW more. Feels kind of like I wasted my money on the other watches.

Re: How Watches Work

#113

Post by SilverRed »

tintt wrote: post #50

Mechanical watch is a mesmerizing device. Makes you wonder though, why there was so little progress around mechanical technology (not only watch specific) lately? My car can talk to me, steer, retain speed by following other vehicles, but the most amazing mechanical innovation it has is a frustratingly slow, whining seat memory function. It’s not only boring, it also relies on a century old tech. Watch are the same,…

Because a mechanical watch is inferior old technology and exists for non practical reasons. A quartz watch is better in essentially every single way. It is the technical progression beyond a mechanical watch.

I'm not saying the mechanical watch is bad because obviously people like them for historical and emotional reasons but there is basically no reason practically to use them.

Re: How Watches Work

#114

Post by desine »

SilverRed wrote: post #110
bee_rider wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you are the only one with a working watch, is your time definitionally correct, off by a bit, or completely incorrect?

Especially as mechanical watches drift a few minutes each day.

It must be exceptionally bad mechanical watches you are used to

Re: How Watches Work

#115

Post by psychomugs »

xcambar wrote: post #62
emodendroket wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be fair automatic watches drift substantially over time.

Yes, they do, and that is a very poetic thing to consider. On one hand, you can marvel at how little they drift during a single power reserve. Could be seconds, which is barely noticeable in everyday life. On the other hand, some others (Seiko 5...) can drift minutes in a single reserve... And so what? In a day and age when we measure everything with maniac precision even during a random person's day, it's beautiful…

https://www.moma.org/collection/works/81074

'Initially set to the same time, these identical battery-powered clocks will eventually fall out of sync, or may stop entirely. Conceived shortly after Gonzalez-Torres’s partner was diagnosed with AIDS, this work uses everyday objects to track and measure the inevitable flow of time. When one of the clocks stops or breaks, they can both be reset, thereby resuming perfect synchrony. In 1991, Gonzalez-Torres reflected, "Time is something that scares me. . . or used to. This piece I made with the two clocks was the scariest thing I have ever done. I wanted to face it. I wanted those two clocks right in front of me, ticking."'

Re: How Watches Work

#116

Post by SilverRed »

joshocar wrote: post #20
martinkraft wrote: post #9

For those who are interested in superior technology, start reading about quartz movements and the piezoelectric effect. Citizen Watch Company recently release the most accurate quartz watch ever, accurate to 1 second per year . Contrast that to the mechanical watches that Rolex—one of the best mechanical manufacturers—produces and the best they can do is an accuracy of about 1 second per day . Hundreds of times less…

> Mechanical watches are an emotional rather than rational technology, and hey if that's what you're into: mechanical watches and horse-drawn-buggies and gas lanterns then that's totally cool. You could say the same thing about people who are into classic muscle cars. "Hey, if like driving around in a model T and braking down every 5 miles then that's totally cool." Everything is emotional. Does anyone really need a…

>Does anyone really need a GPS synced watch

Need? Maybe not. Want? Yes. I find it very useful when my watch can switch times as I cross timezone borders or when daylight savings time switches.

Re: How Watches Work

#117

Post by SilverRed »

desine wrote: post #114
SilverRed wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Especially as mechanical watches drift a few minutes each day.

It must be exceptionally bad mechanical watches you are used to

The drift is affected by movement right? I imagine sitting on a table they are much more accurate than swinging around on an arm all day.

Re: How Watches Work

#118

Post by psychomugs »

joshocar wrote: post #27
throwaway210222 wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Everything is emotional. No it really isn't. HN is not the correct forum for this sweeping psychobabble. > Does anyone really need a GPS synced watch that is accurate to the nanosecond? No, people want it because they think it's cool. No, we buy these accurate watches because a) there are only a few such watch makers, and b) they all use an even smaller pool of GPS chips. And its these chips that have the precision…

> And its these chips that have the precision that bugs you so. I never said it bugs me. I own a Citizen solar powered watch. I also own a mechanical watch and a smart watch. I would probably by a GPS synced watch. I stand by my comment that everything is emotional.

I stand by it too, as someone who drives a manual car that's older than I am and uses a film camera that's older than either of my parents. There's no point if it's not emotional.

Re: How Watches Work

#119

Post by Erik816 »

SilverRed wrote: post #110
bee_rider wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you are the only one with a working watch, is your time definitionally correct, off by a bit, or completely incorrect?

Especially as mechanical watches drift a few minutes each day.

A few seconds each day, unless you have a really bad or poorly maintained watch.

Re: How Watches Work

#120

Post by desine »

SilverRed wrote: post #117
desine wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It must be exceptionally bad mechanical watches you are used to

The drift is affected by movement right? I imagine sitting on a table they are much more accurate than swinging around on an arm all day.

Perhaps, but they're engineered to minimize such effect. I noted in another comment I started with a Seiko 5, one of the cheapest, most inaccurate movements (being the name for the timekeeping mechanism itself), and I see multi-minute differences after weeks without adjustment. I'm not a daily runner or anything (in which I'd use my smartwatch anyways), but my job does involve a fair amount of getting up and walking between places, as well as the temperature shift of controlled environment rooms for computers and SoCal outdoor heat.
Post reply on HN