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

121–130 of 140 posts

Re: How Watches Work

#121

Post by desine »

cstoner wrote: post #55
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,…

Seiko's "spring drive" is a pretty cool innovation, though it's not purely mechanical. I think at the very core of the issue is that mechanical watches are really art pieces at this point. Quartz watches are just cheaper and more reliable. So, if you wanting a watch for the pure utility of it all that's what you should be going for.

>Quartz watches are just cheaper and more reliable.

And more accurate. Better in every measurable way, honestly. Which just makes me love mechanicals even more.

Re: How Watches Work

#122

Post by desine »

SilverRed wrote: post #112
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.

At the very least, you other watches will hold a value more than your smartwatch, long term

Re: How Watches Work

#123

Post by emodendroket »

desine wrote: post #106
emodendroket wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't really find it beautiful being 15 minutes late because I haven't adjusted my watch in a while. This is really a big thing that put me off.

In this modern age, you'll often come across synchronized digital clocks. Whether on your computer, phone, workplace, bank, etc. For me, it has become second nature to adjust my watch's time once every few days. I end up comparing my watch vs a clock a couple of times per day, and deciding the difference is great enough to fix, once a week or so (on a cheap, inaccurate Seiko 5, I would expect less frequency with a be…

I suppose it depends what you want out of your watch, but to me having a time I can't trust is frustrating. Even the best automatic watch is less accurate than quartz (which itself can eventually drift too...).

Re: How Watches Work

#124

Post by emodendroket »

yupper32 wrote: post #107
emodendroket wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't really find it beautiful being 15 minutes late because I haven't adjusted my watch in a while. This is really a big thing that put me off.

The watch I have is rated to +-2 seconds a day. It'd take 15 months of not adjusting my watch to be 15min late. That's pretty amazing to me that basically a spring and some gears can be that good at keeping time.

Yeah, I don't deny there is a certain natural fascination to them.

Re: How Watches Work

#125

Post by approxim8ion »

JohnBooty wrote: post #69
approxim8ion wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is funny because Seiko has notoriously terrible quality control, from misaligned bezels and/or chapter rings to dodgy bracelets across their entire lineup, even the more expensive ones. About Orient: they are pretty much poised to take the spot that Seiko has occupied for entry level mechanical watches, as Seiko themselves move further up market. I love the design of their Bambino and some of the OrientStar offe…

It seems to me that the the QC issues are largely cosmetic, but are mostly with the Prospex models (some of their priciest models!) and seem to have intensified in the last few years. I've heard from watch geeks with friends in "the business" that Seiko is aware of the issue thanks to the negative online word-of-mouth these issues have generated, but I don't know how reliable that hearsay is. (Really, though, Seiko w…

> mostly cosmetic

Agreed, but then again much of the point of wearing watches nowadays is cosmetic. Plus, their terrible hollow rolled-link bracelets and press-clasps aren't really cosmetic issues, just poor quality that they haven't bothered upgrading. The movements themselves though seem to still be solid, and they are a huge provider of movements (eg the NH35/36) to several microbrands.

> Seiko is aware of the issue

Yeah, it's weird. They not only seem to be aware of it, but also say they have "hand-checked" units sent out to reviewers or units that are purchased from boutiques if you ask specifically- only for them to have the same issues as always. Not sure what it will take. The Just One More Watch YouTube channel does a ton of Seiko reviews but he's been extremely jaded because of these issues.

Re: How Watches Work

#126

Post by ymolodtsov »

JohnBooty wrote: post #69
approxim8ion wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is funny because Seiko has notoriously terrible quality control, from misaligned bezels and/or chapter rings to dodgy bracelets across their entire lineup, even the more expensive ones. About Orient: they are pretty much poised to take the spot that Seiko has occupied for entry level mechanical watches, as Seiko themselves move further up market. I love the design of their Bambino and some of the OrientStar offe…

It seems to me that the the QC issues are largely cosmetic, but are mostly with the Prospex models (some of their priciest models!) and seem to have intensified in the last few years. I've heard from watch geeks with friends in "the business" that Seiko is aware of the issue thanks to the negative online word-of-mouth these issues have generated, but I don't know how reliable that hearsay is. (Really, though, Seiko w…

At this point is probably anything they produce except Grand Seiko. Not sure why would they choose to ruin their reputation that way. Yes, SKX007 or 009 were cheap, but their Prospex line replacements aren't really.

Re: How Watches Work

#127

Post by ymolodtsov »

desine wrote: post #77
JohnBooty wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I love mechanical watches too, but surely some cheap digital watches stashed in a shielded box would be the more effective post-EMP timekeeping device, right?

Shielding itself is not perfect. Probably enough for the simple circuitry of an analog quartz. But it's not guaranteed. It's a buffer that reduces a wave by a few to a few dozen dB. A EM pulse through even a properly grounded faraday cage will still replicate another smaller wave internally. Just let me collect my tiny mechanical toys, dammit, don't ask questions.

It's OK collecting them but "protection against an EMP" does sound a bit weird as a reason :)

Re: How Watches Work

#128

Post by ymolodtsov »

havelhovel wrote: post #57
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,…

For the most part I agree with you. I think the popular watch companies (Omega, Rolex, etc.) are resting on their laurels, but perhaps in part because that's what their consumers want. I credit Zenith and Seiko with making their more recent advances accessible to wider audiences. However, most innovation in mechanical watches, unfortunately, is currently too expensive or niche for wide diffusion. Check out companies…

They aren't resting, they are proactively building on that legacy they had. In fact, Omega suffered a lot because they tried going too deep with their quartz models.

Re: How Watches Work

#129

Post by ymolodtsov »

JohnBooty wrote: post #63
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,…

but the most amazing mechanical innovation it has is a frustratingly slow, whining seat memory function What do we mean by "lately?" The humble old internal combustion engine has made some really impressive progress in the past several decades. Engines are roughly 2X better now in the categories that matter: power output, fuel efficiency, and expected lifetime. Some of the fuel efficiency gains have of course been ca…

A 1.6 V6 Formula 1 engine with turbo and hybrid components produces around 1000HP.

That's all you need to know about the progress in engines.

Re: How Watches Work

#130

Post by ymolodtsov »

Since I bought my first Apple Watch it's really hard for me to find a reason to buy mechanical watches. They are less useful, less accurate, and this gap is only going to continue. Yes, they are beautiful. But even their straps and bracelets are superior and more comfortable than any leather or steel I experienced.

Imagine if in 10 years Apple Watch would measure your blood glucose and pressure. And what that could do to your health.

And mechanical watches aren't eternal by any means. Servicing a premium watch (recommended every 5 years, 10 years for Rolex) costs about the same as an aluminum Apple Watch.

Post reply on HN