No meanies allowed edition.
This thread is about the appreciation of horology, as well as the micro-engineering and materials engineering that are required to make a fine watch, clock, or other timepiece.
>Required viewing for noobies:
youtube.com
>Strap Guide:
pastebin.com
>Watch essentials 102:
pastebin.com
Previous Thread:
→
Other urls found in this thread:
watchfreeks.com
forums.watchuseek.com
omegaforums.net
observatory.watch
watchguy.co.uk
twitter.com
>design and movement of the Omega SM 300 MC
>fit & finish of a Grand Seiko
>bezel action and scratch resistance of a Damasko
>value retention of a Rolex
IS THIS TOO MUCH TO ASK
ANSWER ME YOU FUCKING FAGGOTS:
Serious question
how "fake" is a rep cartier tank solo if it has the same exact quartz movement, the same finishing and is probably made in the same factory as the real thing?
Why would I pay 3k for a real one when I can get literally the same watch for like 200 bucks
That's a nice looking Citizen. I live how austere the design is.
> that'll be $99999.99
> with a fugly strap
Are Harding watches any good? Should I get this?
first for cute watches
Citizen is plagued by mall-watch designs but their 70's stuff is great. Current Citizen is amazing movements in ugly watches.
...
no idea but pilot watches is a very common design over all brands, orient has one for about 200$
Oh I know, I was just taken with that one because it was especially austere, and that's what I love about Seiko's Grammar of Design design language.
Any good watch with usb flash drive or a little knife for packages?
Generally fine for the money, if you like it it's good.
I like the way that one looks in the picture but it's a big boi
> case width 46
> lug to lug 54.5
> 13.5mm tall
No thanks. I'll bet it's fugly af on a normal humans arm. $99 seems fair. Massdrop is great for headphones, dunno about watches in general.
For that user that was looking for more watch reading : pretty decent history of the early quartz days, including the question for thin watches, which was at the time even more important to many consumers and manufacturers than accuracy. Gets a little less good towards the end.
Because it's not a cartier, 99% of cartier is overpriced lifestyle shit (this especially applies to the quartz line) and so the only reason to get a cartier is so you can say you have a cartier, which you can't with that.
The question I would pose to you is why you would spend $200 for chink shit when you could get a vintage Seiko seahorse or similar for that?
Does any watch have a WuS owner's thread as huge as this:
forums.watchuseek.com
?
254 pages
Is this watch a future classic?
If the bezel was chamfered it would be perfect, but it just looks too tall from the wrist.
Thank you user I am working through all the articles slowly in my free time.
I'm faggoty looking already. I'd have a dick in my face by dinner time if I wore that
>which you can't with that.
You can though
There are literal 1:1 replicas of the tank solo and the really faggot looking one with the integrated crown.
They literally use the same rhonda movement, case, dial etc
I doubt it in light of the continuing issues with Omega's implementation of the co-axial escapement, I also personally don't think the exterior finishing is good enough for the price point on that watch and would take an in-house Tudor Pelagos over it every day of the week and twice on Sunday.
omegaforums.net
>it just looks too tall from the wrist.
I was afraid of the height too, but I tried it out at an AD yesterday, and it looked absolutely fine height-wise.
See pic. The bottom of the watch nestled nicely into my wrist, and visually the height of the watch off the wrist only began at the bottom of that brushed middle section.
The Pelagos is about the same height, but it's a LOT taller visually because the entire side is basically a big flat surface from top to bottom.
>continuing issues with Omega's implementation of the co-axial escapement
Not sure if those concerns still apply with the 8500-8400 coaxials, which were made from the ground up.
>I would take an in-house Tudor Pelagos over it
I used to think the same thing, until I tried both watches in person.
If you read through that thread, it's clear Archer would have said so if the 8500 did not require the same use of microscopic amounts of oil on the escapement teeth for cushioning that the 2500 did, and therefore it's subject to the same problem of being a complete white elephant.
The Co-axial movements are excellent and the fact that you need a scope to apply oil to it every 5 years is not a huge deal. Also the oiling is just what should be done for optimal performance.
"So clearly these can wear either from lack of service (like any watch can) or from improper oiling. As that article states, the watch will run fine even if oiled improperly, or not oiled at all"
The fact that so many people in these threads straight hate on Omega and their movements boggles my mind. And the whole "finishing is worse than a sarb" is a huge meme and complete and utter bullshit.
I have personally never commented on this but i am totally fucking sick of it. I am not a "swatch" male and own no swiss watches.
>it's clear Archer would have said so if the 8500 did not require the same use of microscopic amounts of oil
How so?
Someone created a very cool website with every single watch submitted for consideration as a chronometer to neuchatel from 45 to 67. Also includes the testing procedure in French - is the polyglot from a few threads ago around and willing to translate it?
observatory.watch
watchguy.co.uk
>muh 8500 cuck-axial chronometer
>ceases to work like a chronometer after one and a half years, needing a service already
Because the 8500 was mentioned more than once in that thread and Al Archer is not the type who would not have noted if the same principles he explained for the 2500 with respect to escapement oiling did not also apply to the 8500 as it would have been a pretty significant fact to the conversation bring had in that thread.
The huge deal is that having to oil the escapement with microscopically precise amounts of oil turns Omega's implementation into a white elephant. It has shorter service intervals, is more sensitive to promote servicing, is harder to service, is easier to damage whole servicing and is easier to screw up servicing, all while being more likely to experience significant damage if not serviced promptly or currently than a traditional Swiss lever escapement would be.
As for the finishing, as an owner of a Seiko SDGM003 and having handled an Aqua Terra 2500 up close and personal, I would say that at least that generation of Omega's had exterior finishing noticeably inferior to Brightz tier Seikos. What I've seen in display cases in jewelers of Omega's newer stuff aside from the PO hasn't given me much confidence that things have improved that much.
If you're referring to the polyglot who did the pronunciations for the watch maker names a few days ago, I am he.
I also happen to be a pro translator and conference interpreter with 10 years of professional experience.
I'd be willing to translate that "règlement", but it's a solid 18 pages of relatively technical text, and I don't do SHIT PHOR PHREE PHUCKERS.
If there's some kind of crypto whale here who's interested in a full professional translation, I'd be willing to do this.
>Because the 8500 was mentioned more than once in that thread and Al Archer is not the type who would not have noted if the same principles he explained for the 2500 with respect to escapement oiling did not also apply to the 8500 as it would have been a pretty significant fact to the conversation bring had in that thread.
For all we know he never even saw an 8500 in the flesh.
I'd argue the opposite: if he did know anything about the oiling requirements for the 8500, he would've explicitly stated it after all the mentions of the 8500.
The fact that he kept mum proves that he doesn't have a clue.
What kind of price range are you thinking, out of curiosity? I assume too much for me but you never know.
I'm gonna post some digital watches from my "collection". Maybe some of you will find it interesting.
This is almost as bad as the anti seiko poster
You use whatever means necessary to twist reality to fit your narrative. You use mostly anecdotal evidence like i saw one in person the finishing is inferior to this other thing i saw in person but i have never finished a metal object in my life. One watch was off after 1.5 years with an unknown service like so the 8500 is a shit movement.
Fuck off
>For all we know he never even saw an 8500 in the flesh.
>I'd argue the opposite: if he did know anything about the oiling requirements for the 8500, he would've explicitly stated it after all the mentions of the 8500.
>The fact that he kept mum proves that he doesn't have a clue.
Yes, I'm sure the 8500 and whether or not it had any different servicing requirements than the 2500 wouldn't have been mentioned when Al Archer when to Omega to receive specific co-axial movement servicing training directly from Omega to allow him to be one of the only independent watchmakers in the world certified by Omega to do co-axials.
Right, it would definitely have been better to make assertions without any evidence whatsoever.
Some are without batteries.
A typical page of average text is about 40 Euros per page, a bit more if it's technical so 50 Euros pp.
It gets a lot worse if the deadline's tight.
I just bought a house and I'm going through a really busy period atm, I'm translating as we speak and I'll be busy until around 9-10pm as usual. I honestly do not have the time to do something like this for free, or even for a substandard fee.
If you can find an interested crypto whale, I'd be willing to do this as a priority over my ongoing deadlines.
...
>Yes, I'm sure the 8500 and whether or not it had any different servicing requirements than the 2500 wouldn't have been mentioned when Al Archer when to Omega to receive specific co-axial movement servicing training directly from Omega to allow him to be one of the only independent watchmakers in the world certified by Omega to do co-axials.
Again, if he actually knew anything about the 8500 why not simply say so?
How is an article written by an actual watchmaker on servicing an actual 8500, with timegrapher data and high-res photographs ANECDOTAL EVIDENCE, you fucking moron? Are you actually autistic or retarded?
watchguy.co.uk
That's pretty nice, user.
Meant for
>ceases to work like a chronometer after one and a half years
Except the article explicitly states the watch only gains 4-5 seconds a day, which is under COSC spec, and matches Rolex and Grand Seiko spec.
See
I unfortunately don't have the original strap for this one, but i think the aftermarket Saiko strap looks pretty doink.
this one's really cool - does it still work?
where did you get it also, and how much did it cost?
All of omegas coaxial movements have had known and well documented issues. Their coaxial line of movements has been a joke thus far and shouldnt be considered by anyone who wants a reliable watch. There is a reason only one Independent man who is certified to work on them.
Omega has made some of the best and most affordable movements ever, but this is nothing more than a bad meme.
What is /wt/ general consensus on the Hamilton Khaki? I'm thinking on nabbing one soon.
>fingerprint
Lmao, some hack opened up that watch already, 100%.
Even Chinkshit watches are assembled using those little fingertip condoms.
whoa whats this? looks sick.
dont get any of the ones with their newer modified movments. Swatch is full of money hungry morons who have made modified low end movements for hamilton and tissot that are essentially impossible to reasonably service. If anything goes wrong, practically the full mkvement needs to be thrown out and replaced. Not my cup if tea.
>goes from spot on to +5 in a year
>I-i-t's fine!!! nothing to see!
>Al Archer went to Omega to receive specific co-axial movement servicing training directly from Omega to allow him to be one of the only independent watchmakers in the world certified by Omega to do co-axials.
Lol, he describes being in a class with 5 other trainees, and this was years ago.
There are hundreds if not thousands of independents like him trained for servicing coaxials.
>goes from spot on to +5 in a year
Who said it was ever "spot on"?
Yeah it works. I got mine on ebay for like 50$.
Just check for different spellings.
Elektronika 5
Electronika 5
Electronica 5
Элeктpoникa 5
>essentially impossible to reasonably service
whoa i wanted one of those watches, could you post some reviews of the movement or something so we can see what they did?
give me 4 (you)s or i will derail this thread like the last one
This one used to be my "ruff work" watch. Unfortunately the screen got fucked up way to hard over the years.
>Lol, he describes being in a class with 5 other trainees, and this was years ago.
>There are hundreds if not thousands of independents like him trained for servicing coaxials.
See, much better to just make claims without any evidence whatsoever.
some idiot on the last thread said that the citizen nighthawk was gonna be $150 over black friday
Any conformation of this? Would it be amazon?
>All of omegas coaxial movements have had known and well documented issues.
Source that the 8500 is among them?
Also, you should read watchguy.co.uk
The guy is extremely positive about the movement, other than some debris and fingerprints which were undoubtedly the work of an amateur opening up the thing.
What?
probably my favorite
...
this 100x. ive had the displeasure of working on the h-10 and powermatic 80. theyre hunks of JUNK.
i cant find anything right now but can attest from personal experience that they have switched out a few of the peices of a low grade eta 2824-2 to save money on manufacturing it. They regulate it better out of the box but the way they change up the balance to get an 80 hr power reserve makes it horrible to work with.
The 2824-2 version is a bit older and more expensive but absolutely worth the cost over the h-10.
>my hobby is about buying expensive things
they use nonmetal parts because its easier to mold them than machine metal bits. i dont know the specifics of it but i have returned an h-10. A full service on an h-10 is ~200 from hamilton and about the same from anyone else. The parts are imlossible to source from what i have heard.
It's all apart of swatchs scheme to keep in all in house.
>ctrl+f
>no mvmt
bad list
yeah the pallet fork is plastic and the mainspring is some weird ass material they wont tell anyone. You cant source them unless you have a specific swatch account. Super annoying shit.
They have made a strange mixture of an 2824-2 and a system51 which the system 51 is disposable and the 2824-2 wasnt designed to be. The regulation on the h-10 is done by laser adjustment. They dont even have a proper regulator because it isnt designed to be regulated.
i googled a bit and it looks like they want to compete with the Asian market making movements cheaper to manufacture, apart from that bit rate and reserve change it looks like they don't have any type of finish, low grade Seikos with open back look trash now hamiltons to.
the low end modified 2824's are a big cash grab. Google their plastic parts in the poswermatic80 and h10. Really a shame.
If you want a h10 serviced you need to find a watchmaker with a swatch account open or send it in to hamilton for an ass raping.
>crtl f
>no Credor
lets change that.
...
Just to inform anyone who doesn't already know: Credor is basically two watch companies under one name. The high-end stuff is produced by the Micro-Art Studio that basically operates as an ultra high-end independent studio while the production Credor's are produced separately in Seiko's factories and aimed at the domestic market. The two only share a name are are otherwise almost totally separate. The Micro-Art Studio also makes the Grand Seiko 8-day, incidentally.
Interesting pieces user.
Why no casio though? I think every digital watch collection needs a f-91w or a158.
I mean he doesn't really need a resin Casio when he has a steel cased Seiko.
Deciding on a proper everyday watch and because ROLEX is a bit more expensive and a bit pompous I was thinking about the Sinn 104 or Tudor BB Red.
They are both on the big side though, so maybe the BB36 might be better (apart from the imo significantly worse movement), I have 19cm wrists and wear a suit only once or twice a month.
Any input on this, anything else I should try on when I'm in town on Friday?
I'd definitely go for the in-house Tudor over the Sinn, but would seriously consider saving up for a 114270 36mm Rolex Explorer instead of a BB36.
Hmm... I'm in a bit of pinch. I would like to upgrade from my beater SKX009 into a better diver watch and I have a budget of max $1,500.
The problem is Seiko's newest watches are monstrously huge, tried the SBDX001 at a Seiko boutique and it's too big on my wrist. I don't know what I should look for, an Oris maybe?
i have an in house BB in house and its a bit hunky. still fits my shirts tho.
Id absolutely go for tudor >>>>>>sinn any day.
The older Bb red may be perfect for you since its a fair bit smaller due to the ETA movement but it has the downsides of power reserve and resale value.
I really like the day/date feature on the Sinn so if I went Rolex I'd go Datejust probably, so at least I have a date window. I like the Explorer and don't even mind the price jump but at this point in my life I think it would come across as weird walking around with a Rolex. So "stealth wealth" would be nicer except that I'm not looking for a high end watch.
Also once I cave in and say ok I'll spend a bit more for the Explorer, I'll go to the Store and exit with a Submariner because if you spend the money why not go all in.
For buying new, 2-3k is a pretty awkward spot I realize.
yeah apart from the tall sides and slightly less good looking dial, the in-house is a much better buy imo.
you seen the BB steel? its got the date window if youre into that
Neat, I haven't actually seen that. Looks pretty good, I'll have to see it in person though. I think by far the best overall Tudor is the blue Pelagos. They pretty much nailed everything with it and don't make the "mistakes" of the Black Bay (round markers, no date) while offering a great movement, clasp and helium escape valve. It's a bit too toolish for me though.
>Looks pretty good
Until you see it from the side.
Slab sides tall enough to keep out Mexicans.
Isn't the normal version a lot thinner than the chronograh, around the same as the Submariner?
About to pull the trigger on this, I don't have a dive watch yet and these look good to me.
How's 4r35?
The SKX thread is 860 pages, MM300 528, Sumo 547.
I thought so too, but apparently both versions are 14.8~9mm in thickness.
Why would they use the same name?
For whatever reason the BB with the new in-house movement sits 2mm taller, so the chrono sits at 14.9mm tall, even the standard watch is 14.8mm
Pelgaos is more manageable at 14.4mm tall.
What doesn't help is that the BB Chrono is so empty on the side, it really shows off it's height, and wears so large because of it
How about for the Amphibia?
No idea, I was reading /f21/ at the time and just looked at the biggest threads on the first page.
why would anyone do this??? you could but a real watch with the money wasted
Hey man why would someone buy 15 old seiko's? People just like different shit
those are real watches do, also having one single watch even do its very expensive and well machined with a nice movement finish is very boring.
Are the cheapest GPUs the best ?
The amount of money tied up in all that slav trash is easily enough to buy quite a few decent watches.
This is the insanity of commies. Nasty shit right there.
That 710 with the red bezel is pretty nice. Shit maybe I'll pick a cheap eBay one up for mine.
excuse me sir, but can you even mine buttcoin with your watches???
christians:1
atheists:0
Its not like people enjoy different things or anything like that.
That isn't really a good analogy, a 1080 is objectively better than a voodoo2 in almost every way. Watches have aesthetics and many different "benchmarks" that are not all one size fits all.
>is dumb
I bet you hate the Poljot Sturmanskie too.