Does anyone "Test" watches?

Transcription

Testing watches
Page 1 of 3
'Poor Man's' Watch Forum - Foro de Relojes Para el 'Hombre Pobre' - Horlogeforum voor de 'Arme Man'
Posted By: Lorena Torres <mailto:ena1m@yahoo.com?subject=Does anyone 'Test' watches? Post contains Picture(s)>
Date: Friday, 31 March 2006, at 11:56 a.m.
I am not aware of any magazine, forum, site or body that carries out comparison tests on watches. These sort of tests are carried out on cars, hi-fi and computers and I think it would be beneficial for the consumer to view something similar on watches.
The ETA 2824 Automatic movements is used on Tag-Heuer 4000, Tudor Prince Date Submariner, Glycine Combat, Ball Engineer, Doxa Sub 300T and many more.
Retail prices can vary as much as £700 from one model to the other (why?).
At £375.00 – the Grovana Corel Reef II comes with automatic ETA 2824, sapphire crystal and 300m water resistant. In my opinion it is now the best value for money diver watch on the market – but – how, by whom, where could THESE (others) watches be
tested?
Messages In This Thread
(views: 290)
Lorena Torres -- Friday, 31 March 2006, at 11:56 a.m.
(views: 35)
Money talks and bull $hit walks !
Fernando Campos -- Tuesday, 4 April 2006, at 7:33 p.m.
A flawed concept.... >> (views: 170)
Matt V. -- Friday, 31 March 2006, at 3:40 p.m.
"the best value for money diver watch on the market".
What defines "the best value"?
Is it the highest grade of accuracy? The largest WR rating? The best polish? The grade of steel? Come on, value in a watch means something different for each and everyone of us because we have different priorities.
"for money"?
Whose money? You're not paying for my watch, so it is my money. My budget, and as I have to justify discretionary spending against other important things such as putting food on the table, making the mortgage payments etc., my budget at any given time can
look very differently.
So the best value in a diver watch for my personal taste and preference under $100, under $200, under $300 and so forth may be very different things at different times. Personally, I believe Seiko's are an incredible value and I cherish my Citizen Aqualand very
much as well. There might be others that will agree to my Seiko and Citizen comment.
Magazines do test watches and compare them. They do not however make a decision which one is the "best" (as a) that is a very personal choice involving taste as much as measurable facts and b) the brands they evaluate pay for the ads that pay their salaries)
Unlike Stereo/Hi-Fi equipment that can be described by physical characteristics and measurable facts documenting their performance, watches have the element of design and as such will never be described, categorized and rated on physical attributes alone. Often,
they are more like jewelry or art.
Your comment on the movement is flawed too. Yes, you can find an ETA 2824 in a $180 Sandoz and in a $2,000 Breitling and in lots of other watches too. That doesn't nescessarily mean they are the same grade, have the same configuration or have been regulated
the same way.
Sort of like buying a car, a house and many other items: there is a base version for price x and there are options, which when added, often painfully deflate your wallet.
But I guess your post really was about Grovana again.
On 3/17, you introduced them to us for the first time. ("GROVANA - NEW Diver - any comments, please").
On 3/21, you felt that it was "delivering all I need for the price" ("GROVANA Diver - my choice").
Yet, every time you only post their stock photographs. Did you buy one yet (are you intending to)? Do you have some of your own photos, reports on purchasing experience, after sale service, availability of spare parts? Know any actual owners of Grovana watches
and reports/reviews from them?
So who is Grovana?
Their website claims they were founded in 1924. Furthermore, they have a staff of 40 people. Based on cost of doing business, they should have annual revenues in the high single million dollars, if not double digits. This means there should be a well established
reseller network, yet in spite of their claim of "selling in 5 continents and over 100 countries" I have not been able to find a brick and mortar dealer actually carrying this brand. I wasn't successful finding older or vintage pieces with their brand name on it either.
Strange, wouldn't you agree?
Wouldn't such and old and established brand show up in industry publications such as the wristwatch annual? Oops...
Why would they just "pop up" recently?
Now what intrigues me is the fact that Steinhart uses some of the same photographs on their site (cut & paste) and the specs for Steinhart/Robert and Grovana seem identical. Can you explain the relationship between them?
Anyway, I believe for $651 there are other choices out there that don't try to copy a wellknown design to the "t".
How about this one, about 17% less than the Grovana, sapphire front and back, top grade ETA 2824-2, decorated and regulated, solid end links, solid deployant, milled diver extension, from a real company that has been around, is known for quality and service and
has lots of "real" satisfied customers and testimonials.
You can find their watches pre-owned and you can find their early pieces, so they didn't just "pop up" using marketing fluff.
Cheers
Matt
mhtml:file://G:\mcbroom_biz\PMWF\Testing_watches-PMWF-Lorena_Torres.mht
8/15/2009
Testing watches
Page 2 of 3
A Marcello C - representative? - or too many false claims? (views: 123)
Lorena Torres -- Tuesday, 4 April 2006, at 3:54 p.m.
I am not going to look back at any of your previous listings but I can safely guess, that you are connected with Marcello C – hence the nice pictures too.
Let me first of all point out that, having come across the Grovana diver watch, I am now questioning other brands and my curiosity is to question which watch is valid and which is not thanks to price and, of course, other features.
I may also point out that some of your statements are somewhat immature.
Perhaps I should have formulated the original question in a more complex manner. You mention – best polish, WR ratings, grade of accuracy – all of which are pretty trivial points.
Important points. above, to compare watches – but not essential.
If we have 5 watches, looking all the same (take your Marcello C and the Grovana – included, for example) – what will anyone look for to make a comparison?
Sharp edges comes to mind. This will show an accurate finish to the workmanship. Sapphire crystal? Which type? How thick? Anti-reflective or not?
Steel? Which type? 316L or 316T or just an alloy? Gasket, screw down back plate, screw down crown and so on.
We know that the movement on both watches is the same, hence there is no point to compare them. Price is almost identical – does it mean that the Marcello C is better value for money? What about that one is made in Switzerland and the other is USA –
does that count for something or not? And what about the other 3 brands that have the same features but they cost almost double the Marcello C – are they better watches?
Someone's money and budget are very much a private decision, but one that should be aided. However, comparison can be made on watches like they are made on other products. It is my opinion that for a Swiss diver watch, the Grovana is the best value for
money watch but, so far, NO ONE has come back and said – “No, it is not because.........
“”Often, they are more like jewelry or art””. – As much as we may like Marcello C, Grovana, Ball, Oris, Omega and other divers’ watches, to say that these are more like art, is a bit of an over statement.
“”Your comment on the movement is flawed too. Yes, you can find an ETA 2824 in a $180 Sandoz and in a $2,000 Breitling and in lots of other watches too. That doesn't nescessarily mean they are the same grade, have the same configuration or have been
regulated the same way. Sort of like buying a car, a house and many other items: there is a base version for price x and there are options, which when added, often painfully deflate your wallet.”” Yes you are right – but there are magazines that will tell me
more about a car specifications and similar models are compared. At the end it will be my choice to see which will be the best car for me and I don't believe for a minute that a $2,000 Breitling with or without COSC certificate is worth $2,000
“”Did you buy one yet (are you intending to)? Do you have some of your own photos, reports on purchasing experience, after sale service, availability of spare parts? Know any actual owners of Grovana watches and reports/reviews from them?”” Well – the
answer to all of this – in fact – is NO! This is why I am here and this is why I am asking other peoples opinions. It is not that I am afraid to spend £375.00 on a watch but – should I perhaps buy the Marcello C? You mention – who is Grovana? (but something
at least is listed on the Internet for this brand). I could also say – who is Marcello C (and no much information is actually available)
It seems that your typical male high dosage of testosterones has guided you to write in anger forgetting that this is a forum where information is shared and notes are exchanged. To add to confusion you have mentioned Steinhart watches for which, thanks to
you and thanks to this forum, I didn’t know they even existed.
Now that the diver “look alike saga” goes on – you may agree with me that some proper professional comparison should be drawn by a few experts to tell us which watch is better than another even if we just stop with Marcello C, Grovana and Steinhart.
One other question here is – why is Steinhart shown in US (only), saying is Swiss and does not come up at this Swiss site http://www.wlw.ch/ - and it comes up only as registered in 2005?
It is easy for anyone to make all sort of claims, but this is why there should be an independent adjudicator telling us – who is who? And – what is what?
If you don't own one, or even know somebody who does - how do you come to the statement that this is the (views: 49)
Micha -- Tuesday, 4 April 2006, at 4:08 p.m.
"best value for money" diver out there?
Re: If you don't own one, or even know somebody who does - how do you come to the statement that this is the (views: 55)
I am sure I said - It must be the best......
In any case, I was comparing it to what I know and not the Marcello C and now the Steinhart watches.
HENCE !! the question - the "original question"
!?
Shouldn't there be soeone telling us what is good or bad out there??
Point 2 - Shouldn't someone really say ......... I think you are wrong because
1)
2)
3)
and so on
It seems that everyone goes in circle. At the moment, I am only compared with TWO USA brands against one Swiss - and we still don't know which one is the best.
Do you really want to know which one is best? I don't (views: 34)
There is no such thing is THE best watch. Why? because everybody has different specs for THE best watch. If there were something like THE best watch, we wouldn't have anything to do here
I want to know which watches are crap
before buying them. I can find out about that here, in other fora or in watch mags.
This is an excellent point! (views: 23)
Jeffc -- Tuesday, 4 April 2006, at 4:49 p.m.
Id rather know the other end!
Re: Do you really want to know which one is best? I do (views: 26)
I don't think it is really difficult to grasp.
We are not talking of a Ulysse Nardin Freak
a Breguette Tourbillon Squelette
or a Jaeger Master Gyrotorbillon
We are talking of three brands - Marcello C, Grovana and Steinhart - where, all three make a very similar watch. And if we want to make it even to a more interesting argument, we ought to include the Tudor Date Hydronaut.
Design - in this case - has nothing to do with it
The finish on the steel should not even come into consideration. It is all down to materials used and finish on the watch.
So far, it seems that the Steinhard is best value on the fact that is the cheapest but unless anyone has tested them - even at $200 it could be just a waste of money.
Ok, I give up - I have a faint idea of what your point is, but frankly those features aren't really important to me (views: 21)
As long as it's stainless steel, doesn't rust and the finish is good, I'm fine BTW there isn't a better steel for watches then the nitrogen hardened cases of
Just my €0.02
Best is a very subjective term (views: 19)
beshannon -- Tuesday, 4 April 2006, at 4:53 p.m.
My brother in law like Toyota and Breitling and I like Honda and Omega.
Who has the best?
Both of us as we each like our choices and respect each others.
Re: Best is a very subjective term (views: 27)
Yes, you are right but wouldn't you feel better if you find out that your Omega is better built than any Breitling? Omega uses better materials, the watch is more reliable and, is also cheaper?
The point that many have missed is that we are talking of watches that are similar in design, components and movements.
I am not comparing a Speedmaster with a Chronomat (although, perhaps, we should). In my mind, due to past experience, I wouldn't touch the Chronomat even if it was a gift - due to many negative experiences.
To your point the answer is no (views: 22)
Your quote "Yes, you are right but wouldn't you feel better if you find out that your Omega is better built than any Breitling? Omega uses better materials, the watch is more reliable and, is also cheaper?"
I based my choice on all the best information I had and I am happy with it. What I find out after the fact does not matter to me, I made a choice that satisfies me.
Buy all 3, write a review and then we will know.
(views: 12)
Re: Buy all 3, write a review and then we will know. (views: 38)
Good point - but I am no expert and I have no equipment to do it.
In any case - aren't the Forum supposed to advise...........??
I always love it when people come in with a haughty attitude and snide manner>>> (views: 43)
TMK -- Tuesday, 4 April 2006, at 4:45 p.m.
this forum does advise, to the best of our abilities; moreso than most...what you are requesting is not advice, you are requesting that a private individual buy all three or four watches and then do an "expert" technical review to
satisfy your curiosity...no one here is going to do that for you and you might as well take a deep breath and jump down off the horse.
If you are so interested in a comparison, buy the watches and do your own...it will be well received so long as it is well done and accurate. If you prefer, buy all the watches you want reviewed and send them to me...I will wear
them for a year or so and then do the in-depth review you want.
Regards, Ted
Re: I always love it (views: 37)
mmmm............ too many issues all over the place.
I never said I wanted anyone to buy all three and give me a report
The original statement was " It would be nice if a magazine - for example - will give reports out"
In my opinion and based on UK experience, the Grovana seemed to me as a very good choice. Now we have Marcello C and Steinhart - that probably don't even exist in UK - to compare with.
Simple answer like - the Steinhard is good value because - apart for all the Grovana features, it also comes with ........?? but no one has said anyting like that
yes but none of us are experts... (views: 23)
And few of us have the equipment. I think you answered you own question.. NO, there isnt one place to go for watch tests. (that i know of). Most of us rely on comments from other collectors, reviews written by collectors, or
just plain old lust factor.
Oh and by the way... (views: 25)
The 2 times i have gotten watches (i wont mention brands) that were the "darlings of the month", and or heavily reviewed/tested... I sold them both.
For me, its way more about company reputation, comments (but not necessiarly reviews) of owners, and design points that I like.
Fair comments (views: 20)
but shouldn't the "community" push for some reports? I, for one, would subscribe to a magazine that is able to tell me why the Tudor Prince Date Hydronaut will cost me $1000 more than the similar Steihart Ocean
Sure, let's all put in $100 a month to pay an expert to tell you what watch to buy.
(views: 6)
Evan -- Tuesday, 4 April 2006, at 5:24 p.m.
Where can I apply for that job?
(views: 4)
Sorry, job taken, according to my expert opinion, this is the best watch
(views: 36)
Evan -- Tuesday, 4 April 2006, at 5:44 p.m.
The Zenith Defy Xtreme Open for "Extreme Condition Use"
Here is my expert conclusion: This watch was designed for extreme use to 1000m and the bezel has nice stars on it, what other watch has nice stars on the bezel? Furthermore, what other watch
has a rectal thermometer? The fourth hand is a temperature indicator and all you have to do is stick this watch up the @ss and it will give an accurate reading, afterall, this is a watch designed for
xtreme conditions. The specially designed cooling fans will start cooling the watch while enduring the xtreme temperatures of the rectum.
Therefore, according to this expert's opinion, go and buy this watch......now send that $100 to my address which I will forward to all of you in your emails.
That disqualifies you
(views: 4)
Well, we did, but apparently you didn't want to hear... (views: 26)
...the concense was that we would rather spend our $$$ on the MarcelloC because it's a known quality Besides, we're just a bunch of people who enjoy discussing watches, we're not a professional hotline
Well said, though not a Marcello C fan, I agreed with most of what you said.
(views: 29)
SJACKAL -- Saturday, 1 April 2006, at 2:21 p.m.
I agree 100%. (views: 40)
Tom P -- Saturday, 1 April 2006, at 11:55 a.m.
I think that we often overlook the cost of the design process in a watch's "value." Originality of the design should count for something -- watches that simply copy a well-known design (like a "submariner") don't give you any "value" through design
originality while a Seiko
gives a unique design for 1/5th the cost of this "Grovana" watch. I think Marcello-C is a little better than the ubiquitous "submariner" market as their dials and cases are different -- they "beef up" the sub design with the
Tridente (man, I wish Rolex would make a case that big!) and even Invicta, which Torres often states she despises, does make somewhat original designs (albeit often quite repulsive, but original nonetheless - though I do like the Subaqua models).
One might make the case that Hamilton makes the best value in swiss divers because they use ETA2824 movements and feature original designs at the same price point of a Grovana.
If "Grovana" wants to become a leader in watches, then it needs to start making original watches not just mildly-altered copies of other company designs. Invicta never had the market share it has now until it stopped making only Rolex knock-offs.
A watch is indeed much more than the sum of its parts! It's the provenance, the design, the mystique, etc.
Hard to argue with your points Matt. However I do like the (views: 55)
Larry -- Friday, 31 March 2006, at 10:28 p.m.
comparison idea of itself but not as a means to shill for a particular brand. I think it would be interesting, perhaps revealing to get a full overview of all that goes into a watch before it hits the market. Why? I like to make an informed decision before spending
my cash. JM2C
Re: Hard to argue with your points Matt. However I do like the (views: 40)
Do you think is best to use steel 316L or steel 2205 in a watch case? and which brand uses which?
Matt...been thinking the same thing all day....very well said
(views: 18)
turfnut -- Friday, 31 March 2006, at 5:59 p.m.
What confuses me is that Grovana owns Revue Thommen and Vulcain >>> (views: 60)
Bas -- Friday, 31 March 2006, at 5:17 p.m.
With brands like that, why would they produce sub-like watches???
Cheers, Bas
Well put, Matt!
(views: 16)
Allmendinger -- Friday, 31 March 2006, at 4:18 p.m.
Unless Lorena can answer your pointed questions, I can only conclude > (views: 87)
TakesALickin' -- Friday, 31 March 2006, at 4:04 p.m.
Re: Unless Lorena can answer your pointed questions, I can only conclude > (views: 87)
that she's shilling, actually selling them somewhere. Her posts have all the trademark attributes of your classic shill.
Cheers, Jeff
It is, in fact, a predominantly male world through no fault of the males. We do not find a lot of women who are >>>> (views: 55)
collectors thus males do predominante. Your assertion about Matt is diametrically opposed to reality, however, in that we all became friends LONG before the majority of us knew he had anything at all to do with MarcelloC. That we all remain
friends is a testament to the positive contributions Matt has made personally and the quality business practices he brings to the MarcelloC watch line. Anyone who has ever dealt with Matt knows he's a straight shooter and stands behind his
product...that is more important to us than a few bucks or an outsider's attempt to stir the "pot".
The reception you are receiving has nothing to do with Matt...it has everything to do with your rather brusque manner and demanding persona...I would normally be inclined to think that language is an issue, this being a forum conducted in
English, but we have many many members from around the world who communicate civilly with each other...I think what you need to do is step back and decide how you'd like to be perceived and received...it's not too late to start over and we
welcome all contributors who approach us, collectively, in what we perceive to be a positive manner...you need not agree with any or all of us...but you need not be disagreeable while disagreeing.
Regards, Ted
WOW !! story of my life (views: 32)
It seems that everyone finds me aggressive. This is not the first time that this has been mentioned.
NO OFFENCE TO ANYONE - I didn't mean to be aggressive or offensive to anyone.
I just like to go straight to a point and a YES or NO answer (with a why) - will suit me.
Sorry - once again - about my approach, perhaps, you may get used to it (I hope so, anyway)
My wife always tells me "you have to give people the time to process..." so I know right where you are coming from on>>> (views: 17)
this. Unfortunately, "yes, no and why" does not lend itself to much discussion on a forum : Besides, as I guess you figured out, there really is no right answer...if you don't like the Steinhart, flip it and move on to something else
Regards, Ted
Well said Ted! (views: 17)
hey, that rhymed!
I dont think anyone minds challenges to ANY brand... but its all in the presentation!
Wow! step back and look at your own posts - it does look like shilling, doesn't it?
(views: 14)
It may be (views: 42)
But that is only my fault - as I try to cut sentences and go straight to the point.
Bravo! Excellent post!
(views: 18)
FloridaSam -- Friday, 31 March 2006, at 3:47 p.m.
I test atches all of the time - in an unscientific type of way.
(views: 20)
BA -- Friday, 31 March 2006, at 3:01 p.m.
Forget the Magazines...Just come Here >>> (views: 63)
Paul December -- Friday, 31 March 2006, at 2:24 p.m.
...and/or the other watch forums. Half the fun of getting a new watch is doing the research!
pricepoints for subs (views: 60)
Bill J. -- Friday, 31 March 2006, at 1:54 p.m.
There are several good price points for comparison. With a 2824 movement and sapphire crystal, Invicta, O&W and Sandoz all make good looking subs available at street prices of just under $300 to maybe $350 or $375. The MarcelloC is similar in features but
generally recognized to be of higher quality, and it is a little more expensive. I have 3 Sandoz subs and like them very much. I can see paying more for a MarcelloC if someone can afford it and wants to feel that they got higher quality. I don't see spending more
than that on a sub unless you go for the real thing. I think there is some difference in performance of the real thing, and certainly a difference in how it will hold its value.
The
N3 is less money and a known quantity...same specs and an upgraded 2824-2
(views: 55)
TMK -- Friday, 31 March 2006, at 12:48 p.m.
The MARCELLOC - GREAT EXAMPLE (views: 106)
Lorena Torres -- Friday, 31 March 2006, at 1:06 p.m.
I have just looked at the Marcello C Nettuno. Apart from the size of it, it is very similar to the Grovana Corel Reef II.
Which is best?
I am also sure that there must be, at least, some other 5/8 brands with similar watches.
Which would come up top - considering quality, price and ..... location?
They all look like Rolex Submariners but the general consensus is that Marcello watches are very high quality (views: 80)
SJACKAL -- Friday, 31 March 2006, at 1:14 p.m.
in relation to their price.
GREAT COMMENT - But - on WHAT BASIS?
(views: 41)
Marcello is excellent... (views: 53)
jganovsky -- Friday, 31 March 2006, at 3:23 p.m.
http://www.pmwf.com/cgi-bin/Forum/webbbs_config.cgi?noframes;read=913110
See my comments in the thread above or do a search on my name in the last 2 weeks. I have several posts about Marcello.
I bought a Marcello Tridente in January and a new N3 in March (on its way now).
The real question to ask is, "is there anything that compares to a Rolex Submariner or Sea Sweller (style/ design) that costs less but is [about (relative I know)] the same quality?"
Owners! I had one (regrettably sold it - duh!) >>> (views: 52)
Mike Lipphardt -- Friday, 31 March 2006, at 2:38 p.m.
The fit and finish were spectacular. Timing was regulated to about a second a day. IMHO, there is nothing at this price point (or even a couple price points above) that can beat a MarcelloC Nettuno 3 sub!
I compared it to a friends' Rolex sub - just not that much difference! The Rolex was a two tone (yuk), so I preferred my MarcelloC anyway!
Frankly, I don't know. I never owned one.
(views: 20)
Re: The
N3 (views: 88)
A picture of this watch - would have been appreciated.
However
what do you mean ? - known quality? Who on is Marcello C ?
Which also point to my original question?
A comparison report will point out many aspects of a watch/brand - and the manufacturer history and location could be also considered.
A Swiss made watch - surely - must play a part to another one made in the Philippines.
ETA movements are not always "alike" (views: 120)
Tom P -- Friday, 31 March 2006, at 12:40 p.m.
Some ETA movements are "ebauche" which means "unchanged" from the factory and are put right into the watch without any modification. The 2824 is a ubiquitous movement and found in watches from $79 USD (Gruen Swiss) to many thousands (Breitling).
Saying the Gruen is a good deal compared to a Breitling is a mistake though. Breitling disassembles the 2824 movement, finishes the bridges, etc and replaces parts of the movement with higher-quality in house components. So a cheaper 2824 may have +/- 20 sec
variance per 10 days while a Breitling fulfills COSC criteria. But both started out as the same movement!
Other things I look for are the case material. Not all stainless steel cases are made to the same tolerances and the hardness of the steel is often variable. A Glycine watch with a SS case will show many less hairline scratches after a week's wear versus a Fossil,
Timex, Trias, Seiko or even Citizen, while an Omega will withstand more than a Glycine most of the time.
Feel a Breitling, IWC, JLC, Omega, or AP stainless band and compare it to a "cheaper" dive watch....you can feel the difference immensely. Their cases and bands are made with Jeweler's attention, not to looser tolerances of a machine shop.
The dial also says a lot about the brand. Are the markers applied or printed? Is the printing even? Is the lume even, and does it match the intensity of the hands? Are their superfluous markings or does everything "make sense" (a major annoyance with an Invicta I
own is the presence of two tachymeter scales, one on the dial insert and one on the bezel )
Finally, think about two watches that appear grossly similar. I own a Hamilton Khaki Navy GMT which some could say remotely resembles a JLC Master Compressor. However, when I saw a Master Compressor in person I could easily tell the difference in
quality. The Hamilton appears "dull" compared to the JLC. The case has so much more sculpting, integrates well with it's band, and has depth to the dial.
So comparing two watches that both happen to use similar movements is, IMHO, flawed to begin with. More than the movement makes the watch. It's the assembly, the finish, the attention to detail on all things (dial, crown, clasp, back, etc).
Glycine will scratch less than Seiko/Citizen and Omega more scratch resistant than Glycine? I don't think so..
(views: 105)
Evan -- Friday, 31 March 2006, at 1:21 p.m.
I don't know about the others you mentioned, but Glycine, Seiko, Citizen and Omega all use 316L Stainless steel for their Steel watches so your statement is false. In fact, I had an Omega SMP that scratched a lot more easily than my Seikos.
That's a little harsh to say it's false...
(views: 60)
316L bars of steel might be the same composition of carbon/chromium/molydbenum/iron\ but its hardness can be changed by cold-tempering, the way it's cut and worked, if it is annealed or not after cutting/working, etc! Bracelet steel may not undergo
the same tempering process as the case too as well. I was referring to case steel not bracelet steel. Additionally, special coatings can be applied to steel to increase its durability (DLC, etc). Also 316L can be formed differently (thus improving purity by
reducing contaminants) so there are great varieties of 316L out there. Here's an example of two types used for jewelry/watches (from a Jeweler's website):
316L ASTM F-138-03 - 316L is the most widely used because it is affordable, durable and non-corrosive. All of our steel jewelry is precision machined, gently tapered and mirror polished.
316L(VM) ASTM F-138-03 * ISO:5832-1 - VM stands for Vacum Melting. It is not part of the ASTM F-138 specification. Vacum Melting means that the metal has been melted or alloyed in a vacuum, thereby limiting outside contaminants and
reducing includions within the metal. This makes the metal more pure. VM is not required for 316L to pass implant standards. There isn't a lab test that can be performed to determine whether or not a metal has been vacum melted. There is no
definitive, ASTM method to test for vacuum melting. Be sure you are getting 316LVM, buy from reputable dealers.
316L Steel Composition - Material Sheet
Not harsh but true, hardness may vary with same steel; however, Omegas do NOT scratch less than Seiko/Citizens.
(views: 59)
Evan -- Friday, 31 March 2006, at 2:44 p.m.
Omega and Glycine probably use the same type of CNC machining process with the same type of CNC machines, being that Glycine and Omega outsource their case productions so your argument that Omegas "resist" more than
Glycine is most likely false.
Then you state: " I was referring to case steel not bracelet steel. Additionally, special coatings can be applied to steel to increase its durability (DLC, etc). Also 316L can be formed differently (thus improving purity by reducing contaminants) so
there are great varieties of 316L out there. Here's an example of two types used for jewelry/watches (from a Jeweler's website)"
If you look more closely to the picture, the case not only suffered scratches, but deformed (dinged) quite easily. Secondly, by stating that 316L can be formed differently, are you stating that you know that Omega and Glycine form
their steel differently from Seiko and Citizen? If you do, then there would be some validity to your argument.
Wait a minute
-- you're going way off here! (views: 38)
First off, I did not say that Omega would always be more scratch resistant than Glycine, just some of the time. It does depend on who made the case and while, yes, the machines might be the same, the coatings applied to the steel after
finishing may be quite different!
Second off, just because your Omega suffered such damage is by no means an indicator of all types of Omega. Omega has made some pretty bad components in the past (i.e, the French-made bracelets they used for a while were of inferior
finish and materials).
What the heck are you doing to your Omega? Sure, the company advertises the Seamaster as a "professional" watch but they're really not designed as a tool watch...if you want a watch for timing that supplements your dive computer, you
don't use an Omega! You would be better off with a SINN or UTS.
Finally, the whole point of the discussion was not on whether a watch was really scratch resistant or not, but rather what makes a watch more expensive or "better" than another is not just the movement and finish on it, but the case and
other components as well, as well as the design costs.
Chill out
Actually, not "OFF" but merely refuting an erroneous claim on your part (views: 31)
Evan -- Saturday, 1 April 2006, at 6:04 a.m.
You stated: "Other things I look for are the case material. Not all stainless steel cases are made to the same tolerances and the hardness of the steel is often variable. A Glycine watch with a SS case will show many less hairline
scratches after a week's wear versus a Fossil, Timex, Trias, Seiko or even Citizen, while an Omega will withstand more than a Glycine most of the time"
By applying simple logic: if Glycine will show "many less hairline scratches" than a Seiko or Citizen and if Omega will withstand more than a Glycine most of the time, we can conclude that you were saying: "Omega will show
"many less hairline scratches" than Seiko or Citizen, which is a FALSE claim.
You stated "First off, I did not say that Omega would always be more scratch resistant than Glycine, just some of the time. It does depend on who made the case and while, yes, the machines might be the same, the coatings applied to
the steel after finishing may be quite different!"
Sorry, Omega's steel is not coated, nor is the Glycine, nor are Seiko and Citizen's normal steel cases; thus, your argument does not apply.
You stated: "Second off, just because your Omega suffered such damage is by no means an indicator of all types of Omega. Omega has made some pretty bad components in the past (i.e, the French-made bracelets they used for a
8/15/2009
Testing watches
Page 3 of 3
while were of inferior finish and materials)."
If you read my argument, I did not encompass all types of Omega, my point was simple: that your argument was false.
You stated: "What the heck are you doing to your Omega? Sure, the company advertises the Seamaster as a "professional" watch but they're really not designed as a tool watch...if you want a watch for timing that supplements your
dive computer, you don't use an Omega! You would be better off with a SINN or UTS."
I wore my Omega the same way I wore all my other watches. Sinn makes great tool watches (my 142st takes quite a bit of abuse) but brands like Rolex, Seiko, Citizen, IWC and Omega are tenured, proven and pioneering
watches so your argument that "they're [Omega] really not designed as a tool watch" has no validity. What premises do you draw on to claim that I would be better off with a Sinn or UTS as a tool watch?
You stated: "Finally, the whole point of the discussion was not on whether a watch was really scratch resistant or not, but rather what makes a watch more expensive or "better" than another is not just the movement and finish on it,
but the case and other components as well, as well as the design costs."
Once again, please read my post carefully. I was merely refuting your erroneous claims about Glycine and Omega being more scratch resistant than Seikos and Citizens.
You stated:"you're going way off here!
I have not veered off from my original argument: that your claim that Omega and Glycine are more scratch resistant than Seikos and Citizens is false. Therefore, no, I am not way off.
Re: Actually, not "OFF" but merely refuting an erroneous claim on your part
Tom P -- Saturday, 1 April 2006, at 11:13 a.m.
(views: 39)
I think that this argument is better directed at experts in watchmaking, I am by no means an expert on watchmaking but have worked in machining before I became an MD. My original point, way back at the beginning of this
thread, was not on the scratching but rather to say that the cost of producing the case can increase the cost of the watch, and that cost includes the type and manufacture of the steel (and that not all 316L is the same) -- also that
the number of turns (or "movements") used to finish the case increases cost, and so labor and materials in case production can be different. Case blanks can be bought from different companies for watchmakers to use, but once
they get to the actual watchmaker the same case may be finished and modified in different ways which increases labor investment and therefore cost. At least you can agree on that. can you also agree on the fact that the way
cases are sculpted and faceted can also help minimize the appearance of scratches much as a tank's faceted armor can deflect shells?
Also you didn't answer my other question, but you did seem to take offense with it.
Quote me:
"What the heck are you doing to your Omega? Sure, the company advertises the Seamaster as a "professional" watch but they're really not designed as a tool watch...if you want a watch for timing that supplements your dive
computer, you don't use an Omega! You would be better off with a SINN or UTS."
Quote you:
"I wore my Omega the same way I wore all my other watches. Sinn makes great
tool watches (my 142st takes quite a bit of abuse) but brands like Rolex,
Seiko, Citizen, IWC and Omega are tenured, proven and pioneering watches so
your argument that "they're [Omega] really not designed as a tool watch" has
no validity. What premises do you draw on to claim that I would be better off
with a Sinn or UTS as a tool watch?"
We can't expect all watches not to get dings and scratches with heavy use. Your Omega shows some pretty heavy use...the scratches are up to the links adjacent to the endlinks which is rather uncommon when I look at the used
watch market. On my Citizen GMT, which I wore for three years straight during residency at a county hospital (a rough tour of duy) the links at that part of the bracelet did pick up some scratches too. So without you answering
my question I have to infer that you are pretty demanding on your watches (as I am) and therefore might be better off with a watch that will be less likely to show wear and tear. Additionally, if you have one of the problematic
"french-made" bracelets you might want to consider swapping it out as many forumers have claimed that they damage quite easily.
There is no "legal" definition of a tool watch, so much of what makes a tool watch is in the eye of the beholder. Here's my opinion on what makes a tool watch...
Sinn, CWC, Stocker and Yale, and Marathon are companies that build watches for military and paramilitary use. Therefore, these issued watches can be considered "Tool" watches. True, Omega used to make WWW watches in
the early 20th century (in addition to the fantastic SM300 in the mid-20th) but they do not make any watches for military use currently. Certain "purpose built" watches such as the Omega X-33 and Breitling Emergency are tool
watches as well because they are designed for uses other than "telling time."
In my opinion a watch that features decorated stainless steel with polished accents bracelet such as a Seamaster Bond is not a tool watch, while a black-dialed Seamaster with a speedmaster-styled bracelet might be considered a
tool watch. I prefer a tool watch's bracelet should have a "user serviceable" bracelet that's one single finish such as brushed or bead-blasted (see the GMT below). However, if you put the same watch with a matte black dial on a
rubber bracelet or brushed stainless steel bracelet (Omega PO) it could be considered a tool watch in my book. Most true "tool" watches have simple, unadorned bracelets and cases with relatively sedate dials (CWC SBS or RN
issue Diver, Marathon Navigator GSAR/TSAR, SANDY 660, Sinn U2 EZM5).
True, in the past Omega did make more "tool" watches such as the Seamaster 300, and makes a few currently (Speedmaster Pro/Hesalite Xtal, Planet Ocean), but I would not include the Seamaster Bond (the "they're" in my
previous statement) among them. Watches that have more of the cost of the watch dedicated to decoration and finish rather than durability of the movement, case, etc are less likely to be "tool" watches in my opinion. By
concession, my favorite Breitling Steelfish, while marketed as a "tool" watch just doesn't meet my personal criteria for a tool watch as it has a little too much complication on the dial to be "spartan" enough to qualify. The
Citizen GMT I mentioned fits that definition well, and is the reason why I wore it through residency -- I knew that a more "polished" watch would show every mark and scratch while a tool watch just ends up looking more
"distinguished" in my opinion.
The biggest travesty is when a former tool watch no longer fits that definition because the price has made it impractical for most of the people who would use them. How much does an IWC Aquatimer go for these days? $5000?
I do love the Rolex Sea Dweller, but how many people do you know actually can afford to use one as their timer for dives? IMHO, I'd buy a Sinn U-series for that. When I used to dive, I'd actually just wear a Gshock and leave
my "fancier" watches at home.
I said nothing about IWC, Rolex, Citizen or Seiko not being a tool watch! Where did that come from? Citizen's Promaster line (esp Navihawk, Navisail, 1000M etc) and Seiko's Prospex divers are good examples of Asian tool
watches. When I have a day in which I know I'm going to be rough on my watch I leave my "nicer" ones at home and usually strap on a good looking tool watch such as my Seiko Samurai, a CWC G10, or a G-Shock. I usually
only wear my omega speedmaster (even though it is the "professional" one) when I know it's going to be light duty for the day.
I'll give you that the way I said "scratch proof" may have been misleading, but no falsehood was intended, I should have emphasized that it was more an opinion and for that I apologize for any offense. But I did get a little upset
as I perceived your response to be less than cordial. You might want to consider using less-harsh language when you are critical of someone, this is a watch forum and not a legal review after all.
Once more: I was merely refuting your erroneous claim
Evan -- Saturday, 1 April 2006, at 3:43 p.m.
(views: 39)
You stated: "I think that this argument is better directed at experts in watchmaking, I am by no means an expert on watchmaking but have worked in machining before I became an MD. My original point, way back at the
beginning of this thread, was not on the scratching but rather to say that the cost of producing the case can increase the cost of the watch, and that cost includes the type and manufacture of the steel (and that not all 316L
is the same) -- also that the number of turns (or "movements") used to finish the case increases cost, and so labor and materials in case production can be different. Case blanks can be bought from different companies for
watchmakers to use, but once they get to the actual watchmaker the same case may be finished and modified in different ways which increases labor investment and therefore cost. At least you can agree on that. can you
also agree on the fact that the way cases are sculpted and faceted can also help minimize the appearance of scratches much as a tank's faceted armor can deflect shells?"
Once again, I was merely refuting your erroneous claim of Omega and Glycine being more scratch resistant than Seiko and Citizen. I was not refuting your "original point".
You stated: "We can't expect all watches not to get dings and scratches with heavy use. Your Omega shows some pretty heavy use...the scratches are up to the links adjacent to the endlinks which is rather uncommon
when I look at the used watch market. On my Citizen GMT, which I wore for three years straight during residency at a county hospital (a rough tour of duy) the links at that part of the bracelet did pick up some scratches
too. So without you answering my question I have to infer that you are pretty demanding on your watches (as I am) and therefore might be better off with a watch that will be less likely to show wear and tear.
Additionally, if you have one of the problematic "french-made" bracelets you might want to consider swapping it out as many forumers have claimed that they damage quite easily. "
I will reiterate, I wore my Omega as I wore my other watches. Your presumption that I am demanding on my watches has no basis, as I do not work with my hands, I wear shirts with the left cuff taylored to
fit watches and whilst I was studying in University, I wore long sleeves much of the time, as dictated by the harsh Canadian weather I am however, a very active person and practice numerous sports but
for the most intense sport I practice: martial arts, requirese that I take off my watch.
You stated:"There is no "legal" definition of a tool watch, so much of what makes a tool watch is in the eye of the beholder. Here's my opinion on what makes a tool watch..."
There is no de facto definition and this term would vary from person to person.
You stated:"True, in the past Omega did make more "tool" watches such as the Seamaster 300, and makes a few currently (Speedmaster Pro/Hesalite Xtal, Planet Ocean), but I would not include the Seamaster Bond (the
"they're" in my previous statement) among them. Watches that have more of the cost of the watch dedicated to decoration and finish rather than durability of the movement, case, etc are less likely to be "tool" watches in
my opinion. By concession, my favorite Breitling Steelfish, while marketed as a "tool" watch just doesn't meet my personal criteria for a tool watch as it has a little too much complication on the dial to be "spartan"
enough to qualify. The Citizen GMT I mentioned fits that definition well, and is the reason why I wore it through residency -- I knew that a more "polished" watch would show every mark and scratch while a tool watch
just ends up looking more "distinguished" in my opinion."
This is in my opinion a pure tool watch.
These too, I consider tenured, proven tool watches still being used extensively by professional divers while offering a good amount of horological substance:
Another tool watch:
Historic tool watches:
You stated:"I said nothing about IWC, Rolex, Citizen or Seiko not being a tool watch! Where did that come from? Citizen's Promaster line (esp Navihawk, Navisail, 1000M etc) and Seiko's Prospex divers are good
examples of Asian tool watches. When I have a day in which I know I'm going to be rough on my watch I leave my "nicer" ones at home and usually strap on a good looking tool watch such as my Seiko Samurai, a CWC
G10, or a G-Shock. I usually only wear my omega speedmaster (even though it is the "professional" one) when I know it's going to be light duty for the day.
Please read carefully, I did not claim that you said something about IWC, Rolex, Citizen or Seiko so it came from yourself.
You stated:"The biggest travesty is when a former tool watch no longer fits that definition because the price has made it impractical for most of the people who would use them. How much does an IWC Aquatimer go for
these days? $5000? I do love the Rolex Sea Dweller, but how many people do you know actually can afford to use one as their timer for dives? IMHO, I'd buy a Sinn U-series for that. When I used to dive, I'd actually just
wear a Gshock and leave my "fancier" watches at home
That is of course, your own opinion, but I use the Rolex as a dive timer (PADI open water certified).
I apologize for sounding abrasive, I just wanted to clarify a point. Now lets get on with watches!
I have to say thats what I felt too when I first read Evan's post, a rather harsh reply. Chill out guys, this is
(views: 11)
SJACKAL -- Saturday, 1 April 2006, at 2:13 p.m.
Allways difficult to draw the line where harsh begins, but I have to admit that I would feel the same way as you Tom
(views: 13)
Paulo -- Saturday, 1 April 2006, at 12:02 p.m.
(views: 9)
Thanks Paulo -- that makes me feel better
Tom P -- Saturday, 1 April 2006, at 12:03 p.m.
Feels like knife forums when we discuss steel and tempering hahaha
(views: 18)
What about alloys and heat quenching and grain and Rockwell hardness and...
(views: 13)
mhawg -- Friday, 31 March 2006, at 4:36 p.m.
I wouldn't say entirely false, because tempering of the steel plays a part and steel hardened to a higher degree>> (views: 40)
for instance 60RC, would naturally be more scratch resistance than at 40RC.
But I do not know if any of these case manufacturers actually does this, other than Sinn and was it Damasko or SUG? Can't remember.
Just my humble opinion.
Not Omega or Glycine case makers. Damasko used an ice-hardening process.
(views: 35)
I'm not aware of any 316L surface hardening process. Can you provide reference?
(views: 10)
Sushirob -- Saturday, 1 April 2006, at 5:14 p.m.
To clarify: Damasko's ice hardening is NOT for 316L, but for more info...
(views: 12)
simply go to Damasko's website and click on Technology and then cases.
Damasko Website
Citizen and Seiko also re-temper the steel and titanium (Duratect, etc).
(views: 20)
WOW !! wot a reply (views: 97)
First of all - Thank you very much.
What in fact, you have also pointed out are materials used. I have no idea what a tonne of 316L steel costs but Google gives prices of $800 per tonne.
One could assume that with ONE tonne, a lot of watches could be made.
I am NOT disputing your views and I can accept some of the comments but the original question, in fact, was Why can't we get comparisons.
A list of which has been made up by another member.
COSC, by the way, doesn't mean anything - in reality. You can read so on their official site or on the Federation of Swiss Watches.
Of all the Rolex watches that I have had, NOT ONE has ever kept the right time.
Only a few days ago - my Submariner started going anti-clockwise (????)
A comparison report will give better understanding to the end user why the Tag should cost £1200 and the Grovana £375.
You're free to do it! (views: 54)
Robert Martin -- Friday, 31 March 2006, at 1:07 p.m.
Why doesn't anyone do it? You could come up with lots of reasons, including the fact that it may not benefit many of the watch companies.
Mainly, I'd say that no one does it because it would take time, effort, and money. Anyone who's got all that to give is free to go ahead and do it. You're probably like most of us here, though, and don't have enough of all three to do it.
I know of a couple of guys who've done something similar with bicycles: they started their own business to perform independent tests, and charge people to see the results.
Surely you must have it ? quality up and prices down (views: 47)
There must be magazines, where you are, that compare similar products from different brands? Hi-Fi, Computers, Cars, Electrical goods, Cameras - Why not watches?
IT WOULD BE VERY FAIR to see results based on many aspects on watches.
If anything else, quality - for one, will go up and prices might come down
Who's going to do it? (views: 28)
You seem to be going after something that will define the true intrinsic value of a watch. I admit, there's a part of me geekily drawn to the same thing. There's two things wrong with what you're saying, however.
One, there are publications that compare all sorts of products, like Hi-Fi equipment, computers and cameras. In most areas, however, there's a conflict between "intrinsic value" type reviews, and the people who pay the publication's bills -the manufacturers. Sometimes magazines spring up that don't accept advertising in an effort to avoid this conflict -- Cook's Illustrated and a motorcycle mag I can't remember the name of, come immediately to mind. Even the advertisingbased mag's that are well-respected, however, do the same thing I mentioned before about cars: they just really don't compare products at the level you suppose -- every aspect of construction and performance side by side -- they all
highlight, then reach an overall conclusion.
Two, many other products can have their performance objectively measured. The sound reproduction of Hi-Fi equipment can be tested, and computers can be run against software benchmarks. Even so, there's endless debate about what
aspects of sound quality are audible to the human ear (and "important"), and over whether computer benchmarks accurately predict real-world results. For watches, what's the test? Accuracy used to be it, but for mechanical watches it just
doesn't seem relevant (within a small window).
Anything else just seems too subjective. What's worth more, a 3 piece case that takes many operations to manufacture and assemble, or a one-piece case that's constructed more simply, but may be more durable and water-resistant?
I agree that it'd be nice to see more information on watch construction, but again, who's going to pay for it? The watch manufacturers, whose prices you say will be driven down when the facts are known? Not likely, and a commercial
magazine gets its budget from the manufacturers. As an independent tester, you'll have to buy the watches yourself; where does that money come from?
Basically, if you can find enough money to perform detailed, independent evaluations, then it's "worth" doing -- i.e., people obviously value the results enough to pay for them. If not, then it's not worth it. I guess that's been the case so far,
but maybe this thread will inspire some WIS somewhere to start the Consumer Reports of Watches. -Rob
Re: Who's going to do it? (views: 69)
Well, Rob - I didn't say it was going to be easy.
In my opinion the tests should be carrie dout by some good international pubblication.
The watch makers will send their watches to XYZ for evaluation. If, in this case, the divers watches look very similar, comparison based on quality of products used (steel, crystal, gaskets, crown etc.) should come into consideration.
I cannot forget Walt Odets write up on Rolex. He said it was "junk" and no one liked him. Why NOT!? Are we more concerned to protect the image of a brand or should we look after the end users (us)!?
There was a watch, once, where I needed to screw in the back plate. The quality of the treading was really bad. What about a Pulsar solar that I wore in Singapore and the dial just steamed up because of (probably) humidity and heat?
There are many apsects into a report but I don't think, in general, the public will be really interested to read on how thick the bumpers are around the movement,
Re: Who's going to do it? (views: 24)
Robert Martin -- Tuesday, 4 April 2006, at 5:08 p.m.
>>Well, Rob - I didn't say it was going to be easy
Actually, I think I said that, and went to great lengths to describe the specifics that would make it difficult. You just keep saying, "Why doesn't someone do it?" and "Someone should do it."
I don't know what sort of answer you want, frankly. Lots of people here know more than me about the watch world, so if some organization did do the kind of objective testing you want (and that I think many of us would
appreciate) I expect we would've heard about it.
So the answer is, and has been, no one does in-depth comparisons of this sort. In reaction, you could get inspired to undertake this enterprise yourself, or lobby some of the magazines to test like this. What makes no point,
however, is just asking the same questions over and over again, and jabbing at people who are trying to help you. That behavior won't get you anywhere, and it makes you look like a troll.
To be honest, I thought you were a troll when you first posted here, especially with your "Should all watches be Swiss?" thread. Such a post, especially from a new user, is a classic sign of a troll. But in true PMWF style,
everyone here rationally discussed the question you posed (a similar, "Should all components be Italian?" post on a bicycling forum would still be flaring up).
So, I reserved my pre-judgment from that thread, but I have to say that your behavior in this thread is classic troll. If you are a troll, of course you'll just argue every point I've made here (only ignoring the trolls makes them go
away, as they crave attention); if you're a real person, though, it may help you to know that yours is an unproductive online manner.
Maybe others will think I'm foolish to take you at face value, but perhaps you're just new to watches, exploring your options, and passionate about this exciting new world. Maybe you were pleased to post about what you
thought was the best value in a sub-style diver, and were disappointed by a tepid response, so you tried again. (I've experienced lack of interest in some of the watches I like, so I understand that.)
Anyway, in the hope that you're a real person, I bid you welcome to the PMWF. I think you'll find we can discuss controversial issues without attacking each other (almost always), and actually prefer things that way. Hopefully
you'll join us in civil discourse on a subject we all love.
-Rob
What is a troll ? it could be a good start (views: 17)
No, I am not really here to argue with everyone - Well - I hope not, anyway.
I follow logic - it could very well be that it is only my logic - but to me it is some what logical (you know what I mean)
My minds spins fast and out of 100000 thoughts and words the 1000 left of it do probably come out in the wrong way.
To post all 100000 every time would be boring and very much time consuming.
There is always an alternative idea and argument behind any of my questions and, admittedly, my questions don't come out too well.
Having said that it also seems that replies are NOT also that straight forward.
The Grovana was compared here in UK with some other known brands - I didn't know that Marcello C or Steihart even existed. For the little information that I have I would say that the Steinhart could be the best value.
But what should I make of the Tudor Prince Date Hydronaut?
An extra $1000 compared to the Ocean for.....??
Anyone can polish that steel as much as they like and engrave the name on the Rotor in GOLD - still - it will not make it $1000 more expensive than the Ocean.
(...and u will have to tell me what a troll is ??)
Look at this whole thread. (views: 16)
Robert Martin -- Tuesday, 4 April 2006, at 6:24 p.m.
You could Google the word and get a whole lot of answers, I think, but here are some thoughts I have.
A troll will start a controversial thread: Democrats vs. Republicans, Campy vs. Shimano, Swiss vs. Japanese movements, etc. This is often the troll's first post on a particular forum (under that user ID, at least). They
may sometimes raise an issue that's valid to discuss (watch quality, for example), but which has no real answer (what's the best watch?).
The troll will ask all sorts of questions, and ignore the answers they're given; they will ask for advice and ignore what is offered. The troll won't answer questions they have been asked, but will take others to task for
not answering theirs. Before too long, the troll will make personal attacks against those who ask the most probing questions of them (often the people who've figured out there's a troll amongst them).
A troll will start a thread and disappear for days or weeks, return and respond to all the subsequent posts in a flurry of activity, then disappear again. This cycle repeats until everyone learns never to respond to a troll
post. Someone always gives in, though, so the cycle starts anew.
I see many of these characteristics in your activity here, Lorena, but I'm willing to chalk it up to circumstance. One of the most productive members of the cycling forum I used to hang out at started there much as
you did here, so it is possible. I see that others here are ready to welcome your participation here as well, so I guess the outcome is up to you.
-Rob
A troll is someone who knowingly posts a message that they know will be inflammatory and cause argument and discord. >> (views: 13)
Mike D -- Tuesday, 4 April 2006, at 6:10 p.m.
Regarding your topic of the best value, there are just too many brands out there to really come up with one best value watch since there are too many subjective issues to deal with when buying watches. Many
people here would rather pay more for a name they trust than for a similar watch that is an unknown. It is the name too that people pay for to a certain extent. Even with Omega, you are buying the name too. Tudor
costs more because they can get more and people buy them. Whether or not it should cost $1K more is pointless to discuss and is your own decision to make.
Why should watches be any different than (views: 18)
cars, electronics and other consumer products.
All tests are subjective up to a point. Besides what is the motivation for any manufacturer to do what you suggest?
Re: Why should watches be any different than (views: 14)
My suggestion in only down to a buyer point of view.
If I want to buy a motorbike, I will read different reports first. I will test drive them and will probably go for the bike with the best design. However, if all reports will tell me to stay away from my choice, I will do so.
The manufacturers have no intention in submitting watches for testing; otherwise the cookie will crumble and they will have to tell us why they are charging us so much for them.
What is the major difference between a Steinhart Ocean 1 at $395 and the Tudor Prince Date Hydronaut at $1400?
Their better be some $1000 worth of something in the Tudor to make it so special!?!?
And you believe these "reports"? (views: 12)
Your quote "If I want to buy a motorbike, I will read different reports first. I will test drive them and will probably go for the bike with the best design. However, if all reports will tell me to stay away from my
choice, I will do so."
Exactly which objective reports are you reading and why do you believe them? If you test them and make a choice why would you care if someone said they did not like your choice?
No different with watches!
Yes, I do (views: 11)
If the reports - written by some experts, are going to tell me that what I like is really a piece of junk - I will stay away from that product.
Having read the report from Walt Odets about Rolex movement - I agree with him that it is a piece of junk and badly designed.
Every watch maker, Rolex, Omega, what have you, can send me a watch and I'll post test results (views: 10)
Tim -- Tuesday, 4 April 2006, at 4:26 p.m.
Payment for service, is to keep the watches sent.
I'll put them through a ton of tests too, and make the results available for everyone. -Tim
The type of steel is one thing... (views: 54)
But the force used to press the case and the way in which the case is formed has a lot to do with the price. A historical example is the early production of the AK-47. Initially the receiver was machined solid steel, but this required many movements per
unit. As a result, the cost of the rifle was higher and the amount produced per hour lower. The factory then changed to stamped receivers which only required 2 movements! This reduced cost and increased unit production per time. The same goes for
watch cases. Some are just carved out, polished and that's that. Others are machined in multiple movements and then polished, inspected, re-machined, repolished, etc. Plus the case may be subjected to retempering to harden the steel more (aligning the
crystaline structure to withstand scratches, etc).
Comparing a Tag to your Sub clone isn't fair since we all know that these days Tag is mostly a marketing gimmick -- there isn't much special about current Tag Heuer these days And Rolex is, in fact, an anomaly -- you pay a premium for the name
but the actual watch is probably only worth half the price. I prefer brands like Omega and Breitling because I feel they offer excellent value for what you get -- attention to detail, a historically important company, committment to the brand, and laborintensive construction of the watch. I feel Rolex offers all that too but they are definitely charging a premium for the watch.
People who shell out a grand for a current quartz Tag these days are, IMHO, not knowledgeable horologists but people who want a "name" and a "fashionable watch." I agree that we might want to start doing watch "shoot outs" on PMWF -- maybe this
thread will spawn some? Reto sometimes compares watches well too.
Whew! I gotta get back to work!
Well said
(views: 16)
DavidM1 -- Friday, 31 March 2006, at 1:12 p.m.
I know there is more to steel (views: 38)
And there are many more aspects to be considered on any one watch.
I am pleased to see that you are not too keen on Rolex and Tag - I agree with you and follow the same feelings.
I am sorry to say that Breitling are NOT my favourite either. I have had a few and they just fell apart. A big let one was a (I think, Colt) with Japanese quartz movement a few years ago.
You sure that wasn't a copy? (views: 26)
would look more to Breitling's historical lines than their entry-level lines such as the Colt...I'm referring to the Cosmonaute and other chronos, as well as the Superoceans. No current Breitling uses non-Swiss movements too.
I don't think ANY Breitling EVER used a Japanese mvmt. It had to have been a
Breitling used Miyota quartz movements (for instance in the Jupiter Pilot).
Thank you Micha - Once again useful information
(views: 6)
(views: 19)
(views: 22)
Re: I don't think ANY Breitling EVER used a Japanese mvmt. It had to have been a
(views: 42)
NO - it was not a fake and it was confirmed by T.W.G. Distribution - the official Breitling distributor for UK In the year of 2525 Breitling will be made in Abania!
(views: 2)
Fernando Campos -- Tuesday, 4 April 2006, at 7:40 p.m.
A side by side comparison would be good I think. (views: 50)
What factors could one use? How about:
1. Grade of ss
2. Movement caliber
3. Warranty
4. Crystal
5. Water resistance
5. Fit and finish.
6. Assembly and QC processes.
Any other ideas?
YOU ARE absolutely right (views: 45)
I enjoy so much to see car magazines when they take 4 or 5 similar cars and they give out test results.
You are right - to see some testing on
REAL water resistant
TRUE type of sapphire crystal
TYPE of steel used (there must be different grading of 316L s/s - I suppose)
...and so on
I think the problem is that most magazines are "affiliated" to watch's manufacturers and results may not be fair.
There are several watch magazins that test watches. WatchTime, Chronos, etc. (views: 47)
Micha -- Friday, 31 March 2006, at 12:05 p.m.
The movement is not the only factor that determines the price. Keep in mind that there are different grades available from ETA too. Basic movements, decorated movements or chronometer movement. Was the movement delivered built together or as an ebauche?
etc, etc.
I could be wrong (views: 51)
First of all, thank you for the information. I think that the magazine that you mention are not available in Europe.
With reference to the movement - I could be wrong - but I think that if the manufacturer is selling their watch with an ETA 2824 movement inside, not much is actually done to it. An engraved rotor is a pretty straight job after all.
If you look up at "Orbita" for example, you will see that watches like Omega or Oris use a base ETA movement but they - like you say - "work" on it. At this point, the ETA becomes caliber xyz321.
The brands that I have listed, use pretty much a standard ETA - I would say
Even with "standard" ETA, there are different finishes at different costs. (views: 40)
You're right, there's a difference between companies that rework an ETA movement and those that use them substantially as delivered.
"As delivered" means different things, though. You'll pay less for, say, a 7750 in ebauche form than in "elaboree" finish (I think that's their highest grade.
Even that may not account for the price differences you see in the finished product, but to say that 2 watches should cost the same because they both use a 7750 is like saying a Porsche 911 should cost the same as a GT3, because they both use a flat-6
engine.
I do think it would be interesting to see an article that explored every aspect of 2 watches with the "same" movement, to see if the package was worth the price difference. -Rob
Not just the movement (views: 26)
Correct Rob - about the cars
but the magazine that will do a report on both cars will specify many aspects about the whole car - interior, engine specs, controls, performance, consumption etc etc
I never said that a watch should be compared just on the movement but, like it was suggested by others, it should be compared on the whole quality of components used and, in this case, also where the watch is made too.
They don't compare cars like you're saying, either. (views: 27)
I've subscribed to a handful of car magazines for over 25 years, and am constantly picking others up, and none of them compare cars at the level you're talking about.
They'll mention lots of factors -- leather vs. cloth, suspension upgrades, etc. -- but you won't see comparisons of the leather in two cars, to see which is "better," or gives more "value." They talk about the highlights of the
construction/performance/comfort/etc., and then give an overall impression of the entire vehicle.
I find this very similar to the watch reviews I've read, frankly (I agree that many aren't true reviews, but I've found WatchTime to be one of the better sources).
Even if it was possible to assign an objective score (or dollar value) to every aspect of watch construction, people won't buy watches based on the total score. It's just not how humans operate. Maybe we say that status shouldn't be a factor
in a purchase, and technical sophistication should (just as examples), but many people feel the opposite, and it's their money. -Rob
Watchtime is available in Europe, but hard to find. Chronos is German (and hence written in German).
(views: 23)
Is it worth subscribing to it? (views: 28)
I always feel that this sort of magazines are not so "INDIPENDENT" after all. It will be VERY NICE to have someone unbiased opinion (like Walt Odets, for example - he gave on Rolex)
I've read Watchtime only once or twice, but it's very similar to Chronos (views: 26)
Chronos is very good and usually objective.
Thank you Micha (views: 31)
Just looked at subscriptions and for Europe they cost a bomb. Obviously these must be American magazines
'Poor Man's' Watch Forum - Foro de Relojes Para el 'Hombre Pobre' - Horlogeforum voor de 'Arme Man'
8/15/2009

Does anyone "Test" watches?

Transcription

Similar documents

0 - Singapore Management University

PDF - Borrowed Time Watches

Financial Times April 2005

High Browse May 2003

BENTLEY Sea Captain Automatic Tungsten HANDsON

swiss - Qantas

G.I. Joe tells time

PDF - Totally Worth IT

A QUICK GUIDE TO THE BRITISH MILITARY WATCH

16 page watch special