Who Watches the Watchmen (Our Chit Chat Thread)

Alanstrainor

micks_address wrote: »

Where did you order from Alan? Enjoy. I haven’t taken off my 556a rs since I got it apart from sleeping.

From Sinn direct. Not too sure how long delivery should be really, they say between 1 to 2 weeks. Hopefully on the shorter end of that scale!

micks_address

Alanstrainor wrote: »

From Sinn direct. Not too sure how long delivery should be really, they say between 1 to 2 weeks. Hopefully on the shorter end of that scale!

There seems to be a shortage of the rs models. I had ordered mine from classic watch dot de. They reckoned 2 weeks for factory to build and then couple of days postage. They were quoting me end of January couple of days before Xmas. Luckily was able to get one from first class watches in uk via parcel motel. That option is gone now.

Cyclingtourist

I've been thinking about YouTube, how much time I'm spending watching and how it influences my watch purchases in particular.

If I'm honest, seeing a watch favourably reviewed on YT is a big motivator to check out other reviews and possible online sources and prices.

It's got to the point where I spend a lot more time watching YT than I do TV and it's not just watches but watch videos are the ones that get me spending money.

Time for a New Year's resolution to watch less and read/exercise more?

James Bond Junior

That's really really nice. What strap did you go for? Revolut won't link to our Omani bank account, it's a pity as I love the vault feature.

fulladapipes

Snap, said the man just off an exercise bike for the first time in his life. Ironically, I spent the 30 minutes watching YouTube videos on watches...

Cyclingtourist wrote: »

I've been thinking about YouTube, how much time I'm spending watching and how it influences my watch purchases in particular.

If I'm honest, seeing a watch favourably reviewed on YT is a big motivator to check out other reviews and possible online sources and prices.

It's got to the point where I spend a lot more time watching YT than I do TV and it's not just watches but watch videos are the ones that get me spending money.

Time for a New Year's resolution to watch less and read/exercise more?

James Bond Junior

James Bond Junior wrote: »

Ugh. Only got it serviced in March.

It's as said likely the actual golf rather than the marker magnet is the issue. Regulation adjustment is preferable to magnetism damage IMO

My own watch is very much a tool watch but I just took it off as I was chopping wood.

david

david wrote: »

......... If anyone knows of an (Irish) horologist who would glance over this and give an opinion, please let me know! ......

Any clockmaker would be grand IMO. It's not as specialised a game as watches are. No shortage of clockmakers about.

Wibbs

I spend mucho time on the youtubes but oddly enough very rarely watches. There's a UK watchmaker I sub to alright, but that would be about it. I suppose mostly because the vast majority of channels are dealing with new watches so not in my wheelhouse as our American friends might say.

Augeo wrote: »

It's as said likely the actual golf rather than the marker magnet is the issue. Regulation adjustment is preferable to magnetism damage IMO

My own watch is very much a tool watch but I just took it off as I was chopping wood.

I'm surprised something like golf could cause a shock like that. :eek: There would be watches of mine I'd be more careful with than others that's for sure, but I've gone clay shooting wearing a trench watch and later 30's and 40's stuff and never had a problem and the trench watches weren't even shockproof. I'd have thought the shock of firing a shotgun for an hour or so would be significantly higher than anything found in golf?

If it is mechanical damage rather than magnetism I'd be worrying about a much larger bill. Magnetism is a much easier fix compared to anything I can think of mechanically that would have cause a 2 hour gain so suddenly.

James Bond Junior

Well all I've done in the past 5 days whilst wearing the watch is swim and golf. Drinking a copious amount of cans isn't possible as I am right handed! My golf glove has a small magnetic marker on the back of the hand. It's possible but I can't remember giving it a knock. Said glove is below.

https://www.srixoneurope.com/en_BE/accessories/gloves/ballmarker-all-weather-glove/SBAWG-EU.html?dwvar_SBAWG-EU_color=White

unkel

Is it still under warranty? I'd expect a tool watch like a submariner or seamaster to be able to stand an awful lot of abuse. A lot more than a bit of golfing / swimming or even chopping wood. I wouldn't even have thought to take my watch off for any of that. Or anything at all really. If I survive it, the watch most certainly should survive it too

James Bond Junior

unkel wrote: »

Is it still under warranty? I'd expect a tool watch like a submariner or seamaster to be able to stand an awful lot of abuse. A lot more than a bit of golfing / swimming or even chopping wood. I wouldn't even have thought to take my watch off for any of that. Or anything at all really. If I survive it, the watch most certainly should survive it too

No it's about 10 years old.

If it's consistent in the two hour per day gain it's not damaged IMO & just needs regulating again.
If the time gain is eratic then it's more serious IMO.

Golf is a no no for automatic watches (swimming is grand obviously if the watch is rated for underwater) but a single round wouldn't be problematic.... It might well be unfortunate coincidence.... Round of golf same time (no pun) a watch component sh1ts itself.

Cyclingtourist

James Bond Junior wrote: »

No it's about 10 years old.

Shuda bought a G-Shock.:D

njburke

For a two hour a day rate change, i'ld say the mass of the balance spring has changed, like a weight has come off it.

I watched the jean claude biver interview this morning, an interesting character in horology. Followed from there to the mechanics of the Zenith Defy Lab silicon regulator.

In other news, just heard on the radio that the UK and not northern ireland, will have duty free status from 1st Jan. What does this mean for a watch purchase, would it be the same as buying in japan?

redlead

njburke wrote: »

I watched the jean claude biver interview this morning, an interesting character in horology. Followed from there to the mechanics of the Zenith Defy Lab silicon regulator.

The guys on the Scottish Watch podcast have a really good long form interview with him to celebrate their 200th episode or something. I'd recommend giving it a listen. The guy has such a great philosophy on life in general.

njburke

Cheers, will save that for the car some morning.

Cienciano

It really sums up automatic watches. You can't show off your €15k rolex on the golf course because it can't handle it. But your €8 casio won't miss a beat.

redlead

Cienciano wrote: »

It really sums up automatic watches. You can't show off your €15k rolex on the golf course because it can't handle it. But your €8 casio won't miss a beat.

It doesn't really; it just sums up the utility of a cheap quartz.

Wibbs

I might understand higher risks in the days before shock protection on the balance pivots when a watchmaker's basic skillset included replacing balance staffs, but since incabloc and similar came along in the 30's and was ubiquitous since the 50's that was of a much lower risk in mechanical movements(these days a watchmaker will charge biggly for a balance staff job). Never mind that antimagnetic doesn't need to be on dials any more since it's a given unless you're working in an industry with serious magnetic fields going on. I've dropped my 1942 Doxa from chest height onto a tiled floor and didn't do any damage, but a round of golf could have it in trouble? That doesn't compute for me anyway. Look at what NASA did to the Speedy and the others in test. They hammered them every which way including high G and while there were failures they mostly kept going.

So is it the automatic mechanism rather than the rest of the mechanics that's the weakness and hand winders would be less susceptible?

TheRepentent

James Bond Junior wrote: »

Well all I've done in the past 5 days whilst wearing the watch is swim and golf. Drinking a copious amount of cans isn't possible as I am right handed! My golf glove has a small magnetic marker on the back of the hand. It's possible but I can't remember giving it a knock. Said glove is below.

https://www.srixoneurope.com/en_BE/accessories/gloves/ballmarker-all-weather-glove/SBAWG-EU.html?dwvar_SBAWG-EU_color=White

I have heard golf ruins a good walk but never a good watch

Fitz II

Cienciano wrote: »

It really sums up automatic watches. You can't show off your €15k rolex on the golf course because it can't handle it. But your €8 casio won't miss a beat.

Nah....you can show off your Rolex all you want on the Golf course, just pull a
Jack Nicklaus and put it in the bag if you are going to hit bombs, or go to the range Its just people dont bother telling anyone when their cheap quartz brakes, you just chuck em. I find that every quartz I ever owned stopped working after a few years.

Wibbs

Wibbs wrote: »

......, but a round of golf could have it in trouble? That doesn't compute for me anyway. .....

Presumably this is a reputable enough article...

https://www.iwc.com/en/forum/ten-tips-for-watch-care.html

'...one good impact, and the watch will have a problem'


I like his opinion on service intervals TBH..... 'The question everyone asks is how lengthy an interval should there optimally be between full servicings. There is no simple answer here, especially for collectors who own numerous watches. IWC recommends a full service every five years. Personally, I have a watch serviced when it appears to need service. One watchmaker told me that watches let you know when they need service: symptoms manifest themselves. The watch runs intolerably too slow or fast, or worst of all simply stops. Or the watch doesn't stay wound, the date doesn't change despite being wound, and so on'

Homer

Augeo wrote: »

Presumably this is a reputable enough article...

https://www.iwc.com/en/forum/ten-tips-for-watch-care.html

'...one good impact, and the watch will have a problem'

Yep, accurate in my experience. Dropped my brand new (at the time) Panerai 060 onto a tile floor from 4 feet and had to send it back to Panerai to fix! Doh!

unkel

I'm sure the article is accurate for IWC and other delicate watches, but I'd expect a tough tool watch from Rolex or Omega to be fine doing any of this all day long:

I —and I know many others —have worn their automatic watches while playing golf, tennis, or other sports. Despite high survival rates (after all, these watches are tough), I'm unsure that this makes sense. Fortunately for my watch, but unfortunately for my golf game, my stroke just doesn't have the power of a pro's swing. But all I need is one good impact, and the watch will have a problem.

I recall one collector from Scandinavia asked if his IWC watch could withstand him chopping wood. And I recall a rider in the Tour de France wearing a fine watch. I'm unsure why either person would want to test his mechanical watch to that extent.

Wibbs

Yet military issued watches have been around for yonks and an infantry guy is going to put way more shocks and impacts on his watch than some bloke on the fairway. There were plenty of guys operating machine guns wearing wristwatches and a Spandau at full chatwould rattle your fillings. Quite a few of those military pieces were tested for impact, salt, radio and magnetic and nuclear radiation, water ingress, G's etc* and though some of the military collectors like to think they were somehow special watches, the vast majority were the exact same basic watches as you'd buy in the shops at the time. They certainly had the same movements.

That said the vast majority were not automatics but hand winders so maybe it's the rotor that makes them more vulnerable?

The other thing that occurs is overall size and weight. Watches were smaller overall than today's stuff. So taking Homer and my experiences. My Doxa is 34mm and weighs feck all, his Panny much larger and heavier which would increase the risks of damage.

Maybe tighter tolerances these days are also in play? Given the choice between a Rolex Milsub from the 70's and a current Sub with the current movement I'd most certainly prefer the old timer. The vintage Rolex movements were more than decidedly meh on the high horology and finishing fronts but by god they were built like feckin tanks.







*EG the Heuer/Leonidas BUND chronograph was tested to sustained and intermittent +10/-8 G and had to remain accurate to 20 seconds a day afterwards.

Wibbs

unkel wrote: »

I'm sure the article is accurate for IWC and other delicate watches, but I'd expect a tough tool watch from Rolex or Omega to be fine doing any of this all day long:

Maybe U, maybe not. I mean talking about modern current movements. They've gotten all dead fancy like as they became more about luxury and jewellery. Look at a 60's Rolex movement.



Look at the wide tolerances



Not exactly clear caseback material, finishing is minimal and it's a long way from luxury, but it's built like a bloody tank. Looks like you could service it with a hammer and a stick. It's not far off a Swiss Seiko type movement(another tank like movement). It;s why they have a great rep for going for decades being bashed about without servicing. Now they've kept close enough to the earlier designs, but with much higher tolerances and much fancier overall. Omega's coaxial escapement ups the complexity yet again.

Fitz II

Wibbs wrote: »

Yet military issued watches have been around for yonks and an infantry guy is going to put way more shocks and impacts on his watch than some bloke on the fairway. There were plenty of guys operating machine guns wearing wristwatches and a Spandau at full chatwould rattle your fillings. Quite a few of those military pieces were tested for impact, salt, radio and magnetic and nuclear radiation, water ingress, G's etc* and though some of the military collectors like to think they were somehow special watches, the vast majority were the exact same basic watches as you'd buy in the shops at the time. They certainly had the same movements.

That said the vast majority were not automatics but hand winders so maybe it's the rotor that makes them more vulnerable?

The other thing that occurs is overall size and weight. Watches were smaller overall than today's stuff. So taking Homer and my experiences. My Doxa is 34mm and weighs feck all, his Panny much larger and heavier which would increase the risks of damage.

Maybe tighter tolerances these days are also in play? Given the choice between a Rolex Milsub from the 70's and a current Sub with the current movement I'd most certainly prefer the old timer. The vintage Rolex movements were more than decidedly meh on the high horology and finishing fronts but by god they were built like feckin tanks.







*EG the Heuer/Leonidas BUND chronograph was tested to sustained and intermittent +10/-8 G and had to remain accurate to 20 seconds a day afterwards.

Any machine can fail at any time for any number of reasons mean time between failures is the measure. While I am sure any watch can play a round of golf. Its a high impact game. Richard Mille make a special golf watch and a tennis watch. While thats total overkill...it really goes to show that a Rolex is worth fixing and some plastic childs watch is not.

Cienciano

It is possible to buy a nice quartz, some great models out there. Doesn't have to be an €8 casio.

njburke

I have a couple of casio Oceanus, it has tough movement printed on the dial not that i'ld believe everything written on a watch face.

What do we think is doing the damage, the shock transmitted through the golf club to the wrist?

Thirdfox

https://www.fratellowatches.com/watches-and-golf/#gref

Here's another article on golfing and watches - the interesting element here is that they have a response from Rolex and Omega along with a quote from Audemar Piguet.

Seems like golfing impacts a few hundred gs of force but Omega master chronometers can withstand 5000gs on the balance.

It's why I tested Starlight up to vibrations of a hedge cutter but wouldn't try it with a chainsaw

I'm a right handed (bad) tennis player and wear the watch on the left hand so I don't worry it (plus I don't hit the ball hard enough anyway). Table tennis is safe enough anyway