Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

Watch That Will Last

Options
2»

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    Anjobe
    Registered Users Posts: 1,445 ✭✭✭Anjobe


    onmebike wrote: »
    It says that it's Automatic. Does this mean it uses hand/arm motion to keep itself wound? Is that a reliable enough technology or a bit gimickey? I seem to remember hearing about that for the first time about 10 or 15 years ago - was it a Seiko or something that was well known at the time?
    Cyclingtourist wrote: »
    Yeah, hand/arm motion, it's a new gimmick. It'll never catch on, better stick to battery powered quartz.
    Wibbs wrote: »
    Basically there are two types of movement; mechanical with gears and springs around for centuries and quartz which uses electronics and battery power.

    Mechanical movements break down again into two types automatics and hand wound. Both wind the spring that drives the watch. An automatic has a swinging weight in the movement that while wearing rotates and winds the watch. Hand wound movements do what they say on the tin :D you wind the spring with the crown on the side of the watch by hand. Most automatic movements allow you do this too. Automatic movements have been around since the 1920's first invented by Harwood so have stood the test of time :)

    Hand wound movements involve more input on the part of the owner which some people prefer, but automatic or handwound it's down to a personal choice.

    I think onemebike may have been mixing up mechanical automatic and Seiko Kinetic movement powered quartz watches.

    Seiko Kinetic have actually been around since 1988 and there have been a number of innovations since then, e.g. auto-relay, direct drive etc. I think you could argue that it is a bit gimmicky, other Japanese manufacturers all went for solar power for multi-function quartz watches that don't need frequent battery changes.


  • Options
    #33
    onmebike
    Registered Users Posts: 262 ✭✭onmebike


    Anjobe wrote: »
    I think onemebike may have been mixing up mechanical automatic and Seiko Kinetic movement powered quartz watches.

    Seiko Kinetic have actually been around since 1988 and there have been a number of innovations since then, e.g. auto-relay, direct drive etc. I think you could argue that it is a bit gimmicky, other Japanese manufacturers all went for solar power for multi-function quartz watches that don't need frequent battery changes.


    You're absolutely right - the Kinetic brand came to mind a short while ago. To my uneducated view at the time, it seemed to be marketed as something new and groundbreaking.


  • Options
    #34
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Kinetic and solar were competing technologies for a self-charging quartz watch. (I say competing loosely)

    Solar was the smarter of the two, no moving parts and stays charged when unworn. Kinetic might suit someone who always has the watch under a sleeve, or who only owns a single watch. Once you have a couple of watches then solar just makes more sense.


  • Options
    #35
    onmebike
    Registered Users Posts: 262 ✭✭onmebike


    There's some great information and examples here. So, here are some of the things that I think I should be looking for, for longevity...

    • Dive watch - waterproof, so will probably stand up to the elements a bit better.
    • I prefer the idea of mechanical and I'll look more into hand wound vs automatic. But a good quartz will be good.
    • Chronographs - more expensive for good quality.
    • Steel body with a ceramic bezel and sapphire crystal.

    Some of these catch my eye.
    Steinhart Ocean - https://www.steinhartwatches.de/en/ocean-one-39-black-ceramic.html
    Seiko - https://weirandsons.ie/seiko-gents-stainless-steel-automatic-watch-01558076.html
    Hamilton Khaki Mechanical - https://www.hamiltonwatch.com/en-int/h69439131-khaki-field-mechanical.html


  • Options
    #36
    Wibbs
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,071 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    The Hamilton Khaki is a nice watch in the flesh. Based on a 1960's military issued watch by the same company.

    t2ec16ve9s2fb2brwp12yq60_3.jpg

    Though the original is much smaller and not nearly as well built as the new one.

    review here

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2scVRDoDKSA


    Those Hamiltons look good on a NATO strap too, so you have that option.

    Hamilton-583x715.jpg

    IMHO the Hamilton is great value for a nice watch with a Swiss movement. At that pricepoint I don't think it can be bettered.

    The Seiko is a decent watch too. Seiko are a good bet in general.

    Again the Steinhart is nice, but too much of a Rolex copy for me. I personally prefer something that stands on its own merits if you know what I mean.

    There is also the option of going used which opens up more options but that can be a minefield too. And I'd avoid vintage like the plague at this stage.

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    onmebike
    Registered Users Posts: 262 ✭✭onmebike


    Wibbs wrote: »
    There is also the option of going used which opens up more options but that can be a minefield too. And I'd avoid vintage like the plague at this stage.
    Would there be any particular source or sources for 2nd hand watches that you could recommend? I'm assuming DoneDeal or Adverts are less likely to be reputable?


  • Options
    #38
    Cyclingtourist
    Registered Users Posts: 1,599 ✭✭✭Cyclingtourist


    Wibbs wrote: »
    IMHO the Hamilton is great value for a nice watch with a Swiss movement. At that pricepoint I don't think it can be bettered.

    I was going to buy one but saw reports that the H-50 movement was causing problems, people reporting very disappointing time keeping after some months. I think Hamilton's move to extend the power reserve may have been at a cost.

    Not on my radar anymore.


  • Options
    #39
    Trigger Happy
    Registered Users Posts: 6,067 ✭✭✭Trigger Happy


    Cyclingtourist wrote: »
    I was going to buy one but saw reports that the H-50 movement was causing problems, people reporting very disappointing time keeping after some months. I think Hamilton's move to extend the power reserve may have been at a cost.

    Not on my radar anymore.

    Noooooo! I ordered one of these last week. The Hamilton Khaki Field Automatic with 80 hour power reserve and the H10 movement.
    Was delighted with getting a new one from an italian dealer for €430.
    Will be testing the bejaysus out of it once it arrives.


  • Options
    #40
    Cyclingtourist
    Registered Users Posts: 1,599 ✭✭✭Cyclingtourist


    Trigger Happy wrote: »
    Noooooo! I ordered one of these last week. The Hamilton Khaki Field Automatic with 80 hour power reserve and the H10 movement.
    Was delighted with getting a new one from an italian dealer for €430.
    Will be testing the bejaysus out of it once it arrives.

    I'd be interested to know whether yours has this problem down the road. As I say, just basing my opinion on hearsay on the internet so yours might be fine.

    A power reserve of more than 48 hours isn't something that really attracts me anyhow.

    Edit: Here's one of my sources about the Khaki.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DsH4erM34vk&t=91s

    Scroll to about 5:20 on his video.


  • Options
    #41
    micks_address
    Registered Users Posts: 8,446 ✭✭✭micks_address


    Wibbs wrote: »
    Steinhart are a good solid watch alright and are popular. Though they tend to get sold on quickly enough. They seem to be a gateway drug :D that leads to more spending on more expensive or different watches.

    yeah i think its like you buy a skoda and its great but you end up in a vw or audi a few years down the line


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    Cyclingtourist
    Registered Users Posts: 1,599 ✭✭✭Cyclingtourist


    micks_address wrote: »
    yeah i think its like you buy a skoda and its great but you end up in a vw or audi a few years down the line

    Skoda is owned by VW. Tudor is a better analogy than Steinhart.


  • Options
    #43
    46 Long
    Closed Accounts Posts: 355 ✭✭46 Long


    Trigger Happy wrote: »
    Noooooo! I ordered one of these last week. The Hamilton Khaki Field Automatic with 80 hour power reserve and the H10 movement.
    Was delighted with getting a new one from an italian dealer for €430.
    Will be testing the bejaysus out of it once it arrives.

    I have the same watch with the H10 movement. I set mine last weekend for the first time since the clocks went back in October and it was about 20 seconds fast. Only downside is the beat rate has been dropped to 21600 A/h to extend the power reserve so the second hand sweep isn't particularly smooth.


  • Options
    #44
    redlead
    Registered Users Posts: 1,123 ✭✭✭redlead


    Anjobe wrote: »
    Seiko Kinetic have actually been around since 1988 and there have been a number of innovations since then, e.g. auto-relay, direct drive etc. I think you could argue that it is a bit gimmicky, other Japanese manufacturers all went for solar power for multi-function quartz watches that don't need frequent battery changes.

    I wore a seiko kinetic day in day out for about 13 years solid. I definitely wouldn't call them gimmicky but I don't know if I could go back to one. There is a rotor in them similar to an automatic but its very noisy and very heavy. I believe the charge lasts up to 30 days on them which is pretty impressive.


  • Options
    #45
    Cyclingtourist
    Registered Users Posts: 1,599 ✭✭✭Cyclingtourist


    redlead wrote: »
    I wore a seiko kinetic day in day out for about 13 years solid. I definitely wouldn't call them gimmicky but I don't know if I could go back to one. There is a rotor in them similar to an automatic but its very noisy and very heavy. I believe the charge lasts up to 30 days on them which is pretty impressive.

    From National Geographic Magazine December 1997

    "Someday all watches will be made this way"

    541468.jpg


  • Options
    #46
    Wibbs
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,071 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    That couldn't be more 90's if it tried. Well... *looks at 90's TAG Heuer* :) Though mark my words, the way the hobby is going and supplies of earlier vintage stuff are getting lean, next target for the dealers/influencers will be 80's and 90's style watches as "the Next Big Thing". Ten years ago you would be hard pressed to shift 70's style watches, yet today...

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • Options
    #47
    redlead
    Registered Users Posts: 1,123 ✭✭✭redlead


    I don't know how they are claiming that there is no battery. My understanding is that your wrist movement charges the capacitor which is effectively a battery. They still need to be replaced after about 10 years. You have to hand it to seiko, they are always trying to develop new movements.


Advertisement