The Breitling Watch Source Forums :: View topic - So, a Quartz movement? Is it ever acceptable?

Having bought three watches in the same amount of months I am not in a position to pull the trigger now but the Hydromax is definitely on my wish list.

Few things in this world please me more than the gentle ticking of the watch on my wrist

Attachment:

uploadfromtaptalk1337602189557.jpg

Few things in this world frustrate me more than resetting the bloody thing when it's been off my wrist for a couple of days...

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk 2

I won't ever buy one, because I want the mechanical marvel, !

I've owned numerous quartz watches over the years (mostly as a kid) and then a couple as beaters during my adult years, but I also owned a Sinn UX which is essentially the same at the B&R Hydromax - although personally I think the Sinn is the better looking watch.

The novelty of an oil-filled case was great, especially as it makes the dial look totally flat even when viewed at an angle - I've got some pictures and a mini review of it up on here somewhere.

These days I only buy mechanical watches, but these oil-filled cases preclude a mechanical movement being used, so for that reason alone there is no alternative if you want an "any depth capable" watch.

For what they are, these watches are hard to beat, so quartz is the only option. But ultimately, it depends what each individual wants from a watch - super-accuracy and the cold "wear and forget" capability of quartz, or the miniature mechancial marvel and warmth of a mechanical movement that you need to interact with now and then. I know which I prefer but everyone's different.

(Still thinking about a Gemini IV Speedy)

ricardo wrote:

Having bought three watches in the same amount of months I am not in a position to pull the trigger now but the Hydromax is definitely on my wish list.

I've just seen the price and it's a bit of a bargain IMO.

It's so slim for the depth as it runs in oil; not sure what that would do for the battery life or service cost but hell. Love it!

Although most of my watches are mechanical, I think quartz watches do have their own place and are reliable for the most part. Just my opinion, but I think Breitling Superquartz the best as far as quartz goes. My Airwolf has all the functions I need and more, and dead accurate. My Omega X-33 is also a grerat aviation tool watch. And my Tag Link chrono (Bourne model) is a great watch that can take a beating.

Great thread as always Rick.

This is where quartz makes so much sense and has a strong arguement. Which is why I think that standard, non-complicated, analogue watches with no complications have no soul. Until, I studied and wore the Hydromax that is.

Author:	ricardo [ Mon May 21, 2012 2:13 am ]
Post subject:	So, a Quartz movement? Is it ever acceptable?
I've found myself pondering over this conundrum long and hard over the last couple of days. My deliberations are the result of being leant the incredible Hydromax 11100m from Bell and Ross. I never expected to like this watch much primarily due to its quartz movement, albeit one with a quoted 9 year battery life. However, I have truly fallen for the idea of owning a watch that is capable of working at over 11km (about 7 miles) under water, where pressures ae in the region of 9 tonnes per square inch. I also love the simple, utilitarian, ultra-legible aesthetics. And it is so comfortable to wear. Unlike, I imagine, the CX Swiss Military 20,000ft mechanical watch which has to be 28.5mm thick to withstand the pressures at only 6000m. The packaging is also the best I have seen at this price point. A water proof and non-submergible case contains two spare straps and the tool to swap them over at ease. I love horology. My watches have all got in-house movements with unusual complications that I can view through sapphire exhibition case backs. I am a member of the British Horological Society. So, I was having a hard time justifying coveting the Bell and Ross Hydromax. But then I realised that a watch can be useful to the end user in many ways. My mechanical movements all have their limitations due to their accuracy and the main spring winding down. There could be a place in my watch collection for a beater watch. So, what then becomes important? Comfort, reliability, strength, legibility and constant running. Bingo! I can indeed justify the Bell and Ross Hydromax. In fact, it makes perfect sense as a beater. After all I have a bedside quartz alarm clock that runs off a radio signal which I use to set all of my mechanical watches when they inevitably run down (apart from my 8 day Panerai. That's never had the chance to run down!) Having bought three watches in the same amount of months I am not in a position to pull the trigger now but the Hydromax is definitely on my wish list. Have you had any similar watch buying dilemmas where you love something but you think you really shouldn't?

Author:	Gyp [ Mon May 21, 2012 4:11 am ]
Post subject:	Re: So, a Quartz movement? Is it ever acceptable?
Few things in this world please me more than the gentle ticking of the watch on my wrist Attachment: uploadfromtaptalk1337602189557.jpg Few things in this world frustrate me more than resetting the bloody thing when it's been off my wrist for a couple of days... Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk 2

Author:	matt968 [ Mon May 21, 2012 4:45 am ]
Post subject:	Re: So, a Quartz movement? Is it ever acceptable?
Nothing wrong with a quartz, it all depends on what you want/need. Quartz is a lot more accurate, but doesn't have that x factor like mechanical watches.

Author:	Roffensian [ Mon May 21, 2012 5:27 am ]
Post subject:	Re: So, a Quartz movement? Is it ever acceptable?
Depends what you are looking for in a watch Rick. I won't ever buy one, because I want the mechanical marvel, but I will also never consider a watch to be anything less significant simply because it has a quartz movement. If the whole package is what you want then go for it!

Author:	Driver8 [ Mon May 21, 2012 7:16 am ]
Post subject:	Re: So, a Quartz movement? Is it ever acceptable?
I've owned numerous quartz watches over the years (mostly as a kid) and then a couple as beaters during my adult years, but I also owned a Sinn UX which is essentially the same at the B&R Hydromax - although personally I think the Sinn is the better looking watch. The novelty of an oil-filled case was great, especially as it makes the dial look totally flat even when viewed at an angle - I've got some pictures and a mini review of it up on here somewhere. These days I only buy mechanical watches, but these oil-filled cases preclude a mechanical movement being used, so for that reason alone there is no alternative if you want an "any depth capable" watch. For what they are, these watches are hard to beat, so quartz is the only option. But ultimately, it depends what each individual wants from a watch - super-accuracy and the cold "wear and forget" capability of quartz, or the miniature mechancial marvel and warmth of a mechanical movement that you need to interact with now and then. I know which I prefer but everyone's different.

The Breitling Watch Source Forums https://www.breitlingsource.com/phpBB2/

So, a Quartz movement? Is it ever acceptable? https://www.breitlingsource.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=40007	Page 1 of 2

Author:	Scott [ Mon May 21, 2012 7:56 am ]
Post subject:	Re: So, a Quartz movement? Is it ever acceptable?
Particularly if you have a lot of watches and you are using the watch as a weekender or a beater, I think a quartz is fine. I'm not in the place where I'd want to wear it every day, but when you are checking each of your howevermany watches for accuracy, sometimes it's nice to just strap on the quartz and go, without a second thought. My knock-around weekender and golf watch is a Luminox. Quartz and perfect for the task, I never worry about what happens to it. I confess to considering an old SMP quartz for my obligatory blue watch. Now that watch might get more use, so I can't quite go that far yet. (Still thinking about a Gemini IV Speedy)

Author:	Gyp [ Mon May 21, 2012 9:07 am ]
Post subject:	Re: So, a Quartz movement? Is it ever acceptable?
ricardo wrote: Having bought three watches in the same amount of months I am not in a position to pull the trigger now but the Hydromax is definitely on my wish list. I've just seen the price and it's a bit of a bargain IMO. It's so slim for the depth as it runs in oil; not sure what that would do for the battery life or service cost but hell. Love it!

Author:	46crew [ Mon May 21, 2012 9:23 am ]
Post subject:	Re: So, a Quartz movement? Is it ever acceptable?
Although most of my watches are mechanical, I think quartz watches do have their own place and are reliable for the most part. Just my opinion, but I think Breitling Superquartz the best as far as quartz goes. My Airwolf has all the functions I need and more, and dead accurate. My Omega X-33 is also a grerat aviation tool watch. And my Tag Link chrono (Bourne model) is a great watch that can take a beating. Great thread as always Rick.

Author:	ricardo [ Mon May 21, 2012 9:33 am ]
Post subject:	Re: So, a Quartz movement? Is it ever acceptable?
Gyp wrote: Few things in this world please me more than the gentle ticking of the watch on my wrist Attachment: uploadfromtaptalk1337602189557.jpg Few things in this world frustrate me more than resetting the bloody thing when it's been off my wrist for a couple of days... Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk 2 I agree Gyp. I don't mind hand winding my watches at all, if they need it. In fact I find it therapeutic. But I also am not a fan of having to set the time to my, aforementioned, radio clock. Especially as the minute hand never lines up with the seconds hand afterwards.

Author:	ricardo [ Mon May 21, 2012 9:35 am ]
Post subject:	Re: So, a Quartz movement? Is it ever acceptable?
Roffensian wrote: I won't ever buy one, because I want the mechanical marvel, ! I used to live by the same rules Roff. However, I have my four mechanical marvels and I really need a beater for the gym, steam room, cycling, garden, etc. Perhaps quartz is the best option.

Author:	ricardo [ Mon May 21, 2012 9:39 am ]
Post subject:	Re: So, a Quartz movement? Is it ever acceptable?
Driver8 wrote: I've owned numerous quartz watches over the years (mostly as a kid) and then a couple as beaters during my adult years, but I also owned a Sinn UX which is essentially the same at the B&R Hydromax - although personally I think the Sinn is the better looking watch. The novelty of an oil-filled case was great, especially as it makes the dial look totally flat even when viewed at an angle - I've got some pictures and a mini review of it up on here somewhere. These days I only buy mechanical watches, but these oil-filled cases preclude a mechanical movement being used, so for that reason alone there is no alternative if you want an "any depth capable" watch. For what they are, these watches are hard to beat, so quartz is the only option. But ultimately, it depends what each individual wants from a watch - super-accuracy and the cold "wear and forget" capability of quartz, or the miniature mechancial marvel and warmth of a mechanical movement that you need to interact with now and then. I know which I prefer but everyone's different. Don't get me wrong: I will always prefer a mechanical movement. I don't think a quartz movement has the soul or character of a mechanical movement. I think the Sin UX is a superb watch as well. The addition of a COSC thermo-compensated quartz movement is a bonus. I actually prefer the aesthetics of the Bell and Ross, but that is, of course, purely subjective. Also, I can't get anywhere near the discount on the Sinn

Author:	ricardo [ Mon May 21, 2012 9:41 am ]
Post subject:	Re: So, a Quartz movement? Is it ever acceptable?
Scott wrote: (Still thinking about a Gemini IV Speedy) I don't blame you Scott. I hope my description of the G4 in my PM was helpful.

Author:	ricardo [ Mon May 21, 2012 9:43 am ]
Post subject:	Re: So, a Quartz movement? Is it ever acceptable?
Gyp wrote: ricardo wrote: Having bought three watches in the same amount of months I am not in a position to pull the trigger now but the Hydromax is definitely on my wish list. I've just seen the price and it's a bit of a bargain IMO. It's so slim for the depth as it runs in oil; not sure what that would do for the battery life or service cost but hell. Love it! Apparently it reduces the usual 9 years battery life down to about 5. Incidentally, talking about the oil, the Hydromax does not make a ticking sound (most annoying in quartz 1 Hz watches) due to the dampening effect of the oil. That I also like as well.

Author:	ricardo [ Mon May 21, 2012 9:58 am ]
Post subject:	Re: So, a Quartz movement? Is it ever acceptable?
46crew wrote: Although most of my watches are mechanical, I think quartz watches do have their own place and are reliable for the most part. Just my opinion, but I think Breitling Superquartz the best as far as quartz goes. My Airwolf has all the functions I need and more, and dead accurate. My Omega X-33 is also a grerat aviation tool watch. And my Tag Link chrono (Bourne model) is a great watch that can take a beating. Great thread as always Rick. I couldn't agree more. Quartz watches are electronic and are, therefore, easy to program for minute repeaters, perpetual calendars, rattrapante/flyback chronographs, alarms, etc. These are all complications that cost a fortune for a mechanical watch. I loved my Tissot T-Touch whilst I had it. The only equivalent mechanical watch I can think of that even comes close is the JLC AMVOX II chronograph with the tilting sapphire glass which costs over 20 times as much. This is where quartz makes so much sense and has a strong arguement. Which is why I think that standard, non-complicated, analogue watches with no complications have no soul. Until, I studied and wore the Hydromax that is.

Page 1 of 2	All times are UTC - 8 hours
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group https://www.phpbb.com/

Author:	TomP [ Mon May 21, 2012 11:02 am ]
Post subject:	Re: So, a Quartz movement? Is it ever acceptable?
ricardo wrote: This is where quartz makes so much sense and has a strong arguement. Which is why I think that standard, non-complicated, analogue watches with no complications have no soul. Until, I studied and wore the Hydromax that is. Come to the dark side... It's horses for courses. My Colt SQ has lost half a second in about six weeks (since it arrived from your shop!). I know super accuracy isn't everything, but in a watch, it's not negligible...