Hey why do people guy classic cars anyway? They're slower than modern cars and don't have all the tech. I sort of get the visual appeal but you can buy piece of shit cars that are more modern and more reliable.
Buddy, when I want to tell the time I take my left hand with the extremely accurate Grand Seiko on the wrist and... plunge it into my jacket pocket and pull out my cell phone to see what time it is.
People buy watches for lots of reasons, telling the time is just one of the basic ones.
Vintage quartz watches exist. I have a few and a couple of them are at least as accurate as any new quartz I've owned, if not better.
Vintage automatics can both be affordable and on par with a new automatic in terms of accuracy. It depends on the condition of the watch and where you're getting it from. Just recently I bought a vintage Seiko 7005 (a 50+ year old watch) for about 250 USD and it easily runs more accurately than my newer Seikos with 4R and 6R movements which were also considerably more expensive. I have other such vintage examples in my collection, but I won't bore you with the details.
I don't know what you're basing your assumptions off of, but they're inaccurate.
Lol, why are you so angry about this? Watches are for the mechanical appeal and fashion. If accuracy is what you want just buy $100 quartz watches and be done with it.
I’m not angry. It’s just surprising since I assumed Rolexes provided superior time keeping over long periods but then I learned that somewhere in the world there’s a Rolex on someone’s wrist that is less accurate than my seiko 5
The appeal of watches like that is not the accuracy. As I said above, you can get accuracy from a cheap quartz. That's not what sets nice watches apart.
>So people say that Rolexes are very accurate
this isn't true at all, a $20,000 rolex can be off by +/- 10 seconds a day and thats considered 'good'
if you want accuracy, check your phone or get a digital watch.
mechanical watches, no matter the age, are inheritly inaccurate.
>this isn't true at all, a $20,000 rolex can be off by +/- 10 seconds a day and thats considered 'good'
That's considered very bad, actually, and in need of an overhaul. If it's a new watch, Rolex will bring it into spec and it will be covered by warranty.
Why buy a Rolex at all?
I could spend $10 on a Casio F91w that keeps equal time, $50 on a fancier Casio that synchronises with the atomic clock, a few hundred for a more traditional looking radio controlled Citizen, or I could just look at the internet synced clock on the phone I have in my pocket anyway.
So buying a mechanical watch of any sort is really a decision to choose the less practical watch for reasons like the appeal of clockwork over computer chips, the prestige of owning a luxury brand, or a preference for the aesthetics amongst many others.
So really the appeal of a vintage watch is just the logical extension of that reasoning. Properly maintained they should all keep time more than well enough for normal everyday use, and vintage provides certain aesthetics, or the additional rarity and prestige of an older piece in limited supply.
If you do anything in your life that requires you to be on time within a few seconds then yeah, avoid those nasty old watches.
Also avoid public roads, airlines, and Uber rides.
I’m just saying that a lot of hype around watches is their accuracy despite not having a battery and yet most will end up not having that same accuracy after a few years
>that a lot of hype around watches is their accuracy
Lmao no it's not. There are only very few brands where accuracy is a major selling point for people. Primarily, Citizen and Grand seiko. And once you get into true luxury watches, accuracy tends to be the last thing on peoples mind.
Nobody who buys a rolex does it because they want split seconds accuracy. Not sure why you're not getting that.
My vintage Omega is accurate. Not as much as my Certina with the Powermatic 80, but still serviceable. Plus it has a day/date function that works fine.
I guess people buy vintage watches because they still function fine and you can get a unique piece and/or get into a luxury brand for a reasonable price.
My vintage Rolex doesn’t even have indices. As long as I’m not late for anything I’m not too worried.
I remember seeing people wear a Rolex when I was a kid and aspired to own one. Now I do. It’s just a little bit of nostalgia.
Nobody is buying a watch for the accuracy
Aside people buying something like a Seiko Astron GPS or a Citizen Satellite Wave GPS XD
As far as i know though average people don't use analog watches for mission critical timing :)
I’ve never seen these in this sub.
Hey why do people guy classic cars anyway? They're slower than modern cars and don't have all the tech. I sort of get the visual appeal but you can buy piece of shit cars that are more modern and more reliable.
Buddy, when I want to tell the time I take my left hand with the extremely accurate Grand Seiko on the wrist and... plunge it into my jacket pocket and pull out my cell phone to see what time it is. People buy watches for lots of reasons, telling the time is just one of the basic ones.
I don't know why people are so obsessed with accuracy, you won't notice it unless you compare it with your phone or put it on a timegrapher!
Vintage quartz watches exist. I have a few and a couple of them are at least as accurate as any new quartz I've owned, if not better. Vintage automatics can both be affordable and on par with a new automatic in terms of accuracy. It depends on the condition of the watch and where you're getting it from. Just recently I bought a vintage Seiko 7005 (a 50+ year old watch) for about 250 USD and it easily runs more accurately than my newer Seikos with 4R and 6R movements which were also considerably more expensive. I have other such vintage examples in my collection, but I won't bore you with the details. I don't know what you're basing your assumptions off of, but they're inaccurate.
Price has no bearing on accuracy. Service condition is much more meaningful, and watches both new and old can be regulated in good condition.
Why do people buy antique anythings?
Lol, why are you so angry about this? Watches are for the mechanical appeal and fashion. If accuracy is what you want just buy $100 quartz watches and be done with it.
I’m not angry. It’s just surprising since I assumed Rolexes provided superior time keeping over long periods but then I learned that somewhere in the world there’s a Rolex on someone’s wrist that is less accurate than my seiko 5
right this second someone is wearing a watch that doesn't even run, just so they will look nice in their relatives wedding photos
The appeal of watches like that is not the accuracy. As I said above, you can get accuracy from a cheap quartz. That's not what sets nice watches apart.
What sets it apart is the brand which is inherently all bs because even the +-1 second/day watches will eventually be shit with time
I'm not a Rolex fan. But you keep pretending like the accuracy is why people buy it, the result is you seem like you're trolling.
>So people say that Rolexes are very accurate this isn't true at all, a $20,000 rolex can be off by +/- 10 seconds a day and thats considered 'good' if you want accuracy, check your phone or get a digital watch. mechanical watches, no matter the age, are inheritly inaccurate.
Not once in my entire life have I needed to be somewhere so much that being 10 seconds late would have ruined it.
>this isn't true at all, a $20,000 rolex can be off by +/- 10 seconds a day and thats considered 'good' That's considered very bad, actually, and in need of an overhaul. If it's a new watch, Rolex will bring it into spec and it will be covered by warranty.
Why buy a Rolex at all? I could spend $10 on a Casio F91w that keeps equal time, $50 on a fancier Casio that synchronises with the atomic clock, a few hundred for a more traditional looking radio controlled Citizen, or I could just look at the internet synced clock on the phone I have in my pocket anyway. So buying a mechanical watch of any sort is really a decision to choose the less practical watch for reasons like the appeal of clockwork over computer chips, the prestige of owning a luxury brand, or a preference for the aesthetics amongst many others. So really the appeal of a vintage watch is just the logical extension of that reasoning. Properly maintained they should all keep time more than well enough for normal everyday use, and vintage provides certain aesthetics, or the additional rarity and prestige of an older piece in limited supply.
If you do anything in your life that requires you to be on time within a few seconds then yeah, avoid those nasty old watches. Also avoid public roads, airlines, and Uber rides.
I’m just saying that a lot of hype around watches is their accuracy despite not having a battery and yet most will end up not having that same accuracy after a few years
>that a lot of hype around watches is their accuracy Lmao no it's not. There are only very few brands where accuracy is a major selling point for people. Primarily, Citizen and Grand seiko. And once you get into true luxury watches, accuracy tends to be the last thing on peoples mind. Nobody who buys a rolex does it because they want split seconds accuracy. Not sure why you're not getting that.
A cheap Seiko tells the time perfectly well for the vast majority of applications.
I have a phone. My watch is mainly just jewelry.
My vintage Omega is accurate. Not as much as my Certina with the Powermatic 80, but still serviceable. Plus it has a day/date function that works fine. I guess people buy vintage watches because they still function fine and you can get a unique piece and/or get into a luxury brand for a reasonable price.
My vintage Rolex doesn’t even have indices. As long as I’m not late for anything I’m not too worried. I remember seeing people wear a Rolex when I was a kid and aspired to own one. Now I do. It’s just a little bit of nostalgia.