Quartz vs Mechanical
This discussion shows up every once in a while at all the watchfora (see the links in the menu on the right), quartz movements vs mechanical movements. To me, a mechnical movement is definately more fun, but this doesn’t say a quartz movement is bad or can’t be justified in an expensive watch (think Rolex OysterQuartz with their ‘mechanical’ escapement). Marc started a thread about the costs of a quartz watch in the High-End quartzforum, is it really worth it? See for yourself, click here
As a watchcollector I must say that although I prefer mechanical watches, I do have my share of quartz watches and I sincerely regret selling a Rolex OysterQuartz DateJust but I can understand the worries of someone paying a lot of money for a high-end quartz watch. The only thing I can say to this is that the quartz movement in a Rolex, Omega or IWC is definately not the same as the one in a 10 USD plastic watch.
January 13th, 2006 at 12:12
quartz is deffinitively better…you buy wrist watcth and you wear it for 15-20 years and then buy another one…thats simple…because it is more precise…
September 28th, 2007 at 00:20
HOW COME MECHANICAL WATCHES COME BACK IN UPPER END MODELS?inspite of weight and less accurate. Any improvement made in per second vibrations from the earlier 33/sec?
July 1st, 2008 at 15:39
I’m sort of a techno-geek myself, earning my living with a computer. But I wear a Titoni automatic (mechanical) watch. I guess I just like to keep one small area of my life immune to the ravages of the digital revolution. I’m not quite sure why, but a mechanical watch is just more of a “real” watch.