3 ms·

For a survey of a few watches I have owned: - $50-60 Fossil: Would break in under a year. - $500 Automatic Tissot: after a couple of years, it couldn't keep t

by kop316 7y ago

For a survey of a few watches I have owned: - $50-60 Fossil: Would break in under a year. - $500 Automatic Tissot: after a couple of years, it couldn't keep time (it added minutes in a period of a week). - $400 Quartz Citizen: something on it died after three years, and it wasn't the battery. Not worth it to save. - $4000 Automatic Omega: keeps time amazingly (off by ~7 seconds a week). No issues after two years. - $60 GPS Soleus: perfect watch for running/working out/rough activities. When two of my sub $500 watches fail like they did in under give years, I am very hesitant to want another one. On top of that, there are many watches that are just branded watches from another company (e.g. a Burberry Watch is really a branded Fossil Watch). I can see why someone would prefer a smart watch based on those experiences. The reason I don't get a smart watch is primarily that I dislike having yet another devices to charge. Well...that and I really like my Omega.

davidgay 7y ago
> $500 Automatic Tissot: after a couple of years, it couldn't keep time (it added minutes in a period of a week). Sounds like it got magnetized (https://wornandwound.com/watches-and-magnetization/ https://wornandwound.com/watches-and-magnetization/), which can happen quite easily. For instance, the magnetic closure of Mac laptops did that to one of my watches, from resting my wrist next to the touchpad. The good news is it's easy to fix with an ~$10 watch demagnetizer.
- kop316 7y ago
  I took it to an authorized repair shop, they said the cost of repair was more than the watch. I'm guessing they would have taken it into account?
LeoPanthera 7y ago
> amazingly (off by ~7 seconds a week). We only think "7 seconds a week" is amazing because we've somehow decided that mechanical watches are still worth buying. I have a Bulova Precisionst that cost 10% the price of your Omega and it's accurate to ~10 seconds a YEAR. I adjust it exactly twice a year - for DST. And even that is considered an expensive model.
- kop316 7y ago
  shrug I like the look and feel of it. If you looked, I have had a quartz watch that was ~10% of this price. I prefer the Omega. I also know that it isn't as accurate. It doesn't bother me.

by kop316 7y ago

davidgay 7y ago

> $500 Automatic Tissot: after a couple of years, it couldn't keep time (it added minutes in a period of a week). Sounds like it got magnetized (https://wornandwound.com/watches-and-magnetization/ https://wornandwound.com/watches-and-magnetization/), which can happen quite easily. For instance, the magnetic closure of Mac laptops did that to one of my watches, from resting my wrist next to the touchpad. The good news is it's easy to fix with an ~$10 watch demagnetizer.

kop316 7y ago
I took it to an authorized repair shop, they said the cost of repair was more than the watch. I'm guessing they would have taken it into account?

LeoPanthera 7y ago

> amazingly (off by ~7 seconds a week). We only think "7 seconds a week" is amazing because we've somehow decided that mechanical watches are still worth buying. I have a Bulova Precisionst that cost 10% the price of your Omega and it's accurate to ~10 seconds a YEAR. I adjust it exactly twice a year - for DST. And even that is considered an expensive model.

kop316 7y ago
shrug I like the look and feel of it. If you looked, I have had a quartz watch that was ~10% of this price. I prefer the Omega. I also know that it isn't as accurate. It doesn't bother me.