Looking for durable, repairable watches
Charles Ball
They are attractive watches and have sentimental value, but weren't
expensive and don't seem particularly durable. Her(mineral?)crystal
is badly scratched, and batteries no longer last more than 6-8 months.
My gold plating is worn, the hour hand is out of alignment, one of
the lcd segments is gone (this is a dress analog/digital with alarm),
and it seems like the gaskets have failed. I asked the clock
repairman at a jeweler (in Boston's "Jeweler's building") to work on
mine and while he didn't refuse the work, he said removing the crystal
to realign the hands would probably break it; not a big deal since it
has a scratch, but I'm getting the impression that the watch wasn't
really intended to be repairable.
We're now contemplating replacements. I'm interested in watches that
are durable and are widely considered repairable for which parts are
unlikely to become an issue. Saphire crystals are definitely on the
list, and I'll probably drop the plated gold finish as much as I like
it. "heirloom" quality is not a requirement though I'm entirely
willing to consider a more expensive "vintage" watch.
I've just started searching alt.horology, this is a great group. The
mechanicals many here seem to love are fascinating but not [yet?]
compelling, I did actively use the alarm feature when traveling, but
the palm/clie can serve that role. I'm not sold on bi-annual service
appropriate to keep the mechanism happy, so a quartz watch is probably
more my/our speed; daily winding is not an option.
So I'm looking for a nice pair of new or "pre-owned" watches. If used,
is ebay a reasonable venue for what most here would consider low-end
watches? For features, date or day/date is entirely adequate for our
needs. Farsightedness is now an issue so legibility is a
consideration, thus we'll probably need to go through a retail outlet.
I originally came here to look for reviews of citizen's eco-drive and
now have reservations.
Any recommendations would be much appreciated.
Charles Ball
John Rowland
news:e709b928.0206...@posting.google.com...
>
> I'm interested in watches that
> are durable and are widely considered repairable for
> which parts are unlikely to become an issue. Saphire
> crystals are definitely on the list, and I'll probably drop
> the plated gold finish as much as I like it. "heirloom"
> quality is not a requirement though I'm entirely
> willing to consider a more expensive "vintage" watch.
Rado is rumoured to be an innovator in durable materials on quartz watches,
but I don't have any personal experience of their products.
--
John Rowland - Spamtrapped
Transport Plans for the London Area, updated 28th Nov.
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Acropolis/7069/tpftla.html
A man's vehicle is a symbol of his manhood.
That's why my vehicle's the Piccadilly Line -
It's the size of a county and it comes every two and a half minutes
Scott A. Ekleberry
wear the watch on a daily basis then an automatic winding watch will not
need to be wound. If you want durability I suggest stainless steel cases, my
Titanium case has all kinds of marks on it from daily wear (some from just
the band moving!!). The reason your gold wore thru so fast is that new cases
are only gold plated, no one (that I am aware of) makes gold filled cases
anymore. If you want something totally care-free buy a quartz watch, you
will get accuracy and they are mostly maintenance free (aside from battery
changes), but lack workmanship or character (just my opinion). As for
sapphire crystals, the one on my watch has several scratches, proof that
they are not "scratch-free".
--
Scott A. Ekleberry
It's About Time!
A full service watch repair shop!
www.itsabouttimeonline.com
SAE...@WOH.RR.COM
"Charles Ball" <anc...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:e709b928.0206...@posting.google.com...
Jack Forster
great folks and useful info here. AFAIK, it sounds like your best bet would be
something with a stainless steel case. Seiko makes a watch called the Kinetic
which has a quartz movement, but which is powered by a capacitor charged by the
movement of the wearers wrist, just like a mechanical automatic. Quite a few
styles and a range of prices. Crystals, I believe, all tend to need to be
replaced sooner or later- some more expensive watches use proprietary forms of
acrylic instead of sapphire because it's less prone to shatter, or because the
watch might have to tolerate sudden internal pressure changes. I've gradually
come around to accepting the notion that any watch is a mechanical device
which, in the course of things, is apt to need maintenance at some point- the
difference between a good watch and a junker, I think, is that a good watch
with proper maintenance will last decades at least, whereas a cheaper watch
will wear out, as yours did.
Jack Forster
NYS Licensed Acupuncturist
www.haelth.com
Thore B. Karlsen
wrote:
>Hi, I'm new to horology and alt.horology too, but have already found lots of
>great folks and useful info here. AFAIK, it sounds like your best bet would be
>something with a stainless steel case. Seiko makes a watch called the Kinetic
>which has a quartz movement, but which is powered by a capacitor charged by the
>movement of the wearers wrist, just like a mechanical automatic.
Have they fixed the problems they had with the capacitors crapping out?
Insofar as I can recall, replacing it is much more expensive than a
simple battery change, and I've heard stories of them breaking even
before a battery would run out. Happened to a friend of mine, but that
was a couple of years ago, so I don't know if they've fixed it by now.
I did find this, though, which was very interesting:
http://home.global.co.za/~pnel/Negative.htm
>Quite a few
>styles and a range of prices. Crystals, I believe, all tend to need to be
>replaced sooner or later- some more expensive watches use proprietary forms of
>acrylic instead of sapphire because it's less prone to shatter, or because the
>watch might have to tolerate sudden internal pressure changes.
Most expensive watches now use sapphire, but a couple of watches still
use plastic crystals for whatever reason. The Omega Speedmaster Pro uses
it for historical reasons, and the IWC Da Vinci and Portuguese 2000 also
use plastic crystals for reasons I don't know. Apart from those and some
other rare exceptions (they're so rare I can't off the top of my head
think of many other high-end watches that use them), most use sapphire.
I will never again buy a watch with a plastic crystal. It just scratches
much too easily, and I don't like their curvature. I have had no
problems with my sapphire crystals. I have absolutely no scratches after
several years, and I don't see why it would be necessary to change a
sapphire crystal unless it shatters. (Or chips along the edges, like
Rolex crystals are very prone to do.)
I haven't heard anything about using plastic crystals because of
internal pressure changes. Which watches would that be?
--
Be seeing you.
Jack Forster
>Insofar as I can recall, replacing it is much more expensive than a
>simple battery change, and I've heard stories of them breaking even
>before a battery would run out. Happened to a friend of mine, but that
>was a couple of years ago, so I don't know if they've fixed it by now.
Really? Didn't know this was a problem. . . hmmm. Just read the article- very
depressing, I was kind of considering a Kinetic, although for the money and at
this point I'd have probably saved my pennies and gotten a mechanical. It's a
shame- I've got 2 mechanical Seikos (a #5 and a 200 meter Diver's) and like
them very much, but it seems, at least from that article, that they've rushed a
product to market before its time. Jeez, a simple handwound or automatic
mechanical in a stainless case, without any additional bells and whistles, is
looking better and better. . .
>I will never again buy a watch with a plastic crystal. It just scratches
>much too easily, and I don't like their curvature. I have had no
>problems with my sapphire crystals. I have absolutely no scratches after
>several years, and I don't see why it would be necessary to change a
>sapphire crystal unless it shatters. (Or chips along the edges, like
>Rolex crystals are very prone to do.)
>
>I haven't heard anything about using plastic crystals because of
>internal pressure changes. Which watches would that be?
Well, I guess the point about sapphire being more brittle (though harder than
acrylic) was what I meant- greater chance of shattering or chipping and hence
needing replacement. Didn't know that Rolex crystals were prone to chipping!
I recall reading (somewhere or other on the great bathroom wall that is the
internet) a history of the Omega Speedmaster Professional, in which it was
remarked that NASA preferred a watch with an acrylic crystal for space missions
because of its' superior resistance to shattering. For daily use here on
Earth, though, I imagine sapphire probably makes more sense- I don't know, do
dive watches use one or the other?
Thore B. Karlsen
wrote:
>>Have they fixed the problems they had with the capacitors crapping out?
>>Insofar as I can recall, replacing it is much more expensive than a
>>simple battery change, and I've heard stories of them breaking even
>>before a battery would run out. Happened to a friend of mine, but that
>>was a couple of years ago, so I don't know if they've fixed it by now.
>Really? Didn't know this was a problem. . . hmmm. Just read the article- very
>depressing, I was kind of considering a Kinetic, although for the money and at
>this point I'd have probably saved my pennies and gotten a mechanical. It's a
>shame- I've got 2 mechanical Seikos (a #5 and a 200 meter Diver's) and like
>them very much, but it seems, at least from that article, that they've rushed a
>product to market before its time. Jeez, a simple handwound or automatic
>mechanical in a stainless case, without any additional bells and whistles, is
>looking better and better. . .
Well, that would be my choice. :) Especially at this price.
>>I will never again buy a watch with a plastic crystal. It just scratches
>>much too easily, and I don't like their curvature. I have had no
>>problems with my sapphire crystals. I have absolutely no scratches after
>>several years, and I don't see why it would be necessary to change a
>>sapphire crystal unless it shatters. (Or chips along the edges, like
>>Rolex crystals are very prone to do.)
>>
>>I haven't heard anything about using plastic crystals because of
>>internal pressure changes. Which watches would that be?
>Well, I guess the point about sapphire being more brittle (though harder than
>acrylic) was what I meant- greater chance of shattering or chipping and hence
>needing replacement. Didn't know that Rolex crystals were prone to chipping!
It's because they are flat, and they protrude quite a bit. The sharp
edges have a tendency to chip. It's not a problem with most other decent
watches, though, since the crystals are usually flush with the case.
>I recall reading (somewhere or other on the great bathroom wall that is the
>internet) a history of the Omega Speedmaster Professional, in which it was
>remarked that NASA preferred a watch with an acrylic crystal for space missions
>because of its' superior resistance to shattering. For daily use here on
>Earth, though, I imagine sapphire probably makes more sense- I don't know, do
>dive watches use one or the other?
Yes, I guess that's why Omega are sticking with the plastic. That's what
has kept me from buying one. I think all of the well known dive watches
use sapphire crystals.
--
Be seeing you.
dann...@cix.compulink.co.uk
> out?
> >>Insofar as I can recall, replacing it is much more expensive than a
> >>simple battery change, and I've heard stories of them breaking even
> >>before a battery would run out. Happened to a friend of mine, but that
> >>was a couple of years ago, so I don't know if they've fixed it by now.
>
> >Really? Didn't know this was a problem. . . hmmm. Just read the
I have one of these, the "battery" died, mainly I suspect because it was
not worn for some months and I sent it back for a service, they charged me
£100 including £74 (I think) for the battery. The crystal is scratched and
they did not replace it. With a plastic cover like on my Rolex if I
scratch it I can polish the scratch out and when Rolex service it every
five years they replace the glass with a new one, the last service was at
about the same time as the Seiko and cost £159
Danny
Scott A. Ekleberry
sapphire can.
Your point about the power cell is a good one. Many of the more expensive
mechanical and other watches have regular up-keep expenses which must be
figured into the cost of ownership. If you buy a Rolex for example, you are
making a life long investment which you can pass on to your children. But,
the watch will require periodic maintenance to stay at peak operating
performance, and overhauls on Rolex can be pricey. That $1000US Rolex at an
estate auction may seem like a deal, until you find out what it will cost to
put the watch in top condition. It still may be cheaper than a new one
though.
Seiko makes very good watches, I have worked on a lot of the mechanicals
(automatics and chronographs). I have never messed with one of the
Kinetic's, but have also heard bad things about the power cells. I should
think that Seiko would have fixed the problem by now, but maybe a
call/e-mail to their customer service line would set your mind at ease??
If your only goal is accuracy and low price, I recommend a quartz watch
(several nice ones are available for under $200). When it breaks/dies throw
it in the trash and buy a new one. Mechanical watches are almost never as
accurate as quartz, so if you are VERY attentive to your time keeping
(within a second or two a day) then only quartz will probably do.
--
Scott A. Ekleberry
It's About Time!
A full service watch repair shop!
www.itsabouttimeonline.com
SAE...@WOH.RR.COM
<dann...@cix.compulink.co.uk> wrote in message
news:adtb01$g4n$1...@thorium.cix.co.uk...
Jack Forster
>(automatics and chronographs). I have never messed with one of the
>Kinetic's, but have also heard bad things about the power cells. I should
>think that Seiko would have fixed the problem by now, but maybe a
>call/e-mail to their customer service line would set your mind at ease??
Glad to hear a good opinion about the mechanicals! I bought a 2nd hand Diver's
200M automatic, stainless band, for 125 USD and I'm very happy with it so far-
I haven't timed it but it seems to run within ten seconds or so a day (seems to
keep better time when I wear it a lot and when I put it crown down when it's
off my wrist, for some reason.) I read several user reviews on Timezone and
nobody had anything very negative to say about it.
It's too bad they dropped the ball on the Kinetics. You would think, etc. etc.
And a hundred quid to fix it, too boot!
Scott A. Ekleberry
better at full wind (when you wear it all the time) is that most mechanicals
have more power at full wind. As the spring runs down, most watches will
gain/loose some. It is also possible it needs cleaned, and the spring
doesn't have enough force to overcome this in a run-down state.
The reason it looses/gains (I'm assuming it looses though or is neutral)
when it is laid on the crown (this is called pendant down) is that position
is heavy. That is what is known as position error. My guess is they timed it
in pendant down (that is the position the watch would be in if you had your
arm at your side walking). The only way to get the error out is to poise the
balance VERY well (this does take time), or adjust the watch to positions
using the timing machine. To do that you put the watch on the machine in the
vertical positions, keeping track of the error in each position. The
position that is slowest will have a heavy spot on the balance. Weight is
removed from the balance at that point. This is done over and over until all
the positions are fairly close (this is called dynamically timing/poising).
To do this right you have to check the watch in 8 vertical positions. If a
good poise job is done on the balance during an overhaul there should be
little or no error in the positions. Where we see this type of error is in
the newer watches that have no balance screws (mainly Swiss and Japanese).
These watches are dynamically poised on a timing machine. The balances are
solid hard brass. If a heavy spot is found a drill is used to remove a small
amount of metal from the bottom of the balance in that spot (balance and
cock are taken out of the watch each time). Hairspring errors can also do
weird things to positional timing (another reason to make sure the
hairspring is trued and leveled at every service). Dynamically
poising/timing is an often lengthy and tedious process, most trade shops
(and many watchmakers) won't do it. It all goes back to time is money. Most
trade shops will time a watch in 1 to 3 positions (hence why your watch
keeps good time in pendant down), and to within 10-20 seconds (again
possibly why your watch doesn't keep time). Most trade shops also do not
poise balances. For the last 30 years one of the standard practices has been
the "dunk-swish-lube' job where they use a "plastic lube" in the last rinse
jar, supposed to negate having to oil the watch (I have one in my shop right
now that had one of those jobs, ran for 11 seconds at a time when they got
back, bad pivot holes, hairspring out of whack, etc.). Here is the text from
an e-mail my instructor from AWI sent on how they did it in a trade shop he
worked in when he first got out of watchmakers school:
We had two L&R Varimatics. One with clean/clean/rinse,
and one with OneStep plastic lubricant then
rinse/rinse. Would pop out the barrel and take the cap
off, (and I would remove the cap jewels and pallet
fork), and run it through the first machine. Then, we
would take the balance/cock complete out and run it
through the second machine. This kept the plastic lube
off the hairspring. I had my own clean OneDip that I
would clean the balance jewels, pallet fork, and
balance in. Then I would check the train freedom, oil
EVERYTHING, reassemble, and time it out. Being good
with hairsprings helps a lot on positional timing. The
"boss" just popped out the barrel, took the cap off,
and ran it through (taking the balance/cock out for
the second machine). He never checked train freedom or
disassembled the cap jewels, and just oiled in the
places where he could get to without further
disassembly. In the year that I worked there, he did
at LEAST on comeback per week for FREE. I did one the
whole time I was there, and it was a quartz conversion
where the dial shifted and touched the hands. It
wasn't TOP watchmaking, but from my perspective, I was
doing pretty good work (a lot better than 90% of the
other guys out there) and the comeback rate says it
all.
He had a Rolex in once....supposedly it had leaked
some water in. He was too afraid to disassemble the
watch, so he "cleaned" it, and sent it back. Came
right back with a bad canon pinion. Rust. If he had
done a proper job (forgot- I always pulled of the
canon pinion to oil inside), or even a decent hack
job, he wouldn't have had to BUY a canon pinion and
the GIVE IT AWAY FOR FREE!!!!!! There's a pretty clear
line between saving time and doing quality work.
--
Scott A. Ekleberry
It's About Time!
A full service watch repair shop!
www.itsabouttimeonline.com
SAE...@WOH.RR.COM
"Jack Forster" <tcm...@aol.comspambgon> wrote in message
news:20020608133349...@mb-cu.aol.com...
John Rowland
news:bmr2gu85gp7fat0c3...@4ax.com...
> On 08 Jun 2002 02:08:11 GMT, tcm...@aol.comspambgon (Jack Forster)
> wrote:
>
> >Seiko makes a watch called the Kinetic which has a quartz
> >movement, but which is powered by a capacitor charged
> >by the movement of the wearers wrist, just like a
> > mechanical automatic.
>
> Have they fixed the problems they had with the capacitors crapping out?
> Insofar as I can recall, replacing it is much more expensive than a
> simple battery change, and I've heard stories of them breaking even
> before a battery would run out. Happened to a friend of mine, but that
> was a couple of years ago, so I don't know if they've fixed it by now.
>
> I did find this, though, which was very interesting:
>
> http://home.global.co.za/~pnel/Negative.htm
Very interesting. However, since Seiko is the biggest watch maker in the
world, I am not surprised that they have a few dissatisfied customers. The
kinetic might be a turkey though. I must say I've never quite got the point
of Kinetic watches: they seem inferior to solar-power from a functionality
point of view, and they must have more moving parts which should compromise
reliability and durability.
Something mentioned in the page is that the minute hand on someone's Seiko
moved a little under gravity. I've known since I bought my Casio that the
minute hand can be made to line up on the left side or the right side but
not both. The error is only about a third of a minute, and since I switch
the LCD panel to display hh:mm:ss whenever I'm catching a train, it's not a
show stopper, but you could argue that any company that combines
radio-controlled accuracy with a wiggling minute hand cares more about what
their customers think they are buying than what their customers are actually
getting. Until I read the article mentioned above, I didn't realise it was
gravity, but by turning the watch upside down I now realise that it is
gravity. Thanks, Thore. What is likely to be the cause - loose hand or bendy
hand? A minute hand that is loose but doesn't fall off seems impossible to
me. Is it fixable, and should I expect Casio to fix it under guarantee? I
don't want to be one of these people who buy a GBP50 watch and expect
GBP5000 quality.
dAz
> Something mentioned in the page is that the minute hand on someone's
> Seiko moved a little under gravity. I've known since I bought my Casio
> that the minute hand can be made to line up on the left side or the
> right side but not both. The error is only about a third of a minute,
> and since I switch the LCD panel to display hh:mm:ss whenever I'm
> catching a train, it's not a show stopper, but you could argue that any
> company that combines radio-controlled accuracy with a wiggling minute
> hand cares more about what their customers think they are buying than
> what their customers are actually getting. Until I read the article
> mentioned above, I didn't realise it was gravity, but by turning the
> watch upside down I now realise that it is gravity. Thanks, Thore. What
> is likely to be the cause - loose hand or bendy hand? A minute hand that
> is loose but doesn't fall off seems impossible to me. Is it fixable, and
> should I expect Casio to fix it under guarantee? I don't want to be one
> of these people who buy a GBP50 watch and expect GBP5000 quality.
no its to do with the gear meshing, in a normal mechanical watch the
power train runs, barrel, center wheel, 3rd, 4th, escape wheel, pallets
balance, the cannon pinion on the dial side which carries the minute hand
is fitted directly onto the long shaft of the center wheel, so in this
case the minute hand has a direct drive, no backlash or slop.
in a ETA style movement, the train wheels are repositioned to make the
movement a little slimmer, what would be the center wheel in this case is
moved closer to the outside edge of the movement, the cannon pinion is
riding a post fixed to the centre of the movement on the dial side, there
is a wheel fitted via a clutch to the cannon pinion, this wheel meshes
with that off center wheel in the power train, you can see there is no
direct drive of the minute hand so there is some backlash present
now add to that the lack of tension from a mainspring in a quartz
movement, in some movements the slop in the hands is quite visable.
early quartz movements had all sorts of fancy tension springs devices to
reduce backlash, but these can consume or waste power, seeing most quartz
watches these days use less than a microamp, smaller batteries, the less
friction the better.
so in the case of your watch, its a design feature, not a fault,
NE333RO
>sapphire can.
Sapphire can, it just takes special compounds (diamond) and someone willing
to take it on. I've had it done but it's tuff finding someone to do it. Almost
impossible if it has a date magnifier.
dAz
you will find its not worth doing that, the crystal is so thin as
compared to old Seikos crystals made in the 70s.
its better to replace the crystal.
FaxMan
<jo...@turquoisedays.spamspam.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>Very interesting. However, since Seiko is the biggest watch maker in the
>world, I am not surprised that they have a few dissatisfied customers. The
I read somewhere just recently that Citizen was now the largest
watch maker in the world.
James Rosenzweig
sapphire crystal in a beautifully designed watch (my opinion) is
available in the Xemex Avenue line for an incredible $375 at
www.bernardwatch.com.
Bernardwatch has an excellent reputation, as I found out here.
The list price for that $375 model is $1250. Quite a deal.
ETA anc...@yahoo.com (Charles Ball) wrote in message news:<e709b928.0206...@posting.google.com>...
dAz
has been for a long time, Miyota which is Citizen are the largest single
manufacturer of watch movements in the world
FaxMan
wrote:
>has been for a long time, Miyota which is Citizen are the largest single
>manufacturer of watch movements in the world
>
>http://www.citizen.co.jp/miyota_mvt/
Does Seiko have a similar page? Somewhere were I can look up
the movement in my Seiko Sport?
dAz
not that I know of, unfortunatly