Sapphire crystal, stainless case. By "mechanical" do you mean hand-wind or auto?

Hamilton, Rado, Mido, Tissot, Invicta, I can't think of any others offering automatic movements for under $500. Maybe Seiko, but theirs don't have a real sapphire crystal. Sapphire is incredibly hard to scratch and very hard to break. I won't buy a watch without a sapphire crystal any more.

 

Did I read correctly elsewhere that quartz is more accurate than mechanical? The idea of an all mechanical timepiece on my wrist sounds cool, but if a quartz watch is the better mousetrap, so to speak, then why would you not get a quartz watch.

Also, someone mentioned above about quartz watches being disposable, alluding to a fact they they will not run well after their first battery change. Is this the truth?

Thanks for bringing the knowledge stockae92

 

Of course better doesn't always win vs fancy. My casio tells perfect time (it's atomic), also tells temp, altitude, has a compass, barometric pressure, shock resistant, water resistant and get this:


Is solar powered so never needs a battery.

 

Quartz is more accurate than mechanical, yes.

People who wear mechanical watches usually accept that not having the most accurate time possible is a small tradeoff to having a small marvel of mechanical engineering (and all the romanticism that comes with it) on their wrist.

It's not like mechanical watches will be horribly fast or slow, most will gain or lose a couple seconds a day- hardly an issue considering you need to pull the crown to change the date once a month anyway.

Hamilton and Oris have some nice entry level mechanical watches, that often times feature the same movement (read: watch engine) as more expensive swiss brands.

 

read one post up

Seiko has release quite a few models with sapphire crystal from the factory.

the matter in fact, sapphire is the *easiest* to break compare to other material like seiko hardlex crystal or the old Hesalite or acrylic crystal.

though sapphire is very scratch resistant, upon impact, sapphire has a higher chance of shattering or cracking than the above mentioned types of crystal. one way to make a real tough sapphire crystal is to make it thick. as a result, it will increase the cost, weight and thickness of the watch.

high qaulity sapphire also require a really detailed QC process because sometimes micro imperfection in the crystal is hard to spot and will compromise the strength of the crystal. (this is one of the reason why Seiko has put off putting sapphire crystal in their professional diver watches for a long long time until recently. btw, the original Omega speedmaster moon watch has a Hesalite crystal for the same reason. can you imagine a shattered crystal inside the space shuttle with no gravity?! O_O )

 

Yep, an quartz oscillate at over 32k bps, resulting in very minimal sec +/- change per day, as opposed to a mechanical time piece which has the highest rate at 28.8k bph.

The idea of owning a mechanical time piece is all about the history, mechanical accomplishments of a company, prestige, heritage, yada yada etc. Many companies like Vacheron pioneered many modern mechanical watching components, and the notion of owning one of their time piece is worth a lot of money to many.

Quartz watch are powered by batteries and they oscillate at the same rate when you put a new one in. I don't see how it's not as good the 2nd time around...unless the internals are total crap and becomes defective after a few months.

 

For my daily I have SUG Spiral (red/black). Can't beat it for the price $30 & It has a Seiko YM92 Quartz Movement + the casing is German steel.

For other activities a Casio GShock, I've had this watch since 1998.

My special occasion watch is a Citizen 8700 BL8044-59E. Great graduation gift from the grandparents

 

its pretty much what i_heart_my_DB8 said.

i simply loves the fact that i am wearing a little machine that has hundreds of small parts with springs and gear, running at a very high rate of speed, and at a very accurate rate:

for a generic ETA mechanical movement which has a 28,800bph (beats-per-hr, and that's 8 beats per second) and the error rate is 10 sec per day (24 hr)

the error rate in % is: ((8*10)/(28800*24))*100% = 0.01157%!

and that's not even what we called an accurate mechical movement. COSC certified requires the watch to run with -4 to +6 sec per 24 hr in various position and temperature.

and of course, you get the joy of having to stare the the smooth ticking of a running second hand.

btw, we only have to adjust the date once every 2 months ;-)

if you are an absolute accuracy freak and you don't want to set your watch everyday, then quartz is definitely the way to go.

like raj said, there are plenty of models from Seiko, Citizen and Casio that will sync with the atomic signal towner in CO everyday. With solar battery, you pretty much get a super accurate maintenance free watch for a really really long period of time.

for me, i have both and i enjoy both.

with proper maintenance, i believe quartz watch will last FOREVER. by proper maintenance, i mean battery change, replacing the water proof seals and pressure testing to ensure "water proof-ness".

 

Before I purchase my next watch, I'm getting in touch with Stockae92

 

Same here. Thanks DB8 and stockae92 I am an engineer and certainly appreciate the degree of precision required for those mechanicals to maintain such accuracy. I'd like to own one, but not for wearing and telling time. Despite the accuracy, seconds add up and being off by a minute or so a month would mess with me. My daily use watch should be as accurate as the clocks I come into contact everyday, right? Which I think are mostly quartz. The solar atomic sounds cool though.

raj, which model do you have?