Watches
Registered User
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 8,586
Likes: 0
From: Scatterbrainia
Originally Posted by tinkfist,Nov 18 2009, 05:10 PM
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?
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?
My watch runs a tad fast, so I just know that I'll usually err on being early somewhere, which in itself isn't a bad thing either. Usually ends up being a couple minutes by the end of a month.
If/when you get a mechanical watch, find one with a display back case. Watching all the gears and springs move around and seeing the spinning weight and jewels is half the fun.
Thread Starter
Former Moderator
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 59,195
Likes: 1
From: Ventura, California, USA
Originally Posted by tinkfist,Nov 18 2009, 04:10 PM
raj, which model do you have?
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=alt1stZEWCI [/media]
Registered User
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 4,281
Likes: 0
From: N. Tx.
I can't really call myself a "watch guy" but I do like to wear a nice watch. Its the only accessory a man really has. I know some guys were bracelets, chains etc. but that is not me.
A Taq is a starter watch. I have a carrera. I like its chrono function and the fact that it in a silly kinda way relates to my 911.
Like this one but I have the previous gen:
I also have a Pam 176. Again - stylish watch, nice croc. leather strap.
I know plenty of guys with 10+ or 20+ watches. I really see the logic in that but then again they don't see the logic in me trying to own multiple sports cars!
A Taq is a starter watch. I have a carrera. I like its chrono function and the fact that it in a silly kinda way relates to my 911.
Like this one but I have the previous gen:
I also have a Pam 176. Again - stylish watch, nice croc. leather strap.
I know plenty of guys with 10+ or 20+ watches. I really see the logic in that but then again they don't see the logic in me trying to own multiple sports cars!
Registered User
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 2,220
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by stockae92,Nov 18 2009, 03:21 PM
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 )
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 )
Glass and plastic scratch much easier than sapphire. Sapphire is much harder to break than glass, and while the plastic crystals are generally pretty tough to break they scratch very easily. It's not often you break a crystal, but it is very often they get scratched. Unless it's sapphire.
Yes, the Omega Speedmaster taken to the moon had a plastic crystal. I'm not going to the moon and neither are you. The reason it had a plastic crystal is because unless the watch had a display back, the Speedmaster came with a plastic crystal. And when they needed a watch for astronauts, an engineer went down to the jewelry store and picked up several to test. The display back cost quite a bit more than without, so they got the one without. It just happened to have a plastic crystal in that configuration. That is the end of the story as far as the Speedmaster crystal goes.
Sapphire makes for the best crystal. It's very hard to break and very hard to scratch. Anyone who tries to sell you a crystal made of something else is giving you a line.
In the real world it's a lot tougher to break a sapphire crystal than a glass one.
The reason Seiko doesn't put sapphire crystals on their dive watches is because their dive watches are on the bottom of their range. They are the cheap Seikos. If sapphire wasn't better, why does Seiko use it exclusively on their more expensive watches? Why did Seiko use it in their "Sapphlex" laminate crystal?
Why does everybody else think it's more than adequate on a dive watch?
Now, if you haven't ever had a watch with a sapphire crystal, maybe you should concede to people with more experience.
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 6,006
Likes: 0
From: socal
here's some info on the web about hardlex vs sapphire ...
(1) http://www.network54.com/Forum/78440/messa...in+the+1000M%29
(2) http://www.larrybiggs.net/scwf/index.php?m...1&id=1032252153
from those information. its seems like , pound for pound (same thickness), sapphire is a better material for resistant to pressure.
in production and manufacturing, factoring in the cost of manufacturing, hardlex (and such) is easier and cheaper to be made to meet the production requirement for sports (diver) watches.
thicker sapphire crystal will be very resistant to shatter as well, but that will raise the price as well. (thick good quality sapphire is more expensive to make than thicker hardlex that would achieve the same requirement for pressure resistant)
so you are right, i agree that we do have to put price and available technology at the time into prospective to consider which crystal is good for what application at what price. sapphire is a better material at a higher cost.
btw, come to think of it, Omega Speedmaster X-33 has sapphire crystal, Casio G-Shock has mineral crystal, Timex datalink has plastic crystal, and all have been on space mission and they survive just fine. So, as you said, the Hesalite crystal on the old Speedmaster was just happened to be whats available at the right price at that time.
i haven't ever had a watch with a sapphire crystal ...... that shattered, or the matter in fact any kind of crystal that cracked or shattered. and i am not looking forward to pushing that envelope ... LOL
(1) http://www.network54.com/Forum/78440/messa...in+the+1000M%29
(2) http://www.larrybiggs.net/scwf/index.php?m...1&id=1032252153
from those information. its seems like , pound for pound (same thickness), sapphire is a better material for resistant to pressure.
in production and manufacturing, factoring in the cost of manufacturing, hardlex (and such) is easier and cheaper to be made to meet the production requirement for sports (diver) watches.
thicker sapphire crystal will be very resistant to shatter as well, but that will raise the price as well. (thick good quality sapphire is more expensive to make than thicker hardlex that would achieve the same requirement for pressure resistant)
so you are right, i agree that we do have to put price and available technology at the time into prospective to consider which crystal is good for what application at what price. sapphire is a better material at a higher cost.
btw, come to think of it, Omega Speedmaster X-33 has sapphire crystal, Casio G-Shock has mineral crystal, Timex datalink has plastic crystal, and all have been on space mission and they survive just fine. So, as you said, the Hesalite crystal on the old Speedmaster was just happened to be whats available at the right price at that time.
i haven't ever had a watch with a sapphire crystal ...... that shattered, or the matter in fact any kind of crystal that cracked or shattered. and i am not looking forward to pushing that envelope ... LOL
Registered User
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 2,220
Likes: 0
There's a misperception regarding the brittleness of sapphire.
Glass will deform a bit before breaking. Sapphire will not, or at least not as much as glass. However, it takes much more force to break sapphire. It's a much stronger material. The resistance to bending makes it more brittle by definition, but that isn't an indication of weakness or strength.
I've had crystals of glass, plastic, and sapphire. I've broken several glass crystals. I've also seen how strong sapphire actually is - the numbers applied to the face of my watch sheared off due to the force of impact, but the crystal remained intact. I've actually seen a cracked plastic crystal, and from what I've seen sapphire withstand, I don't think it would have been a problem.
I don't think you truly understand the difference between glass and sapphire. Sapphire is an actual crystal, while glass is merely an amorphous mass of molecules. Sapphire is four times harder than mineral glass. The bonds between each individual molecule in sapphire are far stronger than the bonds in glass. That means sapphire is far more resistant to bending but also to breaking.
A blow that would shatter a glass crystal would bounce off sapphire without leaving a mark. Conversely, a blow severe enough to shatter a sapphire crystal would most likely destroy the watch. If you drop a watch with a glass crystal on a tile floor from waist height, most times the crystal will break. The sapphire crystal will be unphased. Ask me how I know
And as I've said, I can't see spending money on a watch without a sapphire crystal. Especially if you are afraid of breaking the crystal.
Glass will deform a bit before breaking. Sapphire will not, or at least not as much as glass. However, it takes much more force to break sapphire. It's a much stronger material. The resistance to bending makes it more brittle by definition, but that isn't an indication of weakness or strength.
I've had crystals of glass, plastic, and sapphire. I've broken several glass crystals. I've also seen how strong sapphire actually is - the numbers applied to the face of my watch sheared off due to the force of impact, but the crystal remained intact. I've actually seen a cracked plastic crystal, and from what I've seen sapphire withstand, I don't think it would have been a problem.
I don't think you truly understand the difference between glass and sapphire. Sapphire is an actual crystal, while glass is merely an amorphous mass of molecules. Sapphire is four times harder than mineral glass. The bonds between each individual molecule in sapphire are far stronger than the bonds in glass. That means sapphire is far more resistant to bending but also to breaking.
A blow that would shatter a glass crystal would bounce off sapphire without leaving a mark. Conversely, a blow severe enough to shatter a sapphire crystal would most likely destroy the watch. If you drop a watch with a glass crystal on a tile floor from waist height, most times the crystal will break. The sapphire crystal will be unphased. Ask me how I know
And as I've said, I can't see spending money on a watch without a sapphire crystal. Especially if you are afraid of breaking the crystal.
Registered User
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 459
Likes: 2
My favs are Brietling, Oris, and Patek Phillipe. I'm saving for a Patek I have my eye on and have a few Brietlings along with a bunch more from Italy (Briel), UK (Storm and few others), Scotland, etc. I also have a few beater watches that I can wear daily without worrying about how much I spent on them.
I'd like to get one of the Oris watches for diving. Right now I use the Invictas which are really good looking watches (and functional diver's watches) for the pricepoint.
I'd like to get one of the Oris watches for diving. Right now I use the Invictas which are really good looking watches (and functional diver's watches) for the pricepoint.
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 19,734
Likes: 247
Originally Posted by MDXLuvr,Nov 18 2009, 08:46 PM
