/fa/ - Fashion

>hands of different colored metals

Part of wants to. Solid eta movement and an interesting design with the 24 hour snake indicator. Opinion on it fellas?

>>13662673
Sorry fellas screenshotted ny gallery

Thoughts on the Tudor Heritage Black Bay?

>>13662676
>>13662673
Hope you are fucking trolling

>>13662673
>>13662676
Fuck off.

Won this KQ today, redpill me on the 5856 movement. Gonna get it restored the fuck up.

>>13662607
Do you like my clock guys?

>>13662715
Better shot of the dial. The only time I think non-whites are not inferior is when it comes to Seiko dials.

What is this ultimate motherfucking strongest bulletproof watch ever made?

Also won this. 26 bucks.

>>13662735

>>13662607
>op isn't using my reccomended poorfag watches
Feels bad man

>>13662774
post link

>>13662746
Nice. The GOAT second track design imo.
>red 60
My dick

>>13662776
imgur.com/a/NFMXDuK

>>13662776
https://www.omegawatches.com/

>>13662774
>Casio AE1200
>A homage to a Seiko digital designed in the 1980s. One of the more dressier digital options.
>One of the more dressier digital options.
Nigga what are you smoking?
If you took the silver version of a f-91w and put that on leather, it would be much more dressy.

>>13662855
Fair enough, want me to change that?

wrong day/date oops

>>13662867
The watch itself is good, but yeah, change the desc a bit.
Maybe add the casio databank there too and maybe the op timex or timex iron man.

>>13662783
The Bulova UHF doesn't achieve 10spy. I believe it's currently rated at 60spy and consensus is that's about right.

>>13662874
Nice cat eyes the third

Post wrist shots

1st time on this thread, looking for advice
until 3 days ago, i've been wearing this watch
https://www.amazon.com/AMPM24-Steamp...BYABFGHFA1K3X7
it was an automatic watch. it was pretty cheap, but i loved it because present-aesthetics-being automatic. it stopped working, just 2 days after changing the strap...
i would like to buy another watch, this time a better one that would last for years if possible.

i like automatic (self-winding) watches where you can see the cogs and everything from both sides.

also, i've admired the citzen ecodrive watches, i really love the idea of something that doesnt stop.

so i'm looking for a new watch around 150€/170$, something automatic and transparent or with the ecodrive thing. also, i would love if it's water resistant, i hated to take off the watch everytime i had a shower. oh, and if it shows the date, with all this, it would be the perfect watch.
im really lost, thank you in advance

PD: i think i like brown leather strap
PDD: will i be able to take off the strap i to use it in the future for another watch? i like it

Looking for a clean, minimalistic watch with leather strap. I'm willing to spend ~200$.
Any recommendations?

Tfw I got the module from the dead old stainless steel casio working, missing some segments though.

The texas instruments i posted earlier works too.

>>13662976
Good for you, garbage man.

>>13662940
Have a presage, friend.

>>13662938
>https://www.amazon.com/AMPM24-Steamp...BYABFGHFA1K3X7
Dumb retard.

>>13662991
Thanks faget

Tudor Prince Quartz > Rolex Oysterquartz?

>>13662676
>>13662673
it's less of a shitter than your average big fashion brand """"watch"""" but sticking an ETA in it doesn't stop it from being overpriced and naff

the virgin daniel wellington vs the CHAD luch de luxe

Why is wt so hostile to watch making content?

>>13663050
It's literally just one sad shitskin.

>>13663052
>me
>sad
Rude.

>>13663064
kys

>>13662999
https://www.amazon.com/AMPM24-Steampunk-Self-Winding-Mechanical-PMW198/dp/B00HFQ9K6W/ref=pd_lpo_vtph_241_bs_lp_t_1?_encoding=UTF8&psc=1&refRID=NWCPSVBYABFGHFA1K3X7

>>13663066
Why do you hate me?

>>13663068

>>13663068

Why can't we have one thread without this fucking timex as op.
Who would click at this shit if he is not a frequent wt lurker?


>>13662930
Evening bro
Wristshot from this afternoon

>>13663046
Chad as fuck

>>13662930

>>13663118
Agreed, we should go back to Tudor OPs.

>>13662747
Does it have anti missile flares?

>>13663119
Everytime I see this I am reminded of my failure as a vintage slavshit colletor

I need an answer immediately.
I know rolex is accurate to 4 seconds (in factory anyway), but how is the accuracy like in patek, AP, VC, and other high horology brands? Is it better? I usually hear little about the accuracy of these brands, and mostly about the finishing.

>inb4 high beat GS and spring drive
yeah yeah I know about it already.

>>13663160
go for quartz if you want accuracy

Any advice on what to replace pic related with? It's so fucking loud an I'm tired of sitting in a car/quiet room and having someone go "oh, do you hear that ticking?"

Looking for something that's ~200 eurobucks and can be worn with both t-shirts and simple dress shirts

I like the SNXS77 but I think it might be a bit too dressy and I already have a nice vintage dress watch

>>13663168
What if I want your mom?

>>13662879
Will do, could you write me a description for the Casio databank too?

>>13662881
Gotcha, thanks!

>>13663184
A Mondaine?

>>13663184
Yes

>>13663184
Citizen BM8180?

>>13663160
These brands would not generally equal rolex's accuracy guarantee (which is +/-2spd, not 4), as that's just not really their focus. Patek does very tightly spec their tourbillons.

>>13663208
Thanks, I'll look more into these.

>>13663218
lol, also I'm too big of a wristlet

>>13663237
thanks

>>13663199
Sure


Casio
DBC-611-1DF (silver)
DBC-611G-1D (gold)

The original smart watch, loved by all in the glorious 80s, a time when watches like these were the pinnacle of tech serving many other functions besides telling time.
Many variants exist, all bearing the databank name

(lugs are 22mm, don't remember other dimensions)

+Ton of functions:
perpetual calendar, calculator, alarms, chronograph, memory for contact info etc which is password protected, daylight saving time, decent amber back light.
+cool factor (especially with gold variant)

-bracelet can rip your hair off occasionally
-not possible to avoid looking like a hipster or a giga nerd wearing it
-the key functions the watch offer are outdated because of current tech
-calculator keypad is slow to use, but it is usable

>>13663241
-2 and +2
it's 4, that's what I meant.

Anyway, what kind of accuracies can you expect from Patek and those others?

Bow down, the King has come!

>>13663355
>Soiko
>cuckometer
>orally castrated
>kys
>autistic
>HIV-butt

>>13663380

>>13663355
swissfags btfo

>>13662676
Gucci. The rotten, Syphilis dick edition?

>>13662681
I really like them but would probably sell it and just get a rolex at some point so then part of me is just like why even bother I'll just get something I'll keep

want

Just noticed my watch has a piece of crap between the crystal and the dial. Is there a way to get it out?

>>13663430
If I buy a tool to open the caseback, will I be able to lift out the movement with the dial so I can get that speck out? Maybe I'll just buy a better watch.

>>13663430
open it, take out crown, clean it, put it back together

I did it with mine. Don’t be gay.

My watch
Also how do I fix it?

>>13662874
looks good

does anyone know where can i buy slavshitters this well packaged?

>>13663580
You don’t have that o_O :D version

>>13663580
I bet you don’t wear any of them.

>>13663609
Oh shit
Oh shitshitshitshit
Unwrap it

>>13663119
>>13663136
names?
especially the one on the left in the second pic

>>13663620
sadly not mine kek, it's a pic i found searching for soviet watches on instagram

>>13663355
Reminder: If the quickset on that 56 KS ever stops working, ask in this thread and I'll direct you to where you can buy newly manufactured replacement quickset rockers that don't have the cracking problem of the Seiko originals.

>>13663613
what?

>>13663616
nah I do, it's a lot of cheap shit so it looks like I have kept everything I bought but there has been a lot of stuff I don't wear that I've gotten rid of (as in put in a dresser and ignore because I'm too lazy to sell shit)

>>13663639
fuck that's in good condition
looks brand new

>>13663648
Well, not quite, but it is in very good condition and I did a very minor touch up on the case polish by hand.

It's timing performance over 24h of wind in six positions is pretty good too.

>>13663609
That fucking wax
Instant nostalgie

So is there any reason why casio wants to charge 60 fucking dollars for this and the other weird variants? Other than being part of their "vintage collection" which to my understanding is just a gold tin it comes in, they are the same exact specs as a normal A168

>>13663122
Nice strap combo man...

>>13663338
I think there's a problem with your question Anon. A well regulated movement in good condition from the 1960's could well get into that tolerance, if you accounted for everything (i.e. winding it at the right time, laying it crown up or face up or whatever to compensate for daily wear on the wrist, etc.). My Seamaster is currently holding at +/- 0, but only because I know what it needs when it needs it and how much it loses/gains depending on the situation. Hell, my 1963 is still holding at +0.5 per day, but again, with the same attention to orientation throughout the day and night.

If you did the same thing with any high end watch, I think you could expect within the 4 second margins you're asking for...the only issue is that you'd have to 'learn' your watch as you go along. I'd be astonished if you had a Lange, for example, and with the same attention to detail it would be outside that range...that would seem odd to me, especially given what I've heard from people who own them.

So, perhaps it's another way of saying that I think that range is realistic, but comes with caveats. Furthermore, as others have noted when you pay for Patek or others, you're paying for other things aside from accuracy.

>>13663727
So much love and valueable information in one post
Thanks bro

Not the guy asking about PP tho, just a fellow watch lover


My cheapass seiko with 7s36 movement runns like a champ. Allways doing + on my wrist and almost the same amount - on the winder.

>>13663895
A pleasure Anon. It's been a while since I've been here, but I thought I'd stop by. Life has changed (in a good way), but it also means I have a little less free time. Last time I was here, most of the regulars had moved to the discord, which I have yet to do because in all honesty I don't quite know what it is nor understand what I'd have to do to get on it. I'm not particularly tech savvy...I find that once I understand something, it turns obsolete...such is my lot in life.

Watches are cool. But I think I've come to a kind of gentle acceptance and understanding about accuracy; that if I really, truly wanted accuracy, I'd have to go with a digital. The beauty and fun of a mechanical is the fact that it is mechanical, that is it subject to all the strange things that happen in life, that it lives with you and goes with you for the ride. I never get the same 'feeling' from any of my digital watches, which is probably why I never wear them anymore.

My next watch will likely be 145.012, and I expect that it'll fall outside of the accuracy tolerance of my other watches (though it will probably best the 1963 without trouble over time). Given that the second hand is a technically non-hacking one (though you could stop it with a little back pressure to the crown), and that the running second markings are simply not as precise as on my other watches, the bottom line is that I will still be happy nevertheless, because the importance has now shifted entirely towards the function, aesthetic, and near-miracle of engineering that watches provide to us. I still find it hard to imagine how much serious intellectual work was necessary just to develop these kinds things that we take for granted...it's mind boggling.

Anyway...here's a pic of a nice watch (the bigger brother of the Speedy) so if you didn't want to bother reading this all, at least there's something of value to see...

>>13663959
>most of the regulars had moved to the discord
We're still here, the discord is a backup. The 145.012 is nice, a proper speedmaster.

>>13663981
Oh my...well, there we are then.

It's a funny thing about the 145.012. Initially I was convinced that I'd want to get a brand new Speedy, but after handling a few cal. 321s I came to the conclusion that I really wanted the 5 gradations of a second much more than the 6. I don't know why...it 'sounds' better to me. But more than that, I simply want the technology that went to the moon, as irrational as that is. Also, I didn't want it to be a case where I bought a new one and then simply lusted after 'what I really wanted'...I've had buyer's remorse too often in life...now I just wait until I get precisely what I want, even if it takes a few years.

Hope everyone is doing well and in good health...I've been reminded quite often recently of how quickly health can deteriorate...or how friends and relatives can be gone in a week. Take care everyone.

>>13664006
I'd probably still prefer a cal 320 in a DeVille case but the 321 speedmaster is fine. At least it's better than the modern "moonwatch" that pretends to have some connection the moon by having a similar outward appearance.

>>13664023
Well, I can't blame Omega too hard on that. From a purely technical point of view, mechanical watches today are obsolete and unnecessary, so there really needs to be an advertising ploy that gets people to buy these things. The modern 'moonwatch' still has all the aesthetic qualities I adore in the watch...the only thing I need is the applied Omega logo and the cal. 321. Sure, there are small details one could fuss over on the face (stepped minutes and counters, etc.) but the proportions are the same, the colours the same, and in all the important visual ways, everything is essentially the same.

I can easily see someone who hasn't had the time or inclination to do much research buying a modern Speedy brand new because they like the look and the novelty. Same goes for the sapphire sandwich (which is nice to handle in person). I mean, who doesn't enjoy looking at a watch movement, especially a chrono?

It's just not for me though. As an example of me taking the opposite side though, I really don't have a love for the Ed White Speedy...and the broad-arrow 1957 reissue is something I don't like at all. But I don't have any logical reasons to not like it...I just don't like the aesthetic combination as well as the lack of the original movement. And yet this edition was one of the best selling for the past few years, for obvious reasons. People like the design.

It's a really tough one in today's world. I dropped by the Patek website this evening, just because I have never liked their stuff except when it's really simple, and I still hate the look of the majority of their watches. I know they are sought after by many...but the aesthetic is something I can't handle. Yet, and here's the really difficult thing to admit, if someone gifted me a Patek, I'd treasure it because of the reputation and name behind it. No other reason...but the name and the reputation.

Perhaps that's the watch business...for now.

>>13663118
Just put a Marlin instead of a digital and I would be ok with it.

>>13662723
More than you know.
And you know a great lot

minimal cheap
for bitch wrists

recc me one

all ocassions but sport

Hey guys. Seiko or Bulova? I'm leaning towards Seiko in terms of style and build quality, but fuck me, I'm a sucker for sweeping second hands. Wat do?

>>13664244

>>13662654
I kinda like that, it sacrifices flash for legibility.

>>13663727
Such a long post, yet not an answer at all. Maybe it's my fault failing to elaborate what I want to know. I'm asking whether those other brands has a kind of a guarantee or reputation or goal, or whatever, like that rolex -2/+2.

>>13664243
Kidding? Grand Seiko Spring Drive obviously.

just ordered pic related, my friend had one in highschool at the end of the 90's and i always liked it especially the strap and it being alu

>>13664340
>People are still buying these overpriced loud as fuck non hacking quartz watches

>>13664343
well, i don't really care about any of that, i simply like how it looks and it brings up good memories when i was a kid, so it's more like a sentimental thing than a rational one

i'm not a collector, i have only one other watch in working order, pic related Certina DS and two Poljots, which were my grandfather's, but those need to be fixed

>>13664340
whats the model

>>13664354
260.7132.42

>>13663562
>Also how do I fix it?
Like this.

>>13663621
It's written on the fucking dial. Sekonda De Luxe.

>>13663712
Thanks broseph

>>13664354
>>13664357
sorry, i thought you meant the Certina, the Swatch is Space Rider YGS7000 from 1997

Good day /wt/. Any chance you know about some affordable GMTs? Please tell me about the alternatives you think is worth checking out.

>>13664299
Patek makes a similar guarantee on its tourbillons (off the top of my head, a mean rate between -1.4 and +2.4 and a total Delta of 4 seconds). I've heard rumors that jlc also makes similar client-facing claims about its gyrotourbillon though haven't seen any proof. I've also heard claims about similar internal accuracy standards at breguet and Lange but again no proof.

>>13664375
There's a vostok gmt. If you ask during day time hours Toronto the Canada anon with one might tell you about it.

>>13664384
Not interested in those slav shitters, but I respect that many of you guys like them.

What am I in for?

>>13664388
Should probably define affordable

>>13664398
Less than 500.

>>13664360
Search Luch 2209 or Luch 23 jewels and you will find it.

>>13664244
>Not getting the most technologically advanced speedmaster

>>13664375
Zeppelin make a few GMT watches I have pic related.

>>13664244
Do people even use the tachymetre fuction? I guess people like it for the aesthetics.

>>13664375
Christopher Ward?

>>13664417
>literally has the same functionality of a F91W

Whats the significance of a "crystal" in a watch?

>>13664431
So why not get a f-91w instead of a speedmaster?

Consider yourself redpilled

>>13664434
You mean the glass part which protects the hands and dial?

>>13664428
Yes, I have regularly used it in my everyday life when the opportunity is there.

>>13663959
discord is a application that let you chat with others like in a forum. Just the thread never dies and haven't seen any hate there for now.

again well said, If I want to know the exact time I allways check the phone because I mostly wear vintage watches who run around 20sek off/day, even though the phone is off 1-2sek too btw.

The 145.012 is a beautiful watch and again you are right, if you have to search a watch for a long time befor you get it, this watch will allways be very special no matter how expensive it was or accurate it runs.

Also I agree on the Ed White and on PP watches too, every model they have on there homepage right now is ugly IMO but people will allways love them beacause Patek is written on them. No matter how ugly or bad the watches get, super rich people with no taste will buy em for sure and wear them with pride because it's a Patek.
Same with Audemars Piguet except there is not a single watch they every produced I like still they are hyper expensive and people will buy em.

Sure I know that this is only my taste and there may realy be a people that think there design is awesome but like 99% of all those super expensive watches are only bought as status symbol.

Would you wear a Leica watch?

>>13664478
Only PP I like is the Calatrava
Imo entry-level watches of very expensive brands are better than the 200k+ shit they sell, even if I were able to afford it

Really liking the Amphibia's look /wt/
I'm a poorfag looking to buy a diver watch, I know the skx and seiko are really nice but I already have other Japanese watches and I wanted to diversify.
What alternatives are there aside from vostok?

>>13664505
If you are looking mechanicals only, your options are very limited, some other slav horology exist besides vostok, a few raketas and some other eastern block brands

>>13664375
>>13664429
Yeah there's the new C65 GMT, it has a kind of early Explorer 2 vibe.

>>13664434
Depends what you mean. It either the clear window that protects the dial & mechanism whilst letting you see the hands, or it's the way a quartz movement regulates itself.

>>13664510
What's its price?

>>13664521
£960

>>13663184
>the chad TICK TICK TICK vs the virgin tickticktick

>>13664530
When are they gonna take off that chr ward text on the dial I wonder.

>>13664490
I like the L2 and some of the novel time setting features on the watches but ten kilobucks for a newcomer to the watch market seems a bit much and there is a lot of other compelling watches at that price range.

>>13664534
Dunno but it needs to happen.

>>13664508
Well might as well buy the Vostol then.
I do see some on Amazon with custom seiko bezels which I think are good yet the original bezels have their charm.
Is buying a custom bezel safe?

>>13664620
Yes, i have a seiko bezel mod on my Amphibia.

>>13664627
that is great! I allways enjoyed the vostok divers but there bezel is just ugly IMO.

does anyone own the 38mm intra matic? is it worth?

>>13663727
I found one of those with applied indices and wavy dial, is 1.8k euro a good price?

>>13664174
Go on AliExpress and buy a fake dw

Is TGV just about the most embarrassing watch channel out there?

>owns and slings literal shit like Squale
>pretends to be British aristocracy when he's literally a mutt

>>13664685
>I found one of those with applied indices and wavy dial, is 1.8k euro a good price?

That is the first gen co axial escapement movement and flaky as FUCK

I would stay away.

Also, in my opinion the wave dial looks best without applied indices. If you want applied shit get the successors

>>13664719
Anyone who never has a bad thing to say about anything shouldn't be trusted, I don't think I've ever seen TGV dislike a watch.

what do you think about this lotus?

>>13664735
because TGV appreciates watches in a broader range than other watchsnobs.
You should check out his replica videos though, to prove yourself wrong and maybe learn a lesson you sad cuck.

>>13664735
TGV seems like a nice guy, but the first major red flag I saw was how he decorated his office.
>heifer skull
>tiny samurai armor
>Alien figurine
>model airplanes
>a black skull
>a framed picture of a Speedmaster
Just to name a few. His office looks like a Frankenstein monster of random interests and an unlimited spending spree.

>>13664750
>calling me a sad cuck
>watches TGV
The entire world is sunshine, rainbows and happiness.

just pulled the trigger on my first chronograph

>>13664771
Cool, how much and is it fully working?

>>13664738

>>13664777
heavenly trips of truth

What's the most affordable grand seiko that isn't quartz?

>>13664776
$620, says it's fully working

comes with authentic hand engraved vodka runes
google translate says it's something about "Captain Rank 3 'For The Harvest - 76' November 1976" which is pretty cool to have more more history on it

>>13664375
>>13664384
Technically the Vostok GMTs are pseudo-GMTs because they have a 24hr hand slaved to the normal hour hand and you have to rotate the 24hr bezel to get the time in a second time zone.

That said, they are the cheapest GMT option out there. I don't know what the cheapest GMT is that has an independently adjustable hour hand is off hand.

What's the use of having an automatic movement when quartz is cheaper to make and more accurate?

>>13664383
In theory a JLC gyrotourbillon should have a positional delta of zero so at that point it's just a matter of adjusting for behavior over the first 24 hours of wind, thermic response and shock response (which affects worn accuracy).

I see no reason they shouldn't easily be able to hit +/- 2 SPD on those, probably better if they adjust for the worn accuracy at the factory.

>>13664815

>>13664806
>tfw you got a mechanical chrono in soviet union for being a good farmer
It is a nice piece certainly, looks a lot better than the sturmanskie in my mind.
But still, $620? Do they really go for that much? I know sturmanskies go for around $200.

>>13664777
I knew that it suck tiddies, but just wanted to know of you

>>13664815
Something for the watch guys so they can feel special wearing inferior tech, or just as a status symbol.

>>13664806
Fuck that's cool

>>13664822
yeah the better condition ones go for $700-1000
From what I can find they were originally only issued to pilots and cosmonauts so they are harder to come by than many watches from the era

a lot of them have corroded dial indices and since the dial was in good shape and it was working, I got it.

>>13664815
Because clockwork is magical

>>13664815
Because men have their innate fascination of mechanical autism. Quartz just isn't sexy.

>>13664829
what's it like to be a completely useless fgt?
is it liberating?

>>13664849
Look at the man child when he is hurt by the truth

>>13664838
It is in a pretty good condition, definitely a nice cop.
Remember to post pics here when you get it.

Tell me /wt/ why should I not get an Invicta Pro Diver RIGHT now?

>>13664880
are you a rapper?

>>13664886
Tell me what's actually wrong with this though if I want a solid cheap diver

>>13664894
Just buy a seiko then.

>>13664907
Show me a Seiko with this movement at this price

>>13664914
I don't know what kind of movement it has, but I'm sure seiko movements are better. Get a SKX.

>>13664894
The 8296OB is pretty good, it has a Seiko NH36 which isn't found in other watches in the same price range; fit and finish is decent for the price.

However, Invicta is a shitty company that inflates MSRPs and either copies popular designs or makes ugly , ovesized "russian diver" designs
>>13664921
The SKX has the 7s26, which doesn't hack nor handwind; the 4r36/nh36 is an upgraded version that has these functions

I've noticed that on my non-hacking watch, when I turn the crown as I try to set the time precisely, the second hand will start to move backwards a little bit. Is that by design so that it will be easier to set the time, or am I fucking with the movement when doing that?

>>13664815
Mechanical watches are more like some kind or art. Theoreticaly you are right, quartz would br the smartest choise but yet I find myself googling movements, reading up background info about different mainsprings or just looking through an vintage watch magazin because it's very nice to see how watches and the mechanics used to build them changed over time!

I work in the steel industry so I am realy into the engeneering and allways was fascinated what was going on behind dat dial. Also mechanical movements are fucking beautifull to look at even tho you have no clue whats going on.

Almost all my friends are tying to make a fool out of me, because I spent way to much money on watches but it's my hobby and in the end I can see how they start hiding there fashion shitters when I am around because they feel kinda embarrest.

Here have a picture of a beautifull Illinois movement build 1922 and still running well. There were no computers or calculators back then, just immagine calculating the gears needed and yet it runns great because some great mind was able to immagine and create this.


tl,dr.: There is no actuall benefit from mechanical watches.

>>13665070
most people don't understand that it is a hobby.
Spend 4k on a watch and they flip, but if a car guy spends 4k on a project car most people wouldn't even bat an eye - that's cheap for a car.
Also it is way easier to liquidate a watch collection for near what you paid versus a car

Do vintage quartz watches need as much servicing as vintage automatic watches? I can get a vintage quartz seiko that I like for cheap, I just don't want to spend a lot of money to get it serviced.

I fucking love vintage quartz.

>>13665087
true dat, most used watches will rather increase than fall in value so if you get a good prize you can kinda allways make money on them.
The only thing is, you need time to get the money, because you have to sell a few watches and that will propably need more time than selling a car.
But the car is worth shit after you drove it a few years, not even close to the original value.

>>13665070
>>13665087
It is kinda silly when someone spend 4k on a watch if they are kinda poor. If you have to save for a long time in order to afford a watch, you should not buy it anyway. It will just look out of place on your wrist.

>>13664666
If the style is what you're looking for it is an excellent watch technically for the money.

>>13664627
Fuck that looks good, you've conviced me to get the vostok with seiko bezel or I might just buy two
One black face with the seiko bezel and the other maybe green face with the original bezel both are gonna be on nato straps

>>13665088
Help me out guys, I know fuck all about vintage watches, I just like the way some of them look.

>>13664818
Even in theory it wouldn't have a positional variance of exactly zero, since varying friction in the rest of the geartrain would result in different amounts of power being delivered to the escapement in difference positions. In any case, wearing a watch on the wrist results in different timekeeping than in any static position. Jlc certainly should be able to easily guarantee a tight spec; the question is whether they bother to actually do so on paper.

>>13665088
They dont ned as much, no, but they should be serviced. Almost all quartz watches have power at the escapement end of the geartrain, and so the wear in the geartrain is much less. That said, they are still (usually) jeweled, and require cleaning, oiling, etc., to continue working properly.

>>13665119
Funny you should say that, I also have a green dial Paratrooper Komandirskie with the dots and dashes Amphibia bezel.

>>13664244
Always a beauty...how long have you had it?

>>13664299
Fair enough. Regarding other brands, here's what I've been told in person.

Patek - better than COSC
Lange - better than COSC
Vacheron Constantin - better than COSC
JLC - better than COSC

The problem is that they are unwilling to guarantee specifics in person, hence why they'll use COSC as a comparison base because most of the mid-level watches will use COSC as a standard. Only Rolex traditionally went tighter in this group, but now that Omega is doing their Master Chronometer certification, that has changed too.

But as for a 'guarantee', I'd say there is none. For a 'goal', I think it's there, but left unsaid in case the goal is missed. And reputation, well the reputation is about the finishing, the luxury, and the status that comes along with owning a watch from said company.

If you're buying a Lange 1, are you buying it for its accuracy? Or a JLC Reverso? Or a Patek day-date complication? Furthermore, many of these watches have second-hand indicators that do not have a full gradation on the dial (i.e. 60 seconds marked out)...even the Speedmaster just has 60-20-40. It's not easy to precisely gauge if your watch is to the second or not with these watches because the readouts don't let you do so.

So, perhaps here's a more directed answer to your question. Higher companies don't care about accuracy as a primary goal, nor does the consumer who pays exorbitant amounts of money for the materials, the engineering, the finishing, and the status. COSC or better is enough for daily function and use, so once inside that circle, the differences are minimal and therefore not worth caring about by manufacturer AND consumer.

How about that?

>>13665089
Post your collection

>>13665150
Now there's an answer. Thanks.

>>13665150
How is the speedy compared to cosc?

>>13664343
Why does he look like a pure RAT?

>>13664478
Thanks Anon; what scared me was that I was supposed to download something in order to get it to work, and I don't like doing so when I don't understand the program and stuff. Anyway, if the regulars come here once in a while, then that's okay...I'll see you guys.

When I first got my Seamaster, I was brutally concerned with accuracy because I was thinking, 'if it's within COSC then I should be able to get it to 0.0'. The goal of seeing a mechanical watch that would, through predictable use, stay stable was to me astonishing. After a while, I got it to that standard, so much so that I could predict when the first antecedent bell of Big Ben would strike (it's usually around 18-17 seconds before the hour, depending on climate). But where it really came in handy was when taking public transport, because I could really rely on it to tell me if I was in danger of missing the train at the nearest station and if I should walk the extra 4 minutes to the next one. The point is, it had practical value and use.

But then my life changed, and the accuracy that was required before simply didn't matter. If a client shows up a few minutes after the hour, or a few before, it doesn't really matter. Similarly, driving a car meant that times for public trans was irrelevant. The function tied to hyper-accuracy was gone.

It's always an interesting thing to talk about, accuracy in mechanical watches. I'm still curious about the Zenith project, which if/when mass produced should create the most accurate mechanical ever, and either put the lever escapement out of business historically forever or at least cause it to be a minority statistically. And I do wonder...if that happens, will the new watches still 'feel' organic, or will the hyper accuracy of the watch make it seem less human?

what do you guys think?
there's a black version also

I'm looking for something versatile but inexpensive for traveling

Which case wrench should I buy?

>>13665167
Terrone genes + usual anglo rat face

>>13665160
lol No problem. I was trying to be a little more comprehensive in the earlier post...(I thought that would be more helpful)

>>13665162
Speedys are NOT officially considered within COSC, however both the Cal. 321 and the 861/1861 can be regulated into the spec from what I've been told by watchmakers. Again, it always comes down to how you wear it, how you store it, etc. But you're not going to be getting -/+ 30 seconds or something odd like that...it'll likely be well within 15 seconds if well regulated. I don't own one, this is what I've only seen from colleagues who own one as well as what I've read online.

You can get the co-axial versions of the Speedmaster, though they are off-proportion slightly. They also have the numerical date at the bottom of the hour counter. They'll be within COSC tolerances, even if they're not tested. I thought about getting one immediately when they came out, but was bitterly disappointed with the change in size and facial proportion (the subdials simply look too close together for the rest of the face...just awful). The engineering is fine...the look isn't. But that's just me. You could try that option actually, if you wanted a Speedy in general aesthetic but one that is more accurate over the long term.

pic unrelated, of course.

>>13665173
Why is there a triangle where the 3 should be?
They should have left an empty space instead.

But besides that I like it!

>>13664397
Pure CLASS

>>13665190
The co-axial speedys are too big. If they made them as small as the normal speedy, then I would be very happy to buy one. Also, I too would prefer if they had the same dial as the standard speedy pro. It's perfection aesthetically I think.

>>13664435

Based!

>>13664726
Thankfully I can't find it anymore

>>13665202
>The co-axial speedys are too big. If they made them as small as the normal speedy, then I would be very happy to buy one.
What.

Good morning wt

>>13665214
What??

>>13665214
Compare with pic in>>13664006

The co-axial proportions are off. The case is definitely larger (as they specify), but they didn't upscale everything to compensate, so things look odd (if you're used to what I and others would consider aesthetic perfection in this watch category).

>>13665218
Good morning office guy with gigantic collection! How goes it?

>>13664174
Get a Seiko 5 and change the strap to a leather. The dial is small enough you can pass it for a dress watch.

>>13665224
Good, haven't seen you around. Got a water-activated watch.

>>13665151
These are only vintage quartz watches I own.
I have a SBPG001 in the mail however and always in the lookout for steel cased digital bargains on eBay.

>>13665252
lol Wild! Water activated...so....what does....how does it....what he fuck? lol I don't understand...

>>13665270
As far as I can tell it's basically a wet cell.

>>13665260
Cool pieces anon.
I remember you are the guy who bought the Casio for its bracelet.

>>13665252
so is this a timer for swimmers or what?

>>13665281
Ahh....okay. Interesting! I've never seen anything like that before.

>>13665293
I doubt it, just a fun Gizmo. I enjoyed noting that despite needing to be submerged in water to run the watch does not say water resistant anywhere. The instructions are fairly specific that only one part of the watch should be submerged - perhaps the other parts aren't wr at all.

>>13665325
who the heck comes up with such a stupid idea?
does it work with salty water/swet too?
Also how long will submerging power this? Does it have to stay connected to water all the time or do you have to dip it in once a day?

>>13665193
Nah they should have put a red 3 so you don't get mixed up when looking at the date

>>13665189
So he's actually Italian or pretending to be?

>>13665367
He's American "Italian"
I'm Italian and he looks somewhat Sicilian/southern Italian, but he's too much of a mutt to tell

>>13665285
Yea that Casio stopped keeping time so I binned it not realise how rare they are. I'm an idiot.

>>13665130
>Even in theory it wouldn't have a positional variance of exactly zero, since varying friction in the rest of the geartrain would result in different amounts of power being delivered to the escapement in difference positions.
Okay, fair enough, but I'd still expect those types of positional variations to be very small relative to those normally produced by balance wheel orientation.

>In any case, wearing a watch on the wrist results in different timekeeping than in any static position.
Which I noted. It would make an important difference if they adjusted it at the factory accounting for on the wrist behavior or just behavior.

>the question is whether they bother to actually do so on paper.
I have no idea. I wonder if they'd tell you if you emailed them and asked?

>>13665367
>>13665367
okay, cheow!

>>13665187
asking again

>>13665336
I expect it would work with any reasonably non-corrosive electrolyte solution, so yes. I believe the manual indicates you need to water it every two days - so a similar power reserve to a traditional mechanical watch.

>>13665430
This one

>>13665431
>you need to water it every two days..
>just like a house plant....
Thanks man...that's awesome. See you around.

Also, is it worth opening up a shitter to remove a speck between the dial and the crystal or should I just buy a better watch?

>>13664921
It has an NH 35, literally a 4R35.

>>13665389
Yeah, that was not the smartest move.
You could have done the same mod as I if you didn't get the module working.

>>13665310
TV dial lemania is best speedmaster

anybody have recommendations for a cheap watch like this one?
https://youtu.be/KYZ01tvlZU4?t=1m52s
start at 1:52

>>13664174
timex easy reader

>>13665440
If it bothers you, why not?

>>13665456
Ew. Why would I want that? It looks like garbage.

>>13665527
It is just me or these vintage Omega Marks looks like absolute bargains compared to the Moonwatch?

>>13665150

>>13665551
go fuck yourself

>>13665150

Only had it a few weeks, if even! Got a great price on it new. Will have it the reset of my life :)

Anyone own a Casio databank?
Throw me a pic and I'll toss it on the poorfag list

>>13665456

>>13663562
>gold and silver together
>white skin
>huge bulky watch
>small wrist
>fucking FILA
I'm sorry anon it just doesn't suit you

>>13665456
Hmmmm lovely interior plastic there. Better display that.

>>13665456
At least paint it black or something. That plastic looks awful.

>>13665527
L5100 Speedmasters are great. Neat 70s aesthetics combined with one of the best tool watch chronograph movements ever made.

>>13665561
SEETHING

>tfw you brainlets can't appreciate an f-91w with a stainless steel case and a sapphire crystal
Yeah I know, no dial, I'm working on that.

>>13665407
>It would make an important difference if they adjusted it at the factory accounting for on the wrist behavior or just behavior.

Every person moves there arms different through the day. Some people work on pcs some people are cutting down trees, whatever, there will never be a same movement pattern for a lot of people. You could adjust em to the different usages but that would be way to much efford. Also how the fuck would the watchmakers know what you do all day?

They could release some watches that are designed for different work/lifestyles but that doesn't make a lot of sense ether because your tasks will change a little every day.

>>13663562
Just do yourself a favor and buy a 36mm -40mm max diameter watch. This just looks stupid on a small wrist.

>>13665636
If only it had a built-in timegrapher and an exposed fine-adjustment screw so the user could regulate it themself.

>>13665624
Is this speedy roughly the same thickness as the MOTM?

>>13665651
It looks stupid on any wrist

>>13665260
does the bracelet on the right rip out your arm hair as much as I think it does?

>>13665676
No, its way thicker as a result of being an automatic, having four hands stacked on the central register, and having shock protection built into the movement.

>>13665696
Why does shock protection make it thicker?

>>13665707

>>13665707
It has a clear plastic plate protecting the chronograph mechanism that gives the chronograph extra protection against being damaged by hard impacts.

>>13665710
The question isn't necessarily foolish, as the conventional types of shock protection used on balance wheels don't necessarily make the movement that much thicker.

>>13665716
The 5100 is non-modular, right? Where is the plate?

>>13665736
Behind the dial: https://thewatchbloke.co.uk/2015/10/30/sinnbell-ross-chronograph/

>>13665747
Thanks, very nice teardown. That offset day wheel spooks me. I finally get what's been said about the nylon and plastic bits - the watch is just full of them.

>>13665669
What is the ref on dat? Want to look it up.
Even tho I don't like the looks, the adjustment Feature is hell a smart idea if you can't adjust by mistake.


>>13665677
Yes

>>13665759
Yeah, though none of the nylon and plastic bits are in the driveline, thankfully.

Boys, vostok as gone digital

>>13665774
the fuck is that

Evening wt
How do you spent your last ours of the weekend?
Just changed strap on my F-91W wich turned out to be more difficult than I'd immagined.

>>13665760
Its an urwerk emc. Essentially it has an optical sensor that compares the rate of the balance with a 16Mhz(!) quartz signal, and displays the rate to the user in a subdial. There's also an exposed screw the user can adjust and then re-time. The 16Mhz oscillator is as far as I know the highest frequency quartz oscillator ever used in a wristwatch, although it is not used for timekeeping (the highest frequency used for time-keeping is 4Mhz from citizen, casio, and junghans (and an omega prototype), although citizen has prototyped an 8Mhz.

I don't want to come off as a snob, but I just can't understand how people can keep posting in these threads being all entusiastic about F-91W watches and similar shitters. If a F-91W is all you own, then how on earth are you an enthusiast of watches? Seems to me that you are not.

What's the best watch in the $100-$150 price range for someone who is just staring to collect watches?

>>13665791
Maybe you need a touch of ‘tism to fully understand it but the F-91W is an absolute marvel of design. It has a kind of balance to it that most people who get really into watches stop appreciating after a certain point. There isn’t a single thing you could do to a classic black F-91W to make it look better
Most of the watches in this thread look downright gross to someone who doesn’t spend a lot of time thinking about timepieces

>>13665817
Any Seiko 5 or orient in that price range. Spend $20 on a cheap pickup mic and regulate it yourself with tg.

>>13665822
>There isn’t a single thing you could do to a classic black F-91W to make it look better
On second thought, inverting the LCD display is one good change you could make

>>13665822
Fuck off. It's a worthless piece of shit that only still exists because it's the cheapest watch you can buy.

>>13665780
That is pretty nice, but I think a striped nato would work better.

>>13665831
Oh okay, I guess you’re right. Sorry

>>13665791
>>13665831
This is tudorfag

>>13665841
Wrong.

>>13665849
Then you are just a random brandfag marketing victim or something

>>13665822
Honestly, I don't think it looks good, I never did. And that's fine, I never thought it was supposed to. In my mind it's merely a watch for those who only want to have the time on their hand, as a tool merely. That's why, in my mind, it is the choice of a non-enthusiast. It's the watch for those who don't care about watches, at least in the real world. Then you have, for some reason, a bunch of people in /wt/ who are very enthusiastic about those watches. I just think it's very strange.

>>13665841
No I'm not tudorfag. I'm just one of the regulars.

>>13665860
Just because I think casio and other cheap shitters are fucking terrible and not worth posting about I'm a brandfag? Okay bro, whatever you say.

soviet space digishitter

>>13665832
I think so too, but this was the only nato I had laying around.
Will propably switch to a striped nato as soom as I get one.

>>13665873
>inb4 responding to bait
But ok, I'll have a go.
Don't you really wonder how it is possible to make a watch that functional and accurate so god damn efficiently?
It has pretty much everything you need in a watch and a similar watch in the mechanical world would cost tens of thousands, but here it is, a chip and some electronics magic and it is all possible.
People in the 60s could only dream of such watches the f-91w represents and the only reason most people don't like it, is it's availability, it has no exclusivity or materials lasting decades.

>>13665791
Being a watch enthusiast does not require you to own any particular watches. Learning about and appreciating watches can be done without owning a watch at all.

Also, different people are interested in different genres of watches, sometimes including inexpensive LCD quartz watches or other cheap watch types.

>>13665887
So it's exactly the same as every other piece of electronics ever made that becomes obsolete after a few years. Do you still play games on your Amiga while doing your expenses on a Texas Instrument calculator?

>>13665907
Why dont you just get a smartwatch then instead of mechanicals

>>13665893
You're stating the obvious. But it still seems odd I think.

>>13665914
>f-91w
>mechanical
huh?

>>13665920
>you defend mechanicals saying f-91w is obsolite by current electronics
why don't you just get a smart watch then?
quartz made mechanicals obsolete and smartwatches are making regular quartz watches obsolete

>>13665932
smart watches belong in /g/ .. oh .. wait.

>>13665943
So you were tudorfag

>>13665932
>smartwatches are making regular quartz watches obsolete

>>13665943
>>13665914
*unzips*

>>13665948
haha, no. get over your obsession.

>>13665951
from a technological standpoint yes, only problem they have is battery life.

>>13662607
NEW
>>13665967
>>13665967
>>13665967

>>13665967
>>13665967
>>13665967

>>13665956
I like it.

>>13665970
I don't even have to click it to know it's an awful OP watch.

> click
and yes, I was right.

>>13665982
excuse me, that timex represents the pinnacle of watches for you /g/ rejects

>>13665999
trips of truth

Should I buy a Seiko 5 or a Invicta pro diver? Never dealt with a invicta own a couple Seikos. Are they shit?

>>13664051

>>13666207
Just get a Subby copy and be done with it.
https://chazingtime02.co/

Lads talk to me about fakes, just found about about them and they even copy the movement finishing these days, it's honestly 1:1.
https://youtu.be/P_ZTqC2Yxxs

Why should I not buy one RIGHT now?

>>13664719
Yea that guy annoys me. You can tell old money from new and that guy is new, probably doesnt make more than 100k but acts like someone told him he needs to act like some sort of cunt to be called a gentlemen. All my friends from old money wear either a Casio diver or a Rolex their dad owned.