A Boring Hobby for the Vain & Pretentious: A Primer on Wristwatches

"Jim Zeigler" (jimzeigler) 05/04/2015 at 09:00 • Filed to: Horology, Watches, CZ82, boring

16

23

The ontological discussion about the necessity of the Apple watch has forced me to reevaluate one of my more embarrassing facets: I am a Watch Guy. It’s a hobby that instantly brands you as one of those kinds of people – the ones that live in a world of leased 320i’s with eBay M-badging, webbed belts adorned with the Gucci tricolore, and maxed-out Nordstrom’s credit cards. This certainly comprises a large subsect of the watch-wearing demographic, and you’ll find no arguments herein against the blanket disdain of these folks. I come here to bury Caesar, not to praise him.

But lend me your ears.

A watch is essentially a machine that you strap to your arm. That’s pretty bitchin’! You’re halfway to Robocop with one purchase. With a few exceptions (including the Apple-helmed smartwatch market), they exist for a singular purpose: to tell you what time it is. Some throw in a lagniappe and tell you the date. Truly fine timepieces do both of these things and include a calculator, which is convenient for tallying up the sexual conquests achieved whilst wearing such a lust-inducing piece of technology.

Casio: The Wet-Maker.

Fun fact: calculator watches are not greenlit for use during the math portion of the SAT. Ask me how I know.

!!! UNKNOWN HEADER TYPE (MULTI-LINE BREAK?) !!!

Beyond the realm of Timexes and $9 Casios (which happen to be a favorite of !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! ), the watch world quickly spirals into a petty subculture that uses ambiguous words like craftsmanship and heritage to justify value. Nits are picked. Preferences on second hand placement are defended with a vigor unlikely to be found outside of a freshman philosophy course. Holy wars exist in all hobbies, and this one is no different. Without going too deep into the Matrix, I’d like to explain the two main distinctions behind how most wristwatches work.

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

Sexy.

The cool cogs you conjure in your mind when you think of a clockmaker are part of a mechanical watch movement. Most are powered by a spring that is wound by a spinny rotor mounted on the bottom part of the mechanism. The motion of your wrist spins the rotor and winds the spring and theoretically keeps the watch running perpetually if you wear it regularly. For this reason, they are often called automatics. This kind of mechanism has been around since the late 18th century when pocket watches were a thing, and are pretty nifty and complex when you take a look at them naked. They also use !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! , which is both ballin’ and mechanically interesting.

The cons? They’re expensive and fairly fragile. They inherently lose a few seconds per day and will go dead after 30-40 hours of non-use, so the “set-it-and-forget-it” mindset en vogue these days isn’t fulfilled. They’re also a bit more expensive, with the $65 Malaysian-made !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! being your best starting point. But just look at the little gears!

Not quite as sexy .

Quartz watches, also known as normal-ass watches, make up the majority of the market. These are battery-operated, which render them disgusting and barbaric for upper-echelon timepiece enthusiasts (note: the internet needs a standardized sarcasm font). If you ask me how they work in public, I’ll mumble something about !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! and walk away from you. Quartz watches were The Hot Shit when they became attainable in the early ‘70’s due to their accuracy and electronic simplicity compared to mechanical watches. They’re now the standard mechanism for pretty much every watch under $100 (and quite a few that are far over that figure).

The cons? Not much, really. They’re rugged as hell - Timex’s classic promise that they can !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! is fairly close to reality. Advances in battery technology and creative solutions like !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! mean the limited lifespan argument is practically dead. At this point, it’s more of a prestige thing: even though the tech going into these watches is fairly cutting-edge, a lot of people think it’s cooler to have an automatic’s little steampunk fiesta churning on their wrist than a solar-powered Atomic-clock-synced computer.

!!! UNKNOWN HEADER TYPE (MULTI-LINE BREAK?) !!!

So now you know the difference. The Automatic vs. Quartz debate is analogous to the transmission divide in the automotive world. Think of the quartz watches as continuously-variable transmissions: technologically advanced & efficient, more usable to 90% of the population, and reviled and dismissed by the culture’s purists. Automatics are the stickshifts in this analogy (which is a confusing statement): an old-school stalwart that, though outclassed in almost every category, has a mechanical allure that appeals to a specific type of buyer.

I prefer automatics. This is because A) I’m a snob and B) I find it absolutely hilarious that a machine can be powered by the motion of me eating popcorn or petting a puppy dog. Essentially, automatic watches are KINETICALLY ACTUATED MECHANICAL PARASITES. But that’s not to say that quartz watches are lame! Wear anything you want. Wristwatches are the last acceptable bastion of male jewelry, and it’s your opportunity to show a bit of your personality on your wrist.

Correction: wear anything you want except a goddamn Apple watch.

jariten1781 > Jim Zeigler 05/04/2015 at 09:10

3

If you get an winder box to store your automatics in you power them by electricity just like a quartz bringing everything full circle.

Winder boxes are the Grand Unified Theory of the watch world.

E. Julius > Jim Zeigler 05/04/2015 at 09:12

0

Interestingly enough, here in Europe (or Paris at least) the retro style Casio digital watches are currently in vogue with trendy young people. I see lots of fellow students and some “cool” professors rocking these bad boys in gold and silver.

I have a little collection of watches myself (~8), all but two of which were given to me by my father. His (now deceased) parents used to own a jewelry store, so he has a bunch of stuff left over from when they shut it down in the 80s. He hasn’t given me any of the really fancy stuff, mostly just old quartz Seikos and the like, but they mean a lot to me and I enjoy wearing them. Maybe when I “grow up” as he says I can snag something a little nicer, but having so many already I see no need to expand my collection.

Party-vi > Jim Zeigler 05/04/2015 at 09:12

1

“the ones that live in a world of leased 320i’s with eBay M-badging, webbed belts adorned with the Gucci tricolore, and maxed-out Nordstrom’s credit cards.”

I would have you know that I happen to own my 13-year-old 3-Series, sans M-badging, and Gucci is too gauche for my tastes. My Bailey, Banks & Biddle credit card would be maxed out except they went insolvent.

E. Julius > Jim Zeigler 05/04/2015 at 09:14

0

Also this writeup was hilarious; a welcome and amusing take on a hobby that some Oppos have posted about with much less levity.

Rainbow > Jim Zeigler 05/04/2015 at 09:15

3

Are these seriously wrapped around the trigger? Goddamn, some people just don’t think.

Kawaii-Gon Jinn > Jim Zeigler 05/04/2015 at 09:15

0

Webbed belts. So wrong .

E. Julius > Kawaii-Gon Jinn 05/04/2015 at 09:20

0

Acceptable (edit: male) belts, in order of how many people find them acceptable:

leather

knit

ribbon

needlepoint

yamahog > Party-vi 05/04/2015 at 09:27

1

I had to lol, that sentence describes my college bf almost perfectly. No M badges on his leased 328xi because he doesn’t care, Gucci cologne but no web belt because gross, and he makes more than enough to avoid maxing his Nordstrom card.

Party-vi > jariten1781 05/04/2015 at 09:33

1

My watch winder is powered by magic. I know this because I usually have to chant and curse and dance around the room in order to get the damned thing to work properly.

RedPir8Roberts > Jim Zeigler 05/04/2015 at 10:05

0

This is one of the best sentences I have read in a long time: “At this point, it’s more of a prestige thing: even though the tech going into these watches is fairly cutting-edge, a lot of people think it’s cooler to have an automatic’s little steampunk fiesta churning on their wrist than a solar-powered Atomic-clock-synced computer.” “Steampunk fiesta” is fantastic. So, what do you make of the super-expensive Patek Phillipes and others that go for hundreds of thousands—if you had the coin, would you buy one? Most of them to my eye do not look that expensive, and even a watch afficionado wouldn’t probably notice unless you waved it under their nose. I just don’t think I could spend over $500,000 for a watch even if I had Bill Gates’ money. In particular, what do you think of this (which was brought to mind as to me it looks kind of steampunk—$158,000 or so I think. MB&F hm4 Thunderbolt (as an aside, to the folks on Oppo who post pictures with no explanation or context, or cars without saying what they are, when it’s not a quiz or genuine question—just stop it. Please.).

Jim Zeigler > Rainbow 05/04/2015 at 10:08

2

Hey there! Thanks for reading the article and taking the time to comment. You’re right, this is exceedingly poor form. With that said, the gun in the photograph was A) broken, B) unloaded (but aren’t they all), and C) had a broomstick shoved into the magazine port to get the picture. Also, they aren’t actually strapped down; I kinda just fed them through the trigger guard behind the trigger.

But yes, this is a stupid picture.

Rusty Vandura - www.tinyurl.com/keepoppo > Jim Zeigler 05/04/2015 at 10:32

0

I don’t wear watches; they always stink underneath.

edu-petrolhead > jariten1781 05/04/2015 at 11:02

0

You deserve a galaxy full of kinja stars, haha

MarquetteLa > Jim Zeigler 05/04/2015 at 11:19

2

Neat, thanks for the write-up!

I recently purchased my first watch on something of a whim, mostly because I thought it was sexy as balls and it happened to be on sale.

Jim Zeigler > RedPir8Roberts 05/04/2015 at 11:26

1

I dunno, man. I’d like to think that somewhere around $1500 would be my limit even as a gazillionaire, because at that point you can buy cooler things like used Honda dirtbikes or badass shotguns. I’m a pretty big fan of the Ball Fireman series, though...

Thank God I’ll always be broke.

JR1 > Jim Zeigler 05/04/2015 at 15:10

0

There is a place for both mechanical and quartz. I love the design of watches like the G-Shock Altimeter so I can’t knock quartz too much.

For the most part though a quartz watch is like a Toyota Camry with some notable exceptions.

I ache for a Omega Speedmaster Pro

SteveLehto > Jim Zeigler 05/09/2015 at 15:01

2

I’ll buy an iWatch when this stops being cool.

Which will never happen.

BigGatorChris > Rainbow 05/14/2015 at 13:58

1

It's OK.

That Sig trigger has roughly eleven inches of travel before it will discharge the firearm, requiring the same effort as pushing in the clutch pedal on an early 911 Turbo.

Stef Schrader > Jim Zeigler 05/14/2015 at 15:13

0

Apple lost me when they ruled out fart machine apps. If I can’t remote-poot my phone when I’m across the room, I’m not interested.

Signed,

Wasn’t getting one anyway because watches are leashes to The Man

(I like the cool tech on your arm, though—just not my thing.)

WonkUnit > Jim Zeigler 05/14/2015 at 18:13

0

I hate the fact that i like watches. I never used to. It just clicked one day and I bought a couple. Every once in a while the itch comes back but i have to say NO, and hide my credit cards.

S2Konstantin > Jim Zeigler 05/28/2015 at 12:22

0

Last line is best line.

ninjagin > Jim Zeigler 06/02/2015 at 19:04

0

I, too, am a watch guy. It can be a little embarrassing sometimes when people find out, but every now and again I wear one I like and someone notices and it’s great. The only downside is that every 4-5 years or so, I have to put 10 or so watches in a bag and go have them cleaned and regulated, and that’s a little costly.

idriveayak > Jim Zeigler 06/03/2015 at 10:51

0

I would consider myself an enthusiast. I have about 10 pieces that I wear in regular circulation. I wear everything from a ~$300.00 Nixon to a ~$4000.00 Rolex Datejust Circa 1978. I don’t particularly care what anybody wears, including myself. I don’t wear my Rolex fishing for compliments, as the simple fact is, it just doesn’t garner any. It is EASILY the most simplistic looking timepiece I own. Wear what you love!