Tell me why I am wrong. Part One.

I post a controversial opinion merely for entertainment purposes and you tell me that I am wrong. Change my mind!

·

Hold my beer…

Pin-lever movements on the whole sacrificed quality over quantity to keep costs down. They were designed to be replaced not repaired, and represent everything wrong with consumerism. They are a trap for the unsuspecting vintage watch buyer, and should come with a health warning.

·
chronotriggered

Hold my beer…

Pin-lever movements on the whole sacrificed quality over quantity to keep costs down. They were designed to be replaced not repaired, and represent everything wrong with consumerism. They are a trap for the unsuspecting vintage watch buyer, and should come with a health warning.

They should be viewed exactly like the quartz movements that replaced them: easy to swap out and bring the cost of watch production down so that every consumer can afford one. In a world of replaceable consumer goods they were as accurate and durable as they needed to be.

It is only because we fetishize old watches that we care that a movement designed for five years gets a little balky at 70.

·

Grabbing my popcorn for an epic battle between @Aurelian and @chronotriggered.

@Omeganut , you watching this?  

·
Aurelian

They should be viewed exactly like the quartz movements that replaced them: easy to swap out and bring the cost of watch production down so that every consumer can afford one. In a world of replaceable consumer goods they were as accurate and durable as they needed to be.

It is only because we fetishize old watches that we care that a movement designed for five years gets a little balky at 70.

This is very much a niche problem, but it’s easy to fall into the trap. Other than my personal experiences, my main issue with them is the lack of longevity and what it does to a lot of good (or potentially good) watches. 
I (and this is very hyperbolic) feel there are a lot of watches out there that are just landfill: skin divers, chronos, timers, alarms, 70s fashion watches, obscure brands and designs, that are lost or will be lost once these pieces of s*** give up the ghost - it’s a loss of design, of craft, of heritage. A watch shouldn’t be lost or mourned, it should be cherished and celebrated.

·
celinesimon

Grabbing my popcorn for an epic battle between @Aurelian and @chronotriggered.

@Omeganut , you watching this?  

Uh...  I have no eff'ing clue what a pin-lever movement even is.  Isn't that the thing Mary Lou Retton did at the '84 games in LA to win the individual all-around gold?

Mary Lou Retton GIFs - Get the best GIF on GIPHY

The only thing I am qualified to do here on this site is to make incredibly juvenile jokes and post random gifs.  

Otherwise, when it comes to serious discussion about serious things, I am totally out of my depth.

·
chronotriggered

This is very much a niche problem, but it’s easy to fall into the trap. Other than my personal experiences, my main issue with them is the lack of longevity and what it does to a lot of good (or potentially good) watches. 
I (and this is very hyperbolic) feel there are a lot of watches out there that are just landfill: skin divers, chronos, timers, alarms, 70s fashion watches, obscure brands and designs, that are lost or will be lost once these pieces of s*** give up the ghost - it’s a loss of design, of craft, of heritage. A watch shouldn’t be lost or mourned, it should be cherished and celebrated.

Would you say then that trainers are awful? After all, they're designed to be thrown away when it starts to go, with even massive brands like Adidas glueing the soles so reparation is nigh on impossible. Companies like Shoe Zone have almost killed the art of Shoemaking. Not a sneakerhead or anything I just dislike how accepted disposability has become

·
chronotriggered

This is very much a niche problem, but it’s easy to fall into the trap. Other than my personal experiences, my main issue with them is the lack of longevity and what it does to a lot of good (or potentially good) watches. 
I (and this is very hyperbolic) feel there are a lot of watches out there that are just landfill: skin divers, chronos, timers, alarms, 70s fashion watches, obscure brands and designs, that are lost or will be lost once these pieces of s*** give up the ghost - it’s a loss of design, of craft, of heritage. A watch shouldn’t be lost or mourned, it should be cherished and celebrated.

Any watch that has reached us after 50 or 70 years has survived due more to happenstance than quality.  The vast majority of Rolex and Omegas have passed from this mortal coil (well, not really, most likely tossed).  When we celebrate a vintage piece we must acknowledge that it is here due to luck more than build.

What if we lost a 60 year old LaSalle?  Why do you mourn that more than the inevitable failure of a Moonswatch or Christopher Ward Aquitaine?  We can't make them indestructible. We shouldn't even try.  We would never buy new if that were the case.  The makers of Crocs learned that lesson.

I love that Timex is reissuing their heritage.  They should try one of their original movements and sell the piece for $15.00.

·
Aurelian

Any watch that has reached us after 50 or 70 years has survived due more to happenstance than quality.  The vast majority of Rolex and Omegas have passed from this mortal coil (well, not really, most likely tossed).  When we celebrate a vintage piece we must acknowledge that it is here due to luck more than build.

What if we lost a 60 year old LaSalle?  Why do you mourn that more than the inevitable failure of a Moonswatch or Christopher Ward Aquitaine?  We can't make them indestructible. We shouldn't even try.  We would never buy new if that were the case.  The makers of Crocs learned that lesson.

I love that Timex is reissuing their heritage.  They should try one of their original movements and sell the piece for $15.00.

What is the watch equivalent of this? 

upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/...
·
roberto

What is the watch equivalent of this? 

upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/...

Is that a Zero?

·

I’m no @Omeganut, but I too like GIFs. 

Image
·
Scooby

Would you say then that trainers are awful? After all, they're designed to be thrown away when it starts to go, with even massive brands like Adidas glueing the soles so reparation is nigh on impossible. Companies like Shoe Zone have almost killed the art of Shoemaking. Not a sneakerhead or anything I just dislike how accepted disposability has become

I would. I think fast fashion is a problem. Sustainability is definitely something to consider going forward regardless. I’ve spent half the day talking about this (sustainability in design) amongst other people within my industry, so I’m kind of burnt out…

·
Aurelian

Is that a Zero?

Sounds like it’s a Lockheed PV-1 Ventura (with “hypothetical damage pattern”) based on the description here. For me it’s just shorthand for survivorship bias.

·
Aurelian

Any watch that has reached us after 50 or 70 years has survived due more to happenstance than quality.  The vast majority of Rolex and Omegas have passed from this mortal coil (well, not really, most likely tossed).  When we celebrate a vintage piece we must acknowledge that it is here due to luck more than build.

What if we lost a 60 year old LaSalle?  Why do you mourn that more than the inevitable failure of a Moonswatch or Christopher Ward Aquitaine?  We can't make them indestructible. We shouldn't even try.  We would never buy new if that were the case.  The makers of Crocs learned that lesson.

I love that Timex is reissuing their heritage.  They should try one of their original movements and sell the piece for $15.00.

Yes - there is luck, but what I’m concerned about is the watches that are still currently alive, perfectly functional, but are on borrowed time. At least with pallet-levers they can be repaired to a certain extent... there does arise the cost vs practicality issue, but I have a 1936 Vertex in the shop and a 1911 Elgin that keeps time, so where should I draw the line?

I appreciate that my latest arguement is very much heart over head. We are unique on here, you would mourn the LaSalle as well. Things don’t last forever, but I do wish more watches could, but that is a romantic fool talking. I don’t connect to the CW as I do my 1970s Seamaster f300Hz, but I think it’s nostalgia and pure personal preference. Then again, we are both in it for the thrill of the hunt - so we are wired differently than other watch collectors. The MoonSwatch is future garbage (as in its cheap and disposable) and is a gimmick.

In terms of heritage pieces and homages, I am in favour, but would always want to see and hold an original if nothing else.

·
chronotriggered

Yes - there is luck, but what I’m concerned about is the watches that are still currently alive, perfectly functional, but are on borrowed time. At least with pallet-levers they can be repaired to a certain extent... there does arise the cost vs practicality issue, but I have a 1936 Vertex in the shop and a 1911 Elgin that keeps time, so where should I draw the line?

I appreciate that my latest arguement is very much heart over head. We are unique on here, you would mourn the LaSalle as well. Things don’t last forever, but I do wish more watches could, but that is a romantic fool talking. I don’t connect to the CW as I do my 1970s Seamaster f300Hz, but I think it’s nostalgia and pure personal preference. Then again, we are both in it for the thrill of the hunt - so we are wired differently than other watch collectors. The MoonSwatch is future garbage (as in its cheap and disposable) and is a gimmick.

In terms of heritage pieces and homages, I am in favour, but would always want to see and hold an original if nothing else.

(The old standby: the car analogy.)

Objectively, old Volkswagens are terrible cars.  They break frequently, they leak, rust, are drafty and the heaters don't work.  The windshield wipers are from a child's toy. They are unsafe at any speed. The seats were uncomfortable. They had a weird Volkswagen plastic smell. They were starter cars, and disposable.

It is exactly this quality, their nearness to the crusher, that makes them so beloved. The cost of ownership was low, the barrier to ownership was low.  When you could buy a better car, you did.

50 years later they are collectible. Would you buy one for your sixteen year old? No. You have to love and embrace the imperfections to be able to own an old Bug.  Full disclosure, this was my car when I was 16:

1974 VW Volkswagen Dasher Original 2-page Advertisement Print Art Car Ad  K57 | eBay

My friends would not be seen in it. This car would soon be the Scirocco and Volkswagen would move upscale (a bit).

Pin-pallets occupy the same space in the watch world.  We are sentimental creatures, but the market is not.  The market improved Volkswagen and it improved watches.

Let's pour one out for the working man's movement and resolve never to buy one again.

·
roberto

Sounds like it’s a Lockheed PV-1 Ventura (with “hypothetical damage pattern”) based on the description here. For me it’s just shorthand for survivorship bias.

Very good, a different point then.