The case for manual chronographs
The Mathey-Tissot Type XX manual chronograph that I wear today is a good example for the reason of why I drifted away from mechanical chronos.
For clarity purposes, there is nothing wrong with my Type XX, I posted in the past the reasons for liking it and they are still as valid as on the day I posted them: The size is right (for me), the dial is readable and relatively uncluttered (for a chrono), and the heritage is there as well since Mathey-Tissot was the one to which Breguet went to help them manufacture their first batch for the French military.
The problem is with the usual thickness of mechanical chronographs which is only getting worse once they are fitted with an automatic winding module. The Mathey-Tissot is powered with a manual winded Sellita SW510 which is probably the reason why it's still manageable (for me). With few exceptions, such as my Marathon MSAR, I don't find thick watches to be comfortable, which is why all my other chronographs are of the slimmer quartz persuasion.
Manual chronographs are usually thinner and a bit lighter, and in my case when I don't wear the same watch frequently, the presence or absence of an automatic module is a non-issue.
At least with the Type XX I can bask in the knowledge that I managed to rise above the limited edition riffraff since my Type XX is exclusive! The Type XX is the result of a collaboration with AMWG and I'm very happy that their frequent collaborations results in the re-creation of unusual or forgotten models.
Which is exactly what the Type XX is, because Mathey-Tissot kept the original size of 38-38.5mm, which is why it wears very nicely on my wrist.
I'm a big fan of watches that are interesting because they are either unique, have interesting features, well designed or simply offer a great value for their price.
I've come close to pulling the trigger on this watch a number of times - but I've sort of got it covered elsewhere in the watchbox … you can't own them all I guess.
Shame that it's not getting along with your wrist Claude, it's a great looking watch.
But I get it - doesn't matter how good a watch is, if you don't like how it wears.
I've come close to pulling the trigger on this watch a number of times - but I've sort of got it covered elsewhere in the watchbox … you can't own them all I guess.
Shame that it's not getting along with your wrist Claude, it's a great looking watch.
But I get it - doesn't matter how good a watch is, if you don't like how it wears.
You probably skipped the last part of my post. It does wear very well on my wrist due to its smaller sub 40mm diameter, which is quite uncommon for a chrono.
Most of the other mechanical chronographs that I've tried didn't because they were too large, too tall or both.
You probably skipped the last part of my post. It does wear very well on my wrist due to its smaller sub 40mm diameter, which is quite uncommon for a chrono.
Most of the other mechanical chronographs that I've tried didn't because they were too large, too tall or both.
Sorry bud - didn't read it carefully I guess. ☻
In that case, I'm glad it is getting on with your wrist! It's such a good looking watch with really good specs and history.
Quartz chronographs aren't always thinner 😊
I’ll take a manual wind watch over an auto every single time simply because the watch will be thinner without the rotor.