Time Attack: Tissot PRX Powermatic 80 vs. Q Timex

If there is one universal constant, it’s that vintage will never go out of style. Regardless if you wear old Levi’s, drive a ‘69 Chevelle, or listen to T. Rex records stolen from your parents’ basement, everyone enjoys artifacts from the days when kids exclusively entertained the notion of appreciating stupid-looking cartoon simians.

Watch companies know that people appreciate their past pieces enough that they’d fork over thousands just to experience what watches their old folks used to own…if they bought a 5513 Submariner and not a Casiotron. And because these timepieces are often in a condition which makes wearing them daily risky to their well-being, watch companies will often throw nostalgia-stricken weeble wobbles a bone by gracing our wrists and watchboxes with a reissue.

Two of the biggest reissues of the past three years are paradoxically very similar yet markedly different: The Q Timex Pepsi, the hottest affordable watch of 2019, and the Tissot PRX, the hottest affordable watch of 2021 (and now). Both have angular, blocky 70s styling. Both come from companies that have history. Both are sports watches. Hell, the watches the Q and PRX were based on were released within a year of each other. But that’s about where the differences end. Despite the stark differences these two watches present, I feel that they’re similar enough to compare to each other.

“But ofQuartz, you fucking moron,” you might be saying to yourself right now, “one of these watches is the absolute peak of affordable, retro GADA sports watches, and the other is a Timex! What the in the Kentucky-Fried-fuck are you smoking?!” Calm down. While it might be true that the discrepancies between Timex and Tissot are quite vast (Tissot’s cheapest model, the quartz Everytime, is only $20 more than Timex’s cheapest mechanical, the 34mm Marlin), I think they offer similar experiences, albeit in different executions.

First, the Tissot. Measuring in at 42.9mm in diameter with the crown (about 39.5 without), a thickness of 11.5mm and an effective length of 48.1mm with the endlinks (44.5 without), this PRX variant was upsized from its ancestor from the late 70s, although Tissot recently announced that a more true-to-form 35mm quartz model is coming out this year. Even though it’s bigger than the original the PRX doesn’t dominate your wrist, and you can easily wear it under a cuff and/or jacket. The quick-release bracelet is exceptional, being as articulate as a yoga instructor and as well-finished as the bumper on your grandpa’s restored Bel Air. The PRX also comes with a flat sapphire crystal and 100m of water resistance, making it a viable candidate for a daily wearer.

But the most appealing aspect of this PRX is its movement. The watch is equipped with Tissot’s in-house Powermatic 80.111, which is essentially a modified ETA 2824-2 with a slower beat rate, giving the watch an impressive 80 hours of power reserve. It also comes with a hairspring made out of Nivachron, an anti-magnetic alloy proprietary to Tissot. You can only find stuff like this in actual luxury watches, in timepieces from IWC and Panerai.

The Timex, meanwhile, is a bit more homespun. Coming in at 38mm in diameter, 11.5mm deep and 43.3mm long, it wears slightly smaller than its Swiss competitor, and due to the SII PC33 quartz movement that powers it, feels substantially lighter as well. The bracelet, despite being infinitely adjustable, is unimpressive, and it’s gained a reputation for pulling hairs. Getting a strap to match the bracelet’s taper will also prove daunting, as its 18mm lug width immediately shoots up to about 22mm and tapers down to 16mm. Despite aping and mixing the looks of some of Rolex’s most loved models-the Submariner, the GMT-Master and Oysterquartz-its specs don’t make it as versatile as the PRX. It only comes with an acrylic crystal and 50m of water resistance, and its GMT bezel is bidirectional and friction-fitted, like a Vostok *gasp*.

So, case closed, right? REAL enthusiasts shouldn’t waste their time and at least buy the quartz PRX, not some ‘Chinese-made garbage’. No. While the PRX does give you a lot more at $650 than the Q does at $180, I think it’s unfair to say that the Q is a waste of time; watches are inherently subjective, after all.

Despite that the PRX and Q have unusual bracelets, you automatically have more options with the latter, as it comes with standard, non-integrated lugs. While you will have to deal with your new bracelet or strap not matching the taper of the original (for the most part), you still have the option to switch out the stock bracelet with any old 18mm strap you can find. The PRX doesn’t have this option, as its integrated bracelet has a puny lug width. While Tissot has come out with straps for the PRX, and you can get custom-made ones from Delugs and even Etsy, all of them are either some form of leather or in Delugs’ case, canvas (they're the only manufacturer that I know of that makes a non-leather strap). Tissot hasn’t officially given out the price of their in-house strap, but a third-party one will set you back at least $100. Even though the PRX has an exceptional bracelet and is versatile on its own without a strap, your options are limited if you want to spice things up.

Maintenance is another equalizer. Despite the fantastic movement Tissot gives you, it’s proprietary to the Swatch Group, which means servicing it in the future will probably cost you more than taking it to “your guy”, who might not necessarily have the parts for Powermatic 80s. There’s also countless service center horror stories on forums across the Web that aren’t just limited to Tissot–bad customer service, incompetent staff and spotty communication could await you when your PRX needs some TLC. The only maintenance your Q needs is a battery change every few years. And Timex has you covered: you can open the battery hatch with a coin. Instead of a service, all your Q needs is a SR626SW battery, some tweezers and a dime. And even if the movement inside of it breaks, replacing it will still run you far less than some mechanical watch parts, not to mention a full service. The same applies to the quartz PRX, which shares essentially all of the same parts as the automatic version, with the exception of the dial and caseback (and the movement, obviously).

Although very few (if any) people will ever truly use it, the Q also comes with a functional GMT bezel. This makes it a pretty interesting choice for a travel watch, especially if the place you’re going to is excessively dry, since the Q could barely survive a kiddie pool on a good day. The PRX doesn’t come with a special bezel (those weird $1900 ones with the 14k fluted gold bezel notwithstanding), although I’d personally think a PRX with a tool watch bezel would be interesting.

The most jarringly superficial difference between the PRX and the Q is the price. After being in this hobby for a while you realize $650 for a mechanical Swiss-made watch from a respected brand is a great price. Outside of it, however, $650 is the difference between getting your car fixed or putting food on the table for a lot of people. It’s a hard pill to swallow for less affluent enthusiasts, and people who have more sense than dollars. The Q, meanwhile, is only $180. Sure, that’s not an inconsiderable amount of money, but it still allows you to spend your remaining $470 on stuff you actually need. The Q is more appropriate for a greener enthusiast who just bought a Orient Ray II who wants something more retro, while the PRX is the shitter for that one dude who started out with a 14060 Submariner…at age 15.

Like the last installment in this (very drawn-out) series, I can conclude that neither the PRX Powermatic 80 or the Q is objectively better than the other. Sure, you could prattle on all day about “heritage” and “design” and “prestige”, but truth be told, I think these watches compliment each other, rather than cancel each other out. They’re two slides of the same coin, but part of the reason why people like us collect watches is to have our cake and eat it too…to the best of our ability as we pretend our parents were cooler than they really were in 1979.