- Posts
- 7,992
- Likes
- 28,014
Whats the obsession with manual wind?
- Posts
- 886
- Likes
- 2,975
sjg22
·
I definitely agree with you - lots of PP, ALS, AP, JLC etc automatics with beautifuly decorated rotors.
However, the recent trend of sapphire display backs has exposed us to a litany of boring rotors hiding the nicer mechanical bits underneath.
Why do we need to see this?
- Posts
- 7,992
- Likes
- 28,014
Tony C.
··Ωf Jury memberI definitely agree with you - lots of PP, ALS, AP, JLC etc automatics with beautifuly decorated rotors.
However, the recent trend of sapphire display backs has exposed us to a litany of boring rotors hiding the nicer mechanical bits underneath.
Why do we need to see this?
Oh yes, contemporary designs typically do nothing for me, which is part of the reason why I confine myself to vintage. So we are in agreement.
- Posts
- 7,104
- Likes
- 23,062
- Posts
- 3,787
- Likes
- 10,336
Waltesefalcon
·Another thing I like about manuals is if I decide to wear the same watch two days in a row, it happens sometimes, I can check the time against my atomic clock when I wind it in the evening. Yes I am that anal.
- Posts
- 4,934
- Likes
- 69,436
CPRwatch
·Manual wind , to me it's almost as if you have a closer relationship with the watch . And by this I mean you are in total control of the watches functionality , forget to manually wind the watch & it will surely fail you . It's almost as if the watch depends on you to remember to give it life , which automatics just don't need whilst on the wrist . And I'm not against automatics as all my watches are automatic apart from my Speedmaster racing MKII . But I feel closer to this watch than any other I own .
- Posts
- 35
- Likes
- 25
Wyatt66
·Manual wind is fine, but to me there’s something magical about an automatic keeping itself going as long as you keeping wearing it. In the spirit of inclusion, I’m standing up for the silly rotors, and the ugly ones. They’re not all beauty pageants like the one above, but they’re people too. Wait, no they’re not.... but they do their job, without complaint and without being asked, while manual movements lounge around expecting it all on a plate. “Ooh, wind my crown, you human slave!”
- Posts
- 2,158
- Likes
- 5,706
nonuffinkbloke
·It brings a little bit of drama into my evening:
The phone app, (Time.is) is counting around to 20:59 + 57... 20:59 + 58... 20:59 + 59.....😲 you have the 24 tooth crown out, ready, gentle movements, between the low pushers, adjusting the time to 9 o'clock...😲 then, in a panic, just as the phone app hits 21.00 + 00... 😲 you click in the vintage crown and start to wind the, 50 year old, Omega 321 into life...🥰 you watch with anticipation😕 as the second hand starts it's journey around the Speedmaster subdial 😕... triumphant as it hits the quarter minute mark just as the phone app displays 21:00 + 15...😁
"Yes!... Bang on time ya basstedd!" You mutter to yourself. 👍 ... your wife looks at you as if you are mental!😟
(Same time, same excitement... we do it all again tomorrow night at 9pm!😉)
The phone app, (Time.is) is counting around to 20:59 + 57... 20:59 + 58... 20:59 + 59.....😲 you have the 24 tooth crown out, ready, gentle movements, between the low pushers, adjusting the time to 9 o'clock...😲 then, in a panic, just as the phone app hits 21.00 + 00... 😲 you click in the vintage crown and start to wind the, 50 year old, Omega 321 into life...🥰 you watch with anticipation😕 as the second hand starts it's journey around the Speedmaster subdial 😕... triumphant as it hits the quarter minute mark just as the phone app displays 21:00 + 15...😁
"Yes!... Bang on time ya basstedd!" You mutter to yourself. 👍 ... your wife looks at you as if you are mental!😟
(Same time, same excitement... we do it all again tomorrow night at 9pm!😉)
Edited:
- Posts
- 2,327
- Likes
- 2,541
Professor
·Thickness and to a lesser degree weight are a major factor for me. Gimpy wrist due to a childhood accident.
My late 60's Omega Deville is as thick as i would want for a watch I wear every day. I'd be wearing it now if not for the broken lug and probably would never have looked at other watches.
Aside fro the Orient Tri-star I obtained recently and a el cheapo Chinese self winder I got last year, just to see how well such a cheap watch might work, all my recent purchases have been hand wind.
In large part I wanted to examine older and from my perspective sometimes odd ball movements, and older hand winders are not only low cost they are less likely to be worn beyond repair or broken.
The vintage (USSR made) Russian watches for example have a rep for breaking down if they have any complications, even central second hands and calendars are problematic. Though I'm sure there are still Russian self winders out there with plenty of life left in them, and the Milspec Amphibia is tough as nails. The Russian handwinders are like the AK47 of watches.
I like the older "Dollar" watches as well, just won a Westclock hand winder so simple it has no second hand at all. I at first thought the hand was missing but a google search revealed that this particular older model never had one.
My Tower is much the same only a hair classier, no second hand. That's one less drive train to wear out.
The watch I wear most recently is the el cheapo Diantus. it keeps good time and the dial is very much like the dial of my Deville. Classy looking for a lower rung pin lever. Light as a feather and very comfortable.
I've been eyeing the occasional Bulova mens self winding watch since lucking out on the nice ladies model I got for my sister for peanuts.
I'll probably save my pennies for a Bambino if I don't find a reasonably priced replacement case for my Deville first.
I know the Deville, once re-cased and properly serviced will run worry free for longer than I'm likely to be around .
PS
To be clear there's nothing at all bad about the Tri-Star watches, its just that the style of the case looks much better with its metal bracelet than it could with a leather band and leather is much kinder to my wrist. As it is I don't wear the Tri Star long enough to keep it wound and this version has no hand wind option. If it were my only watch it would be a different story.
My late 60's Omega Deville is as thick as i would want for a watch I wear every day. I'd be wearing it now if not for the broken lug and probably would never have looked at other watches.
Aside fro the Orient Tri-star I obtained recently and a el cheapo Chinese self winder I got last year, just to see how well such a cheap watch might work, all my recent purchases have been hand wind.
In large part I wanted to examine older and from my perspective sometimes odd ball movements, and older hand winders are not only low cost they are less likely to be worn beyond repair or broken.
The vintage (USSR made) Russian watches for example have a rep for breaking down if they have any complications, even central second hands and calendars are problematic. Though I'm sure there are still Russian self winders out there with plenty of life left in them, and the Milspec Amphibia is tough as nails. The Russian handwinders are like the AK47 of watches.
I like the older "Dollar" watches as well, just won a Westclock hand winder so simple it has no second hand at all. I at first thought the hand was missing but a google search revealed that this particular older model never had one.
My Tower is much the same only a hair classier, no second hand. That's one less drive train to wear out.
The watch I wear most recently is the el cheapo Diantus. it keeps good time and the dial is very much like the dial of my Deville. Classy looking for a lower rung pin lever. Light as a feather and very comfortable.
I've been eyeing the occasional Bulova mens self winding watch since lucking out on the nice ladies model I got for my sister for peanuts.
I'll probably save my pennies for a Bambino if I don't find a reasonably priced replacement case for my Deville first.
I know the Deville, once re-cased and properly serviced will run worry free for longer than I'm likely to be around .
PS
To be clear there's nothing at all bad about the Tri-Star watches, its just that the style of the case looks much better with its metal bracelet than it could with a leather band and leather is much kinder to my wrist. As it is I don't wear the Tri Star long enough to keep it wound and this version has no hand wind option. If it were my only watch it would be a different story.
Edited:
- Posts
- 702
- Likes
- 717
ClarendonVintage
·
Nothing anyone says will change anything about how I feel about Chopard...
- Posts
- 4
- Likes
- 0
Onion
·Hello everyone, I am new to this magnificent forum, which I have been observing for some time.
I very much prefer manual watches, mainly because in my youth and in my part of the world, such watches were actually the only ones. I was in high school when I first heard about self-winding watches, and even then for some time I did not believe they actually existed.
In my opinion the main arguments for manual watches are as follows (many of them have been already been discussed in this thread).
Cheers.
I very much prefer manual watches, mainly because in my youth and in my part of the world, such watches were actually the only ones. I was in high school when I first heard about self-winding watches, and even then for some time I did not believe they actually existed.
In my opinion the main arguments for manual watches are as follows (many of them have been already been discussed in this thread).
- Automatic watches are unnecessarily thick. This is true mainly for dress watches.
- It is simpler - less parts to break.
- Winding a manual watch is a sort of a mystical experience. This is very, very true. People who know what I am talking about, know what I am talking about.
- It is obvious that a watch’s timekeeping depends on the degree to it is wound. The more wound is the mainspring, the slower the watch is (the differences are not huge in decent watches, but are always there). With manual watches wound every 24 hours, the average “winding degree” is exactly the same every day, which allows for much better consistency. Automatic watches are wound more or less depending on whether the watch is being worn, how it is being worn, whether a winder is applied and so on. It is then more difficult to achieve consistency, so special contraptions need to be applied such as coaxial escapement, to at least partly take care of this. Such solutions make the watch unnecessarily complicated and unnecessarily expensive. I think that if you compare similar hand wound and automatic movements, the former will always be more consistent. I am not a professional though, and would gladly hear some comments from people more qualified than myself.
- For those of us who prefer display case backs, automatic watches should always be inferior, as the rotor obscures a significant part of the movement. It is like having a sticker covering 50% of your transparent case back. Admittedly some rotors are very nice too. In any case I do not consider this is to be a real disadvantage - for me antimagnetic protection is more important than movement visibility, so I do not buy watches with transparent case backs.
- Rotor adds to the watch’s weight. While I do not have anything against a reasonably heavy watch on my wrist, everything has its limits. Omega Speedmaster 125 weighs 185 grams. It is like having a full glass of water in your hand all the time - you can injure yourself. That’s a pity, as it is a beautiful watch and I would gladly have one, if it were manual. By the way there were instances in the past (no joke) of faultily designed self-winding mechanisms which, once the rotor achieved certain amplitude, caused serious wrist injury, but I assume that coming across such a watch nowadays is not very probable.
- Why at all do we buy mechanical watches and not quartz watches which are more reliable, generally cheaper and can also be beautifully designed? For me it is just a question of conservatism - we want to be in contact with a certain tradition and with generations before us, that wore mechanical watches. Maybe other people have other reasons. I don’t. So, why buy watches that use a technology which was, on a wider scale, introduced just few decades ago? For me automatic watches are just a passing fashion without past and future.
Cheers.
- Posts
- 1,636
- Likes
- 6,607
felsby
··I don't see any option in settings or profile...
I do not want to offend anyone here, but frankly, to me, an automatic watch is something between a proper mechanical watch and an quartz watch, with disadvantages of both. I might be biased though, as I have never owned one.
- Automatic watches are unnecessarily thick. This is true mainly for dress watches.
- It is simpler - less parts to break.
- Winding a manual watch is a sort of a mystical experience.....
- It is obvious that a watch’s timekeeping depends on the degree to it is wound. .....
- For those of us who prefer display case backs, automatic watches should always be inferior, as the rotor obscures a significant part of the movement....
- Rotor adds to the watch’s weight. ....
- .........For me automatic watches are just a passing fashion without past and future.
Cheers.
1. Correction: necessarily thicker.
2. True. The rotor bearing lives a tough life.
3. A different, but equally mesmerising experience applies to the feeling of the moving rotor on the wrist.
4. No idea.
5. The rotor is part of the show!
6. True. The watch is on my non-dominant arm and gives it a little exercise.
7. Eighty years of passing fashion proves you wrong.
I got three manual winds, three automatics and three quartzes. Love'm all. I also got derailleur bikes as well as singlespeeds. Why constrain yourself? Yes, cheers! 😀
- Posts
- 98
- Likes
- 119
dxholdren
·I have nothing against automatic or hand winding. I enjoy and appreciate both movements for what they are. Manually winding a watch absolutely brings a degree of pleasure to the table but so does wearing a watch that stays powered by the motion of being worn on the wrist. All amazing.
Besides quartz. No love for quartz from me.
Besides quartz. No love for quartz from me.
- Posts
- 29,195
- Likes
- 75,441
Archer
··Omega Qualified WatchmakerIt is obvious that a watch’s timekeeping depends on the degree to it is wound. The more wound is the mainspring, the slower the watch is (the differences are not huge in decent watches, but are always there). With manual watches wound every 24 hours, the average “winding degree” is exactly the same every day, which allows for much better consistency. Automatic watches are wound more or less depending on whether the watch is being worn, how it is being worn, whether a winder is applied and so on. It is then more difficult to achieve consistency, so special contraptions need to be applied such as coaxial escapement, to at least partly take care of this. Such solutions make the watch unnecessarily complicated and unnecessarily expensive. I think that if you compare similar hand wound and automatic movements, the former will always be more consistent. I am not a professional though, and would gladly hear some comments from people more qualified than myself.
Okay I'll comment - this is nonsense from a technical point of view. Automatic watches are typically near the top of wind the entire day while being worn, so not only are they more consistent in terms or torque delivery through the day, they are pretty much fully wound when you take it off at night. So your manually wound watch will be at 24 hours from fully wound when you wind it the next morning (spending the last 8 hours going from 16 to 24 hours after full wind, so the torque is dropping off), where the automatic watch will be going from 0 to 8 hours after full wind by the time you out it on the next day, and the torque will be higher. None of this has anything to do with co-axial escapements, etc.
Rotor adds to the watch’s weight. While I do not have anything against a reasonably heavy watch on my wrist, everything has its limits. Omega Speedmaster 125 weighs 185 grams. It is like having a full glass of water in your hand all the time - you can injure yourself. That’s a pity, as it is a beautiful watch and I would gladly have one, if it were manual. By the way there were instances in the past (no joke) of faultily designed self-winding mechanisms which, once the rotor achieved certain amplitude, caused serious wrist injury, but I assume that coming across such a watch nowadays is not very probable.
Unless you provide some evidence of this, I'm going to call shenanigans...
- Posts
- 176
- Likes
- 193
- Posts
- 4
- Likes
- 0
Onion
·I appreciate the different viewpoint and stick to mine. 😀
Limited resources, at least on my part. There are so many beautiful hand wound Omegas (mostly vintage, needless to say), that it will take a long time until I turn to “second to best” watches. Besides, watches are not my only hobby. Nor the most expensive one. Ever considered collecting antique maps? That is a thrill. And they nicely go together with Speedmasters 😉
Why constrain yourself? 😀
Limited resources, at least on my part. There are so many beautiful hand wound Omegas (mostly vintage, needless to say), that it will take a long time until I turn to “second to best” watches. Besides, watches are not my only hobby. Nor the most expensive one. Ever considered collecting antique maps? That is a thrill. And they nicely go together with Speedmasters 😉
- Posts
- 2,327
- Likes
- 2,541
Professor
·Okay I'll comment - this is nonsense from a technical point of view. Automatic watches are typically near the top of wind the entire day while being worn, so not only are they more consistent in terms or torque delivery through the day, they are pretty much fully wound when you take it off at night. So your manually wound watch will be at 24 hours from fully wound when you wind it the next morning (spending the last 8 hours going from 16 to 24 hours after full wind, so the torque is dropping off), where the automatic watch will be going from 0 to 8 hours after full wind by the time you out it on the next day, and the torque will be higher. None of this has anything to do with co-axial escapements, etc.
..
If no winding mechanism is used at night wouldn't the mainspring be mostly relaxed by morning and introduce some slight barely measurable error?
I only have four self winders and no winding table . Three of the self winders have a hand winding option. I usually take whichever I'm wearing off in late evening unless I go out and normally top up the mainspring before going to bed often six or eight hours later.
With the Orient Tri star I will swing the watch side to side gently for a minute or two before going to bed to be sure its still running by noon time if I don't put it on earlier after waking. I've forgotten to do this a couple of times and it stopped or showed some error due to the spring power dropping off below a certain level.
Whats true for modern movements, post WW2, may not be true for older self winders from the earliest days of the first such designs.
I'm sure there are dozens of urban legends about watches like anything else that might have had a grain of truth to them in the old days but are no longer relevant.
As for a watch actually injuring the wrist that sounds a bit far out, but with some of the odd ball oversized beasts coming out of Asia these days I would not be surprised.
- Posts
- 4
- Likes
- 0
Onion
·Al:
First of all, I am honored. I have learned a lot of stuff from your posts. And, apparently, still am.
Thank you. As mentioned, I am not a professional and I was wrong. I do not have trouble admitting such things.
Please do not call me that. I am 100% sure that I read about it on some watch forum within last year (the information contained there could be of course untrue). It referred to some watch (not Omega of course) that had double (multiple?) rotors that interacted in a somewhat unexpected way causing serious wrist damage. Unfortunately, I was just trying to locate that information and could not do it. Will continue searching. For now, I just need to live with the fact that the respect I have for you is not reciprocated due to my fault entirely. Lesson learned.
First of all, I am honored. I have learned a lot of stuff from your posts. And, apparently, still am.
Okay I'll comment - this is nonsense from a technical point of view. Automatic watches are typically near the top of wind the entire day while being worn, so not only are they more consistent in terms or torque delivery through the day, they are pretty much fully wound when you take it off at night. So your manually wound watch will be at 24 hours from fully wound when you wind it the next morning (spending the last 8 hours going from 16 to 24 hours after full wind, so the torque is dropping off), where the automatic watch will be going from 0 to 8 hours after full wind by the time you out it on the next day, and the torque will be higher. None of this has anything to do with co-axial escapements, etc.
Thank you. As mentioned, I am not a professional and I was wrong. I do not have trouble admitting such things.
Unless you provide some evidence of this, I'm going to call shenanigans...
Please do not call me that. I am 100% sure that I read about it on some watch forum within last year (the information contained there could be of course untrue). It referred to some watch (not Omega of course) that had double (multiple?) rotors that interacted in a somewhat unexpected way causing serious wrist damage. Unfortunately, I was just trying to locate that information and could not do it. Will continue searching. For now, I just need to live with the fact that the respect I have for you is not reciprocated due to my fault entirely. Lesson learned.
- Posts
- 29,195
- Likes
- 75,441
Archer
··Omega Qualified WatchmakerIf no winding mechanism is used at night wouldn't the mainspring be mostly relaxed by morning and introduce some slight barely measurable error?
Yes, that's what I just said. The difference is that when you wear an auto during the day, and are not semi-paralyzed, a complete couch potato, or have a faulty watch, the watch would be fully wound at night when you take it off. This means hour 0 is when you go to bed, so the spring winds down from say 0 to +8 hours as you sleep, and when you start wearing it again, it will come back up to zero (full wind) pretty quickly.
In a manual wind watch, when you take it off at night having wound it in the morning, the spring has been winding down for 16 hours, so you go from +16 to +24 before it gets wound again.
The torque curve has a much higher chance of dropping off enough to affect timekeeping in the 8 hours from 16 to 24, then it does from 0 to 8.
Cheers, Al
- Posts
- 29,195
- Likes
- 75,441
Archer
··Omega Qualified WatchmakerPlease do not call me that. I am 100% sure that I read about it on some watch forum within last year (the information contained there could be of course untrue). It referred to some watch (not Omega of course) that had double (multiple?) rotors that interacted in a somewhat unexpected way causing serious wrist damage. Unfortunately, I was just trying to locate that information and could not do it. Will continue searching. For now, I just need to live with the fact that the respect I have for you is not reciprocated due to my fault entirely. Lesson learned.
I didn't call you anything, just saying that the information is quite suspect.
I was trying to do some calcs to understand what forces would be involved in breaking someone's wrist, but information on what it takes to do so is surprisingly scarce on the internets.
Let's just say that with the inertia generated by one or two oscillating weights, I doubt that any "serious wrist injury" was due to the weight spinning out of control. Sounds like the watch owner was spinning out of control after a few to many drinks, and made up a good story for a watch forum...
