Why are vintage Omega Quartz watches looked down upon?

Basically many quartz are at an end of life stage.
Not many people left to service and fix them.
Even Omega has several movements where they can’t help.

I have no issue with quartz in general but never been interested in vintage Quartz as they weren’t vintage to me

Most quartz watches are made with inexpensive plastic injection molded parts. This makes them more of a disposable commodity.
Granted the nicer movements like Omega and Heuer have better materials. The public perception is for the cheapness of the masses of quartz watches that have flooded markets for the last 40 years. One just has to look and see how the charity shops sell such watches by the pound.

Personally I think Omega did some of the better designs, before spinning off then being consumed by Swatch. I also have a soft spot for Tissot. More recently I have found the high end Seiko's to be interesting.

The surprising thing was all those common A. Schild movements and parts I got decades ago. These things offer everything a mechanical watch needs. Easy to work on, and materials that will last.

I still have my first quartz analog. As I recall it is Casio. The strap has disintegrated into potato chip/crisps type fragments of yellow plastic. This is another issue where the rubber gets sort of sticky. Cameras have this issue as well.

If my friend and mentor was right. The metal alloys in mechanical watches should last 500 years if maintained. I have watches and parts that are 200 years old. What other commodity has stuff that undervalued at that age. Most pocket watches are more than a century in age. A lot date to the 1870s and 1880s. Many of the parts of these get used in art projects. Again one can purchase such material by the pound.

On the surface Quartz does seem simpler. Which is why there is so much variation. Downside is the batteries tend to leak and are not as efficient as the metal spring. Springs do need replacement as well. Mechanical watches waste energy (which is why there were complications.) Quartz watches need to conserve energy. Which has lead to more efficient spinoffs. Like the surface mounting of electrical components.

I think there are 50 or 60 parts in a mechanical. The number of gears may be about the same. The electronic modules though are much more difficult to understand than hairspring maintenance. Mostly due to the artificial protection of the controller designs. Now there are tiny micro controllers what are quite small. Working with such becomes more software than hardware. Look at what such things have done in the automotive industry.

I have been keeping a weather eye out for some Omega Quartz to play with. Seems like others do as well as the prices are still around 100USD$ or so. Which is a lot more than a couple of bucks for the lesser stuff sold by the pound. Eventually some of this material may find it's place in the light.

It depends on your perspective. Mechanical watches hold a fascination with most of us, we are interested in the movement, how it works, how springs and cogs can be put together and be so accurate. From a historical perspective too, how our ancestors managed this without the technologies that we have to machine parts today.

A lot of people see watches as jewellery or a fashion item, the movement isn't so interesting. It's all about the design, look and feel of the watch. It tells the time accurately, yes (it has a quartz movement) but looks good too. Form is more important than the internal functions.

OF is a biased community, we value mechanical proess more than the average Joe. We want looks and mechanical prestige: form and function.

Agree @pete_mcc those are beautiful and iconic watches. Very funky and cool and highly collectible.

My quartz offering...

It may be that there is a perception among people that a cheap quartz watch seems to perform as well as an expensive one. Thereby, even expensive ones are not worth any more than cheap ones. Out of my collection, I have only 2 quartz watches. Many transistorized ones (Accutron), however.

As a member since 2016, the narrative of repair frustration and parts unobtainium on old quartz watches is quite compelling. That said, Omega had some very nice designs, their movements were too.

Higher end quartz like Omega and Heuer and some Seikos still seem to sell for many time the amount of say A. Schild or Bettlach pin levers.

It is hard to lump them all together. Otherwise I would have dozens of Omega and Heuer quartz watches. These things also tend to trend in different ways. Some watches simply hold value more than others. Tastes also change. 30 years ago it was acceptable to repaint a dial. 30 years ago one could also get a common SS or gold capped Seamaster or Connie for between 60 and 120. Which is when I built my collection.

I really at the time did not pay much attention to quartz. Mostly for the reason mentioned here. No perceived difference between the cheap ones and the expensive ones. Electronics like calculators, clocks and even computers were dropping quickly in prince as well. I do remember seeing spare parts listings in the factories and thinking Why? The market was also flooded with brands like Fossil, casio, and others what are still sold by the pound. Omega and Heuer quartz watches would have been less than 10 years old and no more than 20. The designs were 70 and 80s which had not yet developed a generational nostalgia.

I recently got A Tissot autoquartz. (which I keep meaning to write up a post on.) I had some ephemera from the 1990s. This watch cost me under 100USD$ Not much more than I paid for an empty Venus 203 moon phase triple date case. I have yet to bother to purchase a replacement supercap for the Tissiot which would cost as much as the empty Enicar case I just received.

One simply gets what is available at the time. Sometimes it goes against the trend. Sometimes one is simply caught up in the flow.