A Few Answers from WatchKing

I collect mechanical pocket and wristwatches to preserve the finest examples of ingenuity or cost effective design from the past. I collect quartz watches for the following reason.  I consider the pursuit of timekeeping accuracy to be the challenge watchmakers took up from astronomers after Harrison won his prize from the British Observatory. Quartz watches rank with atomic clocks at the zenith of this pursuit.

If you have gotten used to not resetting your watch more than twice a year, if you have been able to set your quartz aside while on vacation for two weeks to return to a watch still on the dot, and if you compare the shock resistance or cost of your quartz watch to a mechanical, you would obviously be getting much less if you switch to an automatic version.

If you want an engineering marvel then quartz is clearly superior.  The quartz watch is truly one of the greatest engineering miracles in history. To poo-poo it as too pedestrian simply because we can make them for a dime is a sign of how well the quartz technology has succeeded.

A 1965 Benrus or Texas Instruments quartz LED watch is as dramatic an achievement as the Nuremberg eggs were, or the verge and foliot clock, or the celestially accurate-seasonally corrected sundial, and they brought portable and accurate timekeeping to the masses the way these other timekeepers did. Just because they are a dime a dozen now we seem to have lost sight of the value of this great development. It has made the entire world better and that is saying something.

 While it is nice that a beautiful mechanical watch can enhance a single life as art, the quartz module has benefited mankind in total and this is a quantum increase in value, on a plane with the supply of information to the masses through the airwaves. Even our cars use them to measure and adjust performance. It is the standard I use to check the timekeeping accuracy of my mechanical watches and it is easily in the range of being 10x better which is the minimum needed to be used as such a tool.

Ask pilots with 20-30 years of experience whether they would ever prefer to travel on vacation in any of the aircraft with "character" that they used to fly, or a 747. 90% will say that they prefer the 747. In addition they will say that you'd have to be crazy to prefer the old stuff, no matter how fabulous it looked sitting on the ground or how forgiving it could be in special circumstances. 747s made flying a reliable and trusted part of most people's lives.

The best technology is that technology which is so good we don't ever have to think about it, so we can trust integrating it into our daily life. Quartz watches fit that definition now while computers using quartz clocks will be there in another decade or so. They are supremely accurate and reliable. When they aren't working, the hands or displays stop completely, they don’t usually slow down or speed up which can fool mere humans. They are affordable to all, they are much more rugged than mechanical watches and can perform all the functions of their predecessors plus a few things mechanicals can’t do. Now they are even people powered for ecological value.

I admire artistry in watchmaking but I don't confuse artistry with engineering or invention.  I collect vintage watches to preserve mechanical arts but today’s watch companies don’t make them much better than they did 40 years ago, when the world was begging for something more accurate and reliable.

How many of the people trying to justify an expensive mechanical watch as sensible in today’s world, would do the same for rotary dial telephones instead of touch tone models, slow-speed dental drills in place of hypersonic or laser models, propeller powered aircraft instead of jets, mechanical calculators instead of computers or any of the other old ways of making things which became too expensive, not as accurate or less reliable. All the above-mentioned examples are truly mechanical wonders in their own rights but we don't want to use them anymore because we know the alternatives are better. I still hear people complaining that nib style fountain pens are better than ballpoints. Maybe so, but most people don't want the hassle of fountain pens any more.  Or is a new mechanical watch being described by some as an item which is purposely not sensible but instead is equivalent to a red sports car or a set of huge loudspeakers.

I have been collecting quartz watches since they first appeared. I have a Benrus red led which keeps perfect time and was sensibly designed using a battery which will continue to be available for at least 25 more years. I have a Jaeger LeCoultre Master Quartz which uses the same battery and is accurate to within 2 seconds per year. Breguet was only as lucky as this in his dreams. My collection of quartz watches reflects the beginning of an era in watchmaking while my mechanical watches reflect beautiful watchmaking craftsmanship in pocket or wristwatches, many of which were made during the three high points in watchmaking history, Breguet, English detent pocket marine chronometers and American railroad certified chronometers made between 1907 and 1936.

I will rarely collect a watch that I wouldn't wear (1-2% are bought for other people). On the other hand I have bought nearly 2,000 watches both new and used and sold more that that (due to having re-obtained some items which have then been sold again), so I can't wear them all. In my lifetime I have likely only worn 50 watches for more than 1 week (for testing purposes). These I liked so much that they were more than collectable, but wearable as well. About 30 were mechanical (especially though not exclusively before 1976) and 20 are quartz.