Quote:
Originally Posted by dagolfpro
Tony, which ones do you prefer, the quartz or automatics from Lum Tec? I was eyeing an older model, the M36 but since it was a quartz, I passed on it as I was looking for an automatic one.
|
I can't immediately tell you I have a preference one way or the other among Lum-tec watches. I don't know their collection so well as I sit here typing that I could just specify one or the other. I can tell you what my thinking is regarding quartz vs. mechanical watch movements and watches and that's what follows. I think after you read it, for any given Lum-tec model, you'll know whether I'd choose the quartz or mechanical version, assuming both are offered.
My Thoughts about Quartz vs. Mechanical Movements
I don't have a quartz vs. mechanical watch preference
per se. I prefer high beat rate watches if the watch has a seconds hand. I have that preference because I like the look of a more smoothly moving seconds hand. There's nothing wrong with a "ticking" seconds hand, and I certainly have mechanical watches that do not have a high beat rate.
FWIW, it is so that mechanical watches having higher beat rates are slightly more accurate and lose/gain fewer seconds per day. That said, since I don't buy a mechanical watch specifically for it's accuracy (if accuracy were the key factor, I'd buy quartz), the only time a high frequency movement has greater appeal is when I'm comparing two watches from the same maker and that otherwise I like equally well. For watches from different makes, styling matters far more to me than beat rates do.
How I decide, for a given watch model, whether to buy quartz or mechical
If the watch doesn't have a seconds hand and I'm not buying it as a "collection" watch, but rather I'm buying it just because I like the look of it and want it, I'll generally choose quartz over mechanical. That's my position because if watch has hands only for the hours and minutes, there's no noticeable difference between it and a quartz watch, at least on the face of the watch. My "collection" watches are the ones I buy in order to fulfill my collecting goals. One of those goals cannot be satisfied by most quartz watches, however, there are a couple quartz watches (vintage) that do.
When it comes to sanely priced watches, the only reason I might not choose the quartz version of a style/watch that's offered as both mechanical and quartz is for comparative purposes. For example, if I'm considering Watch X and it has a Miyota 9015 movement inside, I'll choose the quartz version if I already have a watch with the Miyota 9015 inside. If I don't have an example of that movement, I'll choose the mechanical one so that I can gain direct experience with it.
With pricey watches, it's, in my mind, still a matter of whether one just wants a certain look that is offered only by that maker and in that price range, just as it is with modestly priced watches. I explicitly mention this because, ideally IMO, the reason (other than simply because they can) one would spend "Cartier money" or more on a quartz watch is because there's something specific about the styling of the watch in question that they cannot find in a less expensive quartz watch and that they deem critical.
How I decide whether to recommend quartz or mechanical to others:
Indeed, for people who really could not care less about the ins and outs of this vs. that mechanical movement, I see little reason for someone who lacks a particular affinity for mechanical movements to deliberately choose to pay more for the mechanical version if the same look is offered in quartz. At the high end of the watch market, however, one often has no choice but to buy mechanical. Curiously, at the high end of the watch industry, manufacturers have decided (God only knows why) that women should have more options than men. Nearly every high end maker offers watches sized for women in quartz and mechanical versions; the man-sized versions are offered only as mechanical watches.
I'd like to say that I'd hope there's something critical other than the name on the dial that motivates folks to choose, say, a Cartier quartz watch, but for some folks, that's all it is; they just want a Cartier watch. I don't "rag" on or look down on those folks because as I said above, one reason why anybody buys any pricey watch is because they can, and that's a good enough reason so long as they aren't asking me to pay for their watch. I say that about pricey quartz watches also because, although there are a few traits that distinguish some quartz movements from others, for the most part (at least as far as non-quartz movement collectors need be concerned) there's not any appreciable difference in performance among any quartz movement, even though some cost more than others having exactly the same time telling functions.
A watch I have to illustrate my points:
FWIW, my PP 3520 is one watch that wouldn't bother me in the least if it were quartz. I wanted the hobnail styling in a gold watch and at the time (over 20 years ago), the PP 3520 was the least expensive way to get that. The watch doesn't have a seconds hand. Had I bought it with a quartz motor, were quartz an option, it wouldn't be a "collection" watch, but since it is mechanical, it is and I don't need to buy another PP in order to "tick the box" that my 3520 does.
The nature of my appreciation for mechanical movements:
Along with the reasons I've already described, the other reason is that I'm not a "movement junkie." I care about movements, sure. I definitely have an appreciation for mechanical movements insofar as for my "collection" watches, the movements are the things that define the merit of the watch as being something that illustrates the goals I've set for collecting. But bear in mind that the initial impetus for my becoming a collector of watches was because I'm a "fashion junkie" and I got to a point where there were more watches I liked aesthetically that I could ever hope to afford to actually buy. Defining collecting goals gave me a framework that guides my choices; the goals make it very easy for me to know why I will buy "this watch" and not "that one." I know what I know about mechanical movements because that information helps me determine whether it or a different watch will become a "collection" watch. If the watch won't become a collection watch, I may still buy it eventuality, but if I do, it's strictly for aesthetic reasons, or if it's inexpensive enough, just to satisfy a momentary desire for something new, much like folks buy a new shirt to just get a new shirt.
For someone who just wants a watch that "gets the job done," I'd say go for the quartz one if no part of "the job" requires the watch be mechanical. I'd also say that if accuracy is high on one's list of priorities, one should choose quartz because the cheapest quartz movement one can find is till more accurate than 99% of mechanical ones. Even the most accurate mechanical watch -- Seiko's Spring Drive watches -- aren't as accurate as quartz watches.
Something of a rant about some folks who profess to be "into" mechanical movements/watches:
Lastly, I know folks will talk about "movement this" and "movement that," claiming to have some particular interest in mechanical movements. They will prattle on and on about the artistry or the engineering of mechanical movements. They then will go spend some meaningfully greater sum than a similar or identical looking quartz one would have cost on a watch that has as horologically insignificant a mechanical movement as any watch can, the most notable thing about the watch's motor being that it is a reliable work horse of a movement that won't cost a ton to have serviced.
Don't get me wrong, those are excellent qualities for a watch movement to have, and clearly better qualities than the alternative: unreliable and expensive to service.
The thing that goes through my mind, however, is that if all that "mumbo jumbo" they rattled off about why they want a mechanical watch were that important to them, why for the love of Buddha, didn't they instead either
- Keep their money and keep saving until they had enough to buy a medium priced watch that has a movement of some note. Any reasonably priced Omega having a co-axial escapement movement would fit that bill. There are some more obscure brands as well that one could choose, but I'd hardly expect a non-watchie to know they exist. Omega, in contrast, will be available at just about any shopping mall they go to.
It's very hard for me to believe that anyone who has a cell phone and for whom money's tight, or at least not growing on trees, absolutely must have a watch, much less a mechanical one. So if they are "all that" fascinated with the artistry and engineering, why buy one that has nothing of note in either of those categories?
OR
- If they for whatever reason (real or imagined) must wear a wrist watch, buy a quartz watch that looks nice to them, but that allows them keep some of their money so they can put it towards a watch with a mechanical movement that has some artistry or noteworthy engineering/design characteristics.
OR
- Admit to themselves that really all they want is a fancy brand name on a watch they think looks good, and really only want the watch to be mechanical so they can say it is mechanical and in so doing have be able to at least plausibly make the claim that they didn't buy it just because they wanted the fancy name and the good feeling it gives them to wear a watch having a fancy name.
Maybe it's a "me" thing, but after one question, assuming the person interests me enough to ask it, I'll know whether they really give a damn about the mechanical movement or not. If their answer tells me they don't care about movements, their standing with me would have been far higher were they to have just said, "I just wanted a [insert fancy watch brand]. I thought this one looked really good, and what the heck, I can afford it. So why not?" Some folks might call that a shallow reason. I'd call it an honest one and that alone carries more appeal to me than does whatever interest one has in watches or anything else.
OR
- Lastly, if they must have a mechanical watch, buy an uber inexpensive Chinese one. Despite the lore, they work no less effectively and are built just as well as any other standard, inexpensive mechanical watch and cost a good deal less. They are as capable "work horses" as are Miyota, Seiko and entry level Swiss mechanical movements. Hell, if push comes to shove when "money's too tight to mention," they could even opt for fake "whatever," two if they must have a little variety. (One must wonder why if money's that tight why the hell they are buying a watch at all, but that's a different matter and not one I really want to discuss with them.)
Additionally, if one buys the pricier, fancy Chinese watches like those from Beijing Watch Factory (http://www.masterhorologer.com/2013/...double-90.html and http://en.bjwaf.com/) one can get the artistry found in far more costly Swiss makes that offer the same exact artistry. Are there execution differences between, say, a VC tourbillon and a BWF one? Yes, there are, but they are the kind of minutae about which only the most serious of watch collectors, the folks who know why they want a movement to have one bride architecture and not another. I'm no one of those people and 99.999% of the people on the planet aren't either. Regardless of whether we are talking high end or low end Chinese watches, the fact remains that there are compelling reasons to choose a Chines moved watch over if what really fascinates one is "stuff" pertaining to the movement of a watch.
The answer to your question...finally:
So I went over to Lum Tec's site to see if any single model, as depicted on this page --
http://www.lum-tec.com/collection/current-models.html -- lept out at me on the basis of looks alone. (If the look of a watch doesn't appeal to me, it really doesn't matter what movement is inside; I won't buy it.) Lum Tec have a lot of very similar looking watches and I didn't take the time to figure out what the differences are among them all.
The ones that caught my eye were those that have Panerai-esque styling and black dials with orange numerals. I especially liked the bronze colored case ones that aren't too far down from the first row, but I didn't see a bronze case watch with the Panerai styling and having orange numerals.
I'd probably pick one of the bronze case models, more for the bronze case than anything else. The reason I'd pic a Lum Tec in the first place, however, would be for the lume and with that as my primary driver, styling being my second decision making driver, I could see myself ending up with a quartz Lum Tec, particularly if another company's bronze watch that looks better to me than does any Lum Tec.
All the best.