Palimpsest0

joined 1 year ago
[–] Palimpsest0@alien.top 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Very cool. That's an interesting and good looking dial.

[–] Palimpsest0@alien.top 1 points 11 months ago

Traditionally there have been men's, women's and unisex watches, but it's really just a matter of size, and sizes are a changing fashion. Of course there's styles that may be considered more masculine or more feminine, with women's watches traditionally emphasizing the jewelry aspect and men's watches emphasizing function, but there's plenty of overlap there. Just as in clothing, women generally have had more latitude in wearing "masculine" styles than men have had in wearing "feminine" styles, but that's changing these days, too, and there are plenty of examples from history of "men's" watches with floral designs engraved on the case, or gems set in the bezel, or whatnot, and many "women's" watches with tough, utilitarian, oractical designs. Lately, some brands are dispensing with gendered descriptors altogether and grouping collections by small, mid , and large sizes.

So, really there's only one rule: wear what you like and what fits you well, in both size and style.

Size trends currently are headed towards smaller watches after a couple decades of big watches being in fashion. There are a few measurements that sum up a watch and will give you an idea how it may fit, but just like clothing, the numbers don't always catch all the details and aren't a full replacement for trying it on.

The first will be case diameter/width. A pretty typical size for "large", traditionally men's watch is 40mm, but 38mm and 36mm are coming back into style. 33-34 is a typical mid-sized watch, and 28-31 mm for a small. These are typical sizes for round cases, square, rectangular, cushion, or tonneau cases "wear large" taking up more visual space for the same width, so they tend to be narrower. For example, if you look at one of the classic watch brands that has long produced both rectangular and round cased watches, Jaeger-LeCoultre, their traditionally fitting large round cased watches, the Master Control series, are 38-40mm wide, while their large rectangular cased watch, the Reverso, ranges from 28 to 30mm.

The next important measurement is lug to lug. This is the length from where the strap/bracelet connects on one side to where it connects on the other. This can be very variable and affect the overall fit as much or more than the diameter/width. Some makes are famous for "long lugs", like Nomos, which, despite their typical smallish diameters, will fit a large wrist well or, conversely, a small wrist poorly, because of the large lug to lug size.

Finally there's thickness. This is caseback to the highest point of the crystal thickness. Sport or utilitarian watches generally get away with being a bit on the thick side, emphasizing durability, weather resistance, or added functions, while dressier watches will work best if thinner, more discreet, and able to fit under your shirt cuff without binding. Diameter also comes into play here, since a 36mm watch that's 13mm thick will seem a lot thicker than a 42mm watch that's 13mm thick, simply due to proportions.

Then there's technology. Quartz remains a highly accurate, and generally lower cost, technology, but there's a world of difference between low cost quartz and high quality quartz. Quartz is often seen as "soulless" simply because it works, with no fuss, and little need for interaction, while mechanical watches have a fair amount of "care and feeding" instructions that come with them. Plus mechanical comes with a rich and interesting history, and often a transparent caseback, known as a "display" or "exhibition" back, which gives you a view of the visibly energetic work going on inside, which is always fun.

Basically, mechanical watches are not just time telling devices, they're also sort of a Tamagotchi, the "virtual pet" toys that were popular in the 90s that required interaction to keep them "alive".

Within the realm of mechanical watches, there's manual and automatic watches, with a manual (sometimes referred to as just "mechanical") requiring regular winding by hand to add power to the mainspring, while automatics use an autowind device, a rotating mass (the "rotor") and gearing to harvest energy from normal arm movement and store it in the mainspring. There are positives to be said for both. I enjoy a nice manual since wearing one let's me start the day with a few tens of seconds spent winding it until it's full, meaning I get to check an item off my "to do" list without even getting out of bed. Plus, they tend to be thinner since the addition of the autowind device adds to the bulk of the movement. But, there are some very thin autos out there. On the plus side for autos, you have the added complexity of the device, which can add appeal for a gearhead, plus the convenience of not having to wind it up every day. And, with the vast majority of autos, you can wind them by hand if you want, adding extra power. This is useful if you're a relatively sedentary person, since if you're not active, it won't be able to harvest enough energy to keep running.

Mesh bracelets, also called Milanese bracelets since this method of interlocking wire coils to form a flexible mesh originated in the city of Milan, are a great choice, and one of my favorite bracelet styles. But, quality really matters for Milanese bracelets, and with heavier watches you want a thicker mesh to give some mass to the bracelet to act as a counterweight, keeping your watch nicely centered and located on your wrist without having to wear the bracelet too tight. A well-balanced and well-fitting mesh bracelet is very comfortable.

Mesh bracelets, owing to their straight ends, can usually be fitted to most watches, and there are a few makers of Milanese bracelets which excellent bracelets, with good adjustability, so if a watch is not offered with a mesh bracelet as original equipment, it's usually easy to add one. My favorite mesh bands are the German made Staib bracelets. They're very supple, nicely finished, and just all around solidly made.

So, that's some basics.

[–] Palimpsest0@alien.top 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

This part is called "the crystal".

Acrylic is actually a great material for this. It's better, in my opinion, than glass, albeit not as good as synthetic sapphire, the other popular, but more costly, material used for watch crystals.

The reason I like acrylic better than glass is that while it scratches more easily, it's also repolished more easily. There's a polishing paste made just for acrylic, called Polywatch, which works great. Glass is harder, but once it scratches you can't remove those scratches. Acrylic can also handle sharp blows pretty well, since it can flex a bit. Sapphire, of course, isn't something you can readily polish at home, but since it's much, much harder than even hardened glass, it's virtually scratch proof, but glass is sort of a bad in-between where it's soft enough it can scratch, but too hard to easily restore.

So, watch crystal materials in order of my preference are sapphire, then acrylic, and then glass bringing up a distant third. If you can't be so hard as to be nearly invincible, the next best thing is to be soft enough to absorb blows and be readily restored. And, should it take too much damage, acrylic is inexpensive to have replaced with a new acrylic crystal.

So, I wouldn't worry about it. I have 50 year old watches that still have their original acrylic crystals, they just need a light polish now and then, maybe once every several years, to keep them clear and easy to read.

[–] Palimpsest0@alien.top 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Nomos is a good suggestion. Older ones would fit that price band, and, although not regularly fitted with display backs, they're not uncommonly found with them.

To go a very different direction, what about a mid 90s to early 00s Zenith El Primero Prime? This is the cal 420 hand winding version of their 36kvph chronograph, smaller and thinner than most modern chronos, in a 38mm case and 11 mm thick. It's a bit of an oddity to have a movement famous for being among the first automatic chronographs in a manual version, but it makes for a nice view of the movement and a much thinner, dressier watch, if a chronograph can be considered "dressy". Here's a good write up on the model.

[–] Palimpsest0@alien.top 1 points 11 months ago

Exactly like that? No. But, it definitely borrows a bit from vintage Eterna Kontikiand and vintage Zodiac Sea Wolf dials.

[–] Palimpsest0@alien.top 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I've never been a fan of titanium watches specifically because lightweight metals feel insubstantial and "cheap" to me, plus it doesn't seem to age gracefully, at least not from titanium items I've worked with. I honestly don't understand the watch industry's love for the material. Sure, its yield strength is on par with steel, but its density only about 60% of steel, which is nice if I'm designing a rocket or a missile. But I'm not trying to put my watch into orbit, so that's not really that important to me. Instead, I'm more worried about dents and dings, and that's where the inferior Rockwell hardness of titanium when compared to most stainless steels becomes a negative. Add to this the psychological perception of lighter objects as less substantial, whether that's true or not, and I've just never liked titanium watches. I don't even like the usual darker grey color.

So, it's got some cool engineering properties, even beyond the strength to weight ratio, such as it being a good CTE match for some ceramics. So, if I need a strong, but light, metal insert to braze to an alumina component, that needs to not induce excess strain on the ceramic even though temperature ranges from -100 to 200 C, I might propose titanium for that component, but that doesn't mean I want a watch made out of it.

[–] Palimpsest0@alien.top 1 points 1 year ago

I definitely have watches that are collection pieces, not wearable watches, but these are all vintage to antique, and mostly pocket watches. Pocket watches are great for this since they can make interesting display pieces, especially if shown under glass with the case opened to display the movement, and this is true even if they are inoperable.

But, otherwise, I tend to wear my watches, even ones from as far back as the 1930s, albeit sparingly. I can think of cases where it's reasonable to wear, for example, a tiny 1930s Harwood Automatic, but I've never had reason to wear an 18th century pair cased verge fusee on an ornate chatelaine. My wardrobe is entirely lacking in embroidered waistcoats and powdered wigs, so I just don't have anything that would go with it, but it's makes for a fascinating display piece.

[–] Palimpsest0@alien.top 1 points 1 year ago

What sort of watch is it? Generally a toothed crown on the back is for winding and/or setting. Quite a few "backset" watches have been made over the years. I have a few different watches with this feature. It's not uncomforable. If that's a quartz watch, I would guess the crown is for setting and numbered bit is a sticker, there to show when the battery was replaced, or when it's due, and is probably in months. If jt's not a quartz watch, I have no idea what the numbered sticker would be.

[–] Palimpsest0@alien.top 1 points 1 year ago

Looks great! Glad to see you had quick and successful shipping of it from Japan.

[–] Palimpsest0@alien.top 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Hentschel is actually made in Hamburg.