Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by ywnner_0001 2696 days ago
If you really want a mechanical watch, and you want to have it mean / be worth something, I'd suggest saving up for a Rolex.

Mechanical watches have (and this has been said before) the Rolex problem. On the lower end of the scale, a lot of mechanical watches will borrow design cues from Rolex (e.g., most dive watches will share similarities with the Submariner) and will fall far short of the quality of one.

On the higher end, you quickly end up at multiples of the cost of an entry-level Rolex with very questionable additional value, quality or longevity.

Rolex is really in a sweet spot in terms of value. They're virtually indestructible, tend to keep their (or even grow in) value and make a number of elegant, understated watches that are iconic.

For example, if you want a dive watch, buy a Sub (no date). While you might argue that Blancpain beat Rolex by a year for the quintessential dive watch, Rolex is the one that popularized it. You're not buying a dive watch, you're buying the dive watch as it has stood since the early 50s.

They're not cheap, but they will undoubtedly last two generations, possibly more. Compared to the other luxury watch makers, they're downright cheap. JLC is another value-oriented brand and you're lucky to get into a watch for 2X what you'll pay for a Rolex. Patek and AP are much more expensive.

The problem with the affordable brands is they cut a lot of corners with manufacturing (vs Rolex), use outsourced, less reliable movements and -- with the exception of some Seikos, have none of the cachet of Rolex.

You can go a bit higher to say an Omega, but you're already ballpark Rolex, so is it worth it?

The downside to buying a Rolex is it will probably kill your watch hobby. I used to collect watches and when I decided I did in fact like the story of Rolex, I bought one, strapped it on basically forgot about watches.

The only watches I'm interested in now are so expensive I'll probably never bother to buy one. I will get to gift my Sub to my son in another decade or so at which time I'll get to go shopping again. So that's something to look forward to, but I'll mostly likely buy another Rolex.

3 comments

It seems my thinking about watch collecting differs a lot with you. I agree, its all about personal pref. I like Rolexes but I know I will never own them. They are too big for my wrist, and I honestly believe they are super over priced. I consider them like Apples of tech. They have super awesome band value, but does not mean they worth all the money you put into their pocket. That said, there are lot of other great brands with hell of horology. Like, Omega which is older than Rolex. Oris, Seiko, Tissot are great too!. JLC is like over-manufactured German car, you will never go wrong with it. But, for me watch collecting is all about a. enjoying the watch. b. Know the history of the watch. c. Have story with the watch you wear. So, yeah I enjoy my Timex Expedition as much as I love wearing HMT* Manual Wind Watch. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMT_(company)
So funny you should recommend Rolex, because I actually know a few people who own them(and they all bought them brand new) and the prevailing opinion is that they are absolute crap at actually being a watch - they just drift a lot in short amount of time - one of my friends says his is can be as much as 10 minutes out every month(!!!!!) and that's a 5k watch!!!

I'm personally saving up for an Omega, you can get a timeless design for 2-3k, and those watches are truly indestructible and actually keep time accurately.

Um, what? Rolex is known for having the best accuracy and reliability in the mechanical watch market. 20 seconds per day is way out of spec, your friend needs to get it serviced. Omega is sometimes okay, but you still have to avoid certain movements, even on new models. Edit: But you're right that Omega is often a better deal.
One word: Tudor.