Hacker News Reader

Comment by jerlam | Hacker News Reader

Even though my mechanical watch wasn't as inaccurate as yours (mine was only a minute or two off a week), the act of regularly adjusting it to match the true time slowly changed my impression of it from a "serious timekeeping device", the image cultivated by marketing, into "this is a silly hobby for people who have too much time and money". Doubly so when you look how much it costs to repair a mechanical watch.

This single-use timekeeping device was literally the least accurate timekeeping device on my person, compared to my phone and computer.

View on HN

It's also the only timekeeping device that will still work after three days away from an electric plug, and the only one you would wear all you life.

1 second/day is 10 PPM. Reaching that accuracy with only mechanical means in a device small and robust enough to be worn on the body is something to admire, not to fault for its limits.

Digital watches also exist, last years on a single cell and some have a solar cell to extend that. A cheap Casio F-91W is accurate to 1 sec/day and I imagine you’ll find others that can do better.

https://www.walmart.com/ip/casio-casual-black-resin-digital-...

I replaced my mechanical watch with a G-Shock that lasts ten years without charging of any kind. Even my current Garmin will last a week when charged - it will last even longer if I turn off every single feature.

I use the Garmin to track my exercise - I don't care if the mechanical watch will last all my life if it doesn't do what I want it to do, and it's not even that great at the one thing that it does do.

There aren't a lot of normally-priced mechanical watches that get 1 second/day accuracy. That precision can be admired in mechanical watches, but as I said, it becomes a fun expensive hobby.

> It's also the only timekeeping device that will still work after three days away from an electric plug

Quartz watches go years on a small battery, and keep better time.

Sure, it's admirable engineering, it's just most obsolete. And that's ok!

The role of watches as jewellery has kept mechanicals going far more than practicality.

"It's also the only timekeeping device that will still work after three days away from an electric plug"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quartz_clock

Lasting years on a battery is easy.

Why not both?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spring_Drive

Advertised at +-15 seconds a month, but in reality it's much better than that.

> It's also the only timekeeping device that will still work after three days away from an electric plug

I get your point, but I can easily get >2 weeks out of my Garmin Fenix or over a month if I put it in battery saving mode.

It won't do that in 5 years, let alone 10. You'll be unlikely to find a replacement battery, too.

People (including myself) often wear mechanical watches because they really enjoy the engineering/history/whatever of mechanical movements. To me, I enjoy getting to wind my watch/set the date and time/have a reason to interact with it. I enjoy that it's a conversation starter for some people (hey, nice watch!) and for others it's an opportunity to talk about something I enjoy. It's also nice that it's aesthetically very pleasing compared to a random seiko or electric watch.

Well, when the collapse happens and you have no batteries, satellites, etc., you can use the stars[1] to tell time and reset your mechanical watch to within a reasonable estimate given the circumstances. I own a relatively cheap mechancal watch I adjust every week. I bought a Garmin vs. an Apple/Samsung watch too. My Garmin battery lasts about 20 to 24 days depending on how I use the watch vs. 24 to 48 hours. It does more than I need, but has come in handy in my line of work.

[1] https://www.timeanddate.com/astronomy/tell-time-by-stars.htm...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com