# New TAG Heuer owner. Why the hate?



## WOFTAM (Dec 30, 2013)

Hi all! New here from Australia and have recently bought a TAG Heuer Carrera 1887. 

After browsing the other forums it looks like TAG cops a bit of flack. Is there a perception that TAG Heuer is overrated or what's the story? I'm not particularly fussed, just curious.


----------



## pbv (Jun 21, 2012)

I am trying to understand this "hate" as well. 

Own a Rolex and some Omegas' - and intend to soon buy a Carrera 1887.
(yea, yea.... now about the Seiko bit and do not care).

Perceived as a fashion brand.... do not understand that.

Even Omega used ETA in fancy cases.


----------



## //Napoleon// (Mar 22, 2012)

Don't worry too much about what other people say about tag. I've never owned any tags but I think they are really nice watches, especially the carrera models.
I agree that they are somewhat overpriced, but then again, I think Tag watches have really great modern design.
Some people don't like how tag does lots of celebrity branding... but most people are not WIS and celebrity branding WILL help their sales.
Here's tigerwood with his rolex:


----------



## pbv (Jun 21, 2012)

//Napoleon// said:


> Don't worry too much about what other people say about tag. I've never owned any tags but I think they are really nice watches, especially the carrera models.
> I agree that they are somewhat overpriced, but then again, I think Tag watches have really great modern design.
> Some people don't like how tag does lots of celebrity branding... but most people are not WIS and celebrity branding WILL help their sales.
> Here's tigerwood with his rolex:


Show me one watch brand that isn't over priced.


----------



## //Napoleon// (Mar 22, 2012)

pbv said:


> I am trying to understand this "hate" as well.
> 
> Own a Rolex and some Omegas' - and intend to soon buy a Carrera 1887.
> (yea, yea.... now about the Seiko bit and do not care).
> ...


Tags aren't considered fashion brand... fashion brands are like gucci, emporio armani, fossil, etc.... And not all "fashion brands" are bad. Take the ralph lauren for example.
Some of their models have jlc movement inside and have really tasteful design (IMHO looks better than speedmaster).


----------



## //Napoleon// (Mar 22, 2012)

pbv said:


> Show me one watch brand that isn't over priced.


I think wristwatches are luxury items and are all over priced to some degree. But there are times when you compare two over-priced items, one offers more value than the other.


----------



## Richerson (Jun 18, 2006)

It's simple - most none WIS place Tag Heuer in the same bracket as Omega etc etc, where's a small number who own such brands do not consider this to be true. 

I will say it's not that common anymore to see hate about tag Heuer, I've been a member since 2006 and spend most of my time reading and not posting - people like yourselves find old threads because they just brought a new and VERY nice watch which they are rightfully proud to own. I rarely see anything negative here, nothing that other branded forums don't get, look at Rolex, no one can argue the brands up there but it gets allot of hate for many reasons, I've seen 200plus threads in the past on such subjects where nothing goods comes from them. 

Me personally it's simple why I love Tag Heuer - it was the first real watch someone showed me and I really wanted. 

The other small point is - Tag update their watch lines allot more than most and haven't always got this right in the past, where you will see nice old Omega watches etc in general some of the late 80's and 90s Tag Heuer weren't that nice (some were stunning), so you have people who remember these and don't forget. 

Tag Heuer is on the up at the moment, excellent designs across all the models and starting new movements etc, 

I've liked that watch of yours - Um jealous J


----------



## beeman101 (Nov 16, 2013)

I just got a Tag as well. Nowhere is the quality is less then the omega i have. Neither is the finishing any less. Especially the carrera line which is my favourite


----------



## justbecauseIcan (May 8, 2013)

I shared the same thoughts after buying my first TAG and then reading deeper into the watch scene. Cognitive dissonance. I felt like I wasted my money on a brand name that only mall-going people that don't bother researching buy. Similar to Breitling, it all seemed like a big marketing joke.

Needless to say, after the Omega/Rolex phase is dealt with, I just bought another TAG less than a month ago...because it looked awesome. And apart from the cheap movement, it's a lovely casing. *I wish it had Omega printed on it tho, that would be perfect.*


----------



## drunken monkey (Jun 22, 2011)

short version:

a strange mix of jealousy and desperate need for confirmation.


----------



## pbv (Jun 21, 2012)

justbecauseIcan said:


> I shared the same thoughts after buying my first TAG and then reading deeper into the watch scene. Cognitive dissonance. I felt like I wasted my money on a brand name that only mall-going people that don't bother researching buy. Similar to Breitling, it all seemed like a big marketing joke.
> 
> Needless to say, after the Omega/Rolex phase is dealt with, I just bought another TAG less than a month ago...because it looked awesome. And apart from the cheap movement, it's a lovely casing. *I wish it had Omega printed on it tho, that would be perfect.*


That' precisely the problem with TAG .... you wish "it were an Omega"

Even knowing that the quality of caliber/finish/materials are the same.

Yet perhaps... one cannot justify the cost ...would have paid twice that for a different name.


----------



## justbecauseIcan (May 8, 2013)

Value is a funny concept, isn't it? 

If it is all about history and heritage or rarity, it is noble - but when it is brand prestige, it is a complex? I don't think so, I think it is both the same feeling of worth to whoever attaches value to what matters to them.

It is an industry where price and performance are all over the place. You can take the objective or subjective approach. The same is reflected in many purchase decisions we make. I bet that similar spending habits exist, on average, across all other possessions. I like the threads where people disclose the watches they have and the cars they drive - correlations go far further than price range


----------



## Perseus (Mar 25, 2010)

I think it's two things

1) They compare brand X to Tag they always talk about Tag lowest and least expensive offering.

2) Tag has used a lot of ETA movements over the years, but so has everyone else. People seem to forget out the pendulum and mikro movements.


----------



## 1887 (Feb 15, 2012)

I will never slag off a TagHeuer.


----------



## MusicPDX (Feb 27, 2013)

I bought my TAG quartz over 20 years ago and have put it though hell. It was my only watch for 10 years. Took it on scuba, snokeling, rafting, mountain biking, climbing, and much more. It has never failed -- except battery every 3 years or so -- and keeps within a second a day. That's a great, reliable watch IMHO


----------



## kjse7en (Dec 12, 2011)

To me, I perceive TAG as a brand for luxury Sports watches, especially with its long history in F1 and motor racing. That brings the emotional connection that any sports only have one winner, with the rest runners-ups. So there you have the 'majority' making their 'voices' heard, and the need to stamp confirmation marks. That's just my 2c.

I like TAG in Chronograph...


----------



## CombatMarine (May 21, 2013)

drunken monkey said:


> short version:
> 
> a strange mix of jealousy and desperate need for confirmation.


You brilliantly gave the truth in a most succinct way!

Fit finish and build quality of a Tag in comparison to an Omega, using an SMP vs Aquaracer matchup, shows very little difference in quality at all. The only thing the Omega has in it's favor is the vaunted Co-Axial movement, which as far as I'm concerned, the jury is still out on.

Come servicing or repair time, the Omega owner is going to have to shell out around $700 or more while the Aquaracer can be handled by any competent watch maker for $200 or $300. Servicing time is when the cons of having an "In House" movement come to the front and center.


----------



## RDK (Mar 11, 2011)

No hate here 

My current "'collection" of automatic watches consists of 2 TAGs and 1 Omega.



TAG Heuer Link Calibre 16 (ETA 7750 movement) / TAG Heuer Aquaracer 500M Calibre 5 (Sellita SW-200 movement) / Omega Planet Ocean 2500D (ETA 2892-A2 / Omega 1120 movement with co-axial escapement)

I think all 3 watches are on par with each other, with some slight differences.

Funny thing is, in each category there's a different "winner":
Accuracy: TAG Heuer Aquaracer
Finish: Omega Planet Ocean
Fit / wearability: TAG Heuer Link

As far as the "hate" for TAG Heuer is concerned: I don't understand it. I'm not even trying to ;-).


----------



## Richerson (Jun 18, 2006)

RDK said:


> No hate here
> 
> My current "'collection" of automatic watches consists of 2 TAGs and 1 Omega.
> 
> ...


3 stunning watches you have and they are all in sync - cool


----------



## gossler (Mar 19, 2009)

I guess people judge TAG on their lowest grade watches, the F1 series, and forget they make watches like Mikrogirder $250,000.

I have a mix of watch brands in my collection, In no way do I feel Tag is inferior to any one of the watches I own Rolex included, on the contrary... For some reason TAG´s designs draw me in every time,

I was contemplating purchasing a Rolex Sub, and felt nothing special when I tried it on, on the other hand, when I tried the TAG Carrera Calibre 36 Flyback, it was love at first sight, I knew I had to have it.

People argue about in house movements vs purchased movements, I believe this is nonsense, specially in this day and age. It would be like saying Redbull Racing F1 Team is worse than Ferrari, because Redbull does not build their own engine.... guess what, they are 4 times consecutive champions...

Enjoy your TAG and don´t care what anybody think about the brand.... They make amazing watches!


----------



## Eeeb (Jul 12, 2007)

justbecauseIcan said:


> Value is a funny concept, isn't it?
> 
> If it is all about history and heritage or rarity, it is noble - but when it is brand prestige, it is a complex? I don't think so, I think it is both the same feeling of worth to whoever attaches value to what matters to them.
> 
> It is an industry where price and performance are all over the place. You can take the objective or subjective approach. The same is reflected in many purchase decisions we make. I bet that similar spending habits exist, on average, across all other possessions. I like the threads where people disclose the watches they have and the cars they drive - correlations go far further than price range


We seem to have a disproportionate number of BMW owners... Anyway, my .sig gives my view.


----------



## balzebub (May 30, 2010)

Tag makes very nice watches in terms of design etc, finishing and quality is also good; as long as you like your tag, paid a fair price for it, then why bother what anyone else thinks? Everyone is entitled to their own opinions..


----------



## justbecauseIcan (May 8, 2013)

Eeeb said:


> We seem to have a disproportionate number of BMW owners... Anyway, my .sig gives my view.


Ooops...

2 TAGs 2 Beemers 2 Continents 
















long live the stereotype


----------



## mpalmer (Dec 30, 2011)

Welcome to the forum! I think Tag makes some great watches. The knock on Tag is that most of their watches are not particularly good value for money compared to other options in the same price range. Another beef is that they market in overpriced quartz at the low end as a cash cow. However, there is no doubt that they make some beautiful pieces.


----------



## CombatMarine (May 21, 2013)

RDK said:


> No hate here
> 
> My current "'collection" of automatic watches consists of 2 TAGs and 1 Omega.
> 
> ...


I had the same Link chrono you have, it was arguably one of the nicest looking watches out there and the bracelet was a dream, only problem was I could never get the bracelet to fit properly on my 8" wrist, stock bracelet, too loose, flopped around on the wrist, removed a link, too tight. Never ever used the chronograph features anyways.

I reluctantly flipped it a few months ago.

Replaced this...









For this









I absolutely love this Sinn, nicest watch I have ever owned and this includes my 1995 Rolex Sub. Perfect size for dress or sports, WR 200m, top grade ET 2824-2 runs +3 seconds a day


----------



## Richerson (Jun 18, 2006)

CombatMarine said:


> I had the same Link chrono you have, it was arguably one of the nicest looking watches out there and the bracelet was a dream, only problem was I could never get the bracelet to fit properly on my 8" wrist, stock bracelet, too loose, flopped around on the wrist, removed a link, too tight. Never ever used the chronograph features anyways.
> 
> I reluctantly flipped it a few months ago.
> 
> ...


could you not use the mirco adjustments on the clasp

I had the same issue with my WAN but using the mirco adjustments I got a perfect fit


----------



## allaction (Jan 9, 2008)

I often wonder why Tag is not held in the same esteem as it's obvious rivals. It has a vaunted history (when Heuer) and rightly trades on that now with the Carrera amongst other lines. I had a brown Carrera chrono and without doubt it was THE most admired watch I've ever owned, kick myself for parting with it in a cull . Perhaps the fact that it still produces 'affordable' Quartz models actually hinders it ? I have a 90 's F1 chrono I bought new when at school from weekend jobs . Damn thing would survive an Armageddon ! I'd never get rid of it for sentimental reasons and hope it keeps chugging away so my son can have it in a few years as the size would be ideal for a young 'un!


----------



## Bueller67 (Aug 18, 2013)

Some people criticize Tag Heuer over their celebrity endorsements.

This poster of Clooney and his Omega endorsements is all over European jewelry stores. I know because I see it. Buy what speaks to you, forget about what others think and enjoy the timepiece.


----------



## Ray916MN (Feb 11, 2006)

TAG became perceived at the time of its acquisition of Heuer as a fashion brand. Whereas Heuer had a history of producing chronographs and automatic watches after the TAG acquisition of Heuer in 1985, the entire TAG Heuer offering became centered on quartz watches, which of course were an anathema to watch collectors. Over the course of the next couple of decades, TAG was a marketing success, but did virtually nothing that was significant in terms of horological innovation. Of course the same can be said of many watch companies during the dark days which followed the contraction of the Swiss watch industry under the onslaught of inexpensive quartz watches. TAG gets slagged more than other brands that achieved little innovation during this period, because the TAG brand over shadowed the Heuer brand which watch collectors held in esteem and having abandoned mechanical watches, collectors saw TAG as just marketing. During this period of time, other brands met the same fate and fell into the same category as TAG. For example Movado has a rich history, but during the 80s became nothing but a maker of quartz movement "Museum" watches (interestingly enough originally a Vacheron & Constantin design which Movado popularized). During this period of time, watch collectors held in greater esteem brands which continued to produce mechanical watches, even if they ultimately ended up with common ETA movements and disparaged grand brands that became quartz brands.

In more recent history, TAG under LVMH has begun to invest in horological innovation and has made some progress in restoring the original Heuer legacy, but their initial steps were not particularly well received by longtime collectors. The 1887 movement built on Seiko technology licensed by TAG was blasphemy to collectors biased to Swiss watches. The 2011 Carrera Mikrograph which essentially housed a 360,000 bph 1/100 of a second stopwatch in a common case with a common mainspring with a regular 3 hand movement was seen as a marketing novelty since it broke no new ground (the first 360,000 bph stopwatch was produced in the 60s). The latest generation of Mikograph movements represent more innovation, but still remain novelties in so far as they still have significantly lower amounts of power reserve when the chronograph is operated.

Having abandoned mechanical watch production during the darkest times for the Swiss watch industry, long term collectors question TAG's commitment to making mechanical watch entirely of their own design.

FWIW


----------



## Richerson (Jun 18, 2006)

No matter what watch you own there'll be someone who doesn't like it or the brand. 


I love my Tag watches and I also love seeing friends and work colleagues wear nice watches whatever the brand, it's also great to see people on WUS sharing pictures of their watches


As long as you enjoy the timepiece it doesn't matter what anyone else thinks


----------



## denmanproject (Apr 17, 2012)

I put off reading this thread because I'm tired of all the hate I read about Tag&#8230;. but I was pleasantly surprised

I love all my Tag's, I've had 3 Carrera's from the 39mm Carrera automatic (first 'real' watch) to the Day-date to now the Grand Carrera Cal 17. Come to think of it I've always had a Tag in my collection with many others coming and going, everyone has been top notch quality, thinking about adding an 1887 now b-)

(no personal pic of the 39mm Carrera, that was pre-WIS ;-))


----------



## drunken monkey (Jun 22, 2011)

is TAGHeuer the AlfaRomeo of the watch world?


----------



## CombatMarine (May 21, 2013)

Richerson said:


> could you not use the mirco adjustments on the clasp
> 
> I had the same issue with my WAN but using the mirco adjustments I got a perfect fit


There are no micro adjustments on a Link bracelet, just links.


----------



## El Gato (Nov 24, 2013)

TAG make excellent watches. Overpriced? I heard someone say once that a watch is for telling time, and any watch over $200 is more jewelry than watch.

I agree with other posters here who have said, if you like the brand and enjoy your watch, who cares what others think? Someone somewhere will always have a criticism. 

Not sure why watches that have a lot of marketing or celebrity endorsements are ridiculed for that reason. Some look at TAG with disdain because it is so well known and you can buy one "in a mall". Who cares if you buy a watch in a mall? Does that really matter? And if it's got a lot of market penetration that does not make it a bad watch.

I think it boils down to what each of us watch people value the most, and what each of us looks for in the experience. And we should recognize that it's highly variable and very subjective in a lot of ways. 

Some people want to wear a watch that is well recognized by the general public as high quality/exclusive. We know which brands are for that. That's fine. Others don't care about that, and have other reasons for what they buy. I will tell you I am not wearing a Muhle Glashutte watch for the brand recognition among the general public...lol. But really all views should be okay. Some of these brand wars kind of make me laugh. Sometimes it's like people who like the color blue arguing with people that like the color green, that blue is better and they need to change their preference. We are always going to have diversity of opinions and taste.


----------



## Richerson (Jun 18, 2006)

denmanproject said:


> I put off reading this thread because I'm tired of all the hate I read about Tag&#8230;. but I was pleasantly surprised
> 
> I love all my Tag's, I've had 3 Carrera's from the 39mm Carrera automatic (first 'real' watch) to the Day-date to now the Grand Carrera Cal 17. Come to think of it I've always had a Tag in my collection with many others coming and going, everyone has been top notch quality, thinking about adding an 1887 now b-)
> 
> (no personal pic of the 39mm Carrera, that was pre-WIS ;-))


That grand carrera looks stunning, very sharp piece, looks even better on, I bet you get loads of compliments


----------



## Eeeb (Jul 12, 2007)

denmanproject said:


> I put off reading this thread because I'm tired of all the hate I read about Tag&#8230;. but I was pleasantly surprised


"liking" and "hating" are emotions driven by a whole variety of reasons. I grow tired of such threads but they are common on WUS.

I don't hang out much in Public or Omeeeeeeeeeeeeega and seem to avoid many of them :-d ... works for me!


----------



## rosborn (Oct 30, 2011)

CombatMarine said:


> I had the same Link chrono you have, it was arguably one of the nicest looking watches out there and the bracelet was a dream, only problem was I could never get the bracelet to fit properly on my 8" wrist, stock bracelet, too loose, flopped around on the wrist, removed a link, too tight. Never ever used the chronograph features anyways.
> 
> I reluctantly flipped it a few months ago.
> 
> ...


Thank you for opening the door...

I bought a 300M quartz Aquaracer in March of 2012. I saved for 10 years to buy that watch. I loved the Aquaracer (first nice watch I ever owned) but the skeleton hands were difficult to see and I never used the chronograph on the watch so I sold it in order to purchased a Sinn UX. I sold this:









to buy this:









Yes it's a quartz but it's a COSC certified quartz and it's made of submarine steel and filled with mineral oil. Incredibly accurate and legible from almost any angle. Like CombatMarine, I absolutely love this watch and also consider it the nicest watch I have ever owned. She's not a "pretty" watch but is pretty true to German design, function over form, criteria.

That being said, I do appreciate Tag Heuer watches and always will.


----------



## Richerson (Jun 18, 2006)

Hate comes from jealously & insecurity, most genuine people who don't like something just stay away.


----------



## denmanproject (Apr 17, 2012)

Richerson said:


> That grand carrera looks stunning, very sharp piece, looks even better on, I bet you get loads of compliments


Its a great watch, thank you


----------



## Zzyzx (Dec 16, 2013)

All I know is: When I think "Grail," one watch continues to pop back into my head at the top of the list - Tag Heuer Monaco in the classic blue style. 

I don't even need a chronograph! What's wrong with me??? ;-)


----------



## Richerson (Jun 18, 2006)

Zzyzx said:


> All I know is: When I think "Grail," one watch continues to pop back into my head at the top of the list - Tag Heuer Monaco in the classic blue style.
> 
> I don't even need a chronograph! What's wrong with me??? ;-)


nothing


----------



## blackbard (Mar 24, 2009)

Tag is a well marketed watch with well made parts. On the whole, they are not bad until you consider the price. Of the modern pieces, they use plastic movement holders which screams potentially a lack of quality. My personal experience with them and Tag service has not been good so I'm biased. Parts falling off, paint flaking, leaks past gaskets(even when new), has turned me off of the brand. I love a couple of the models and wouldnt mind owning them but I would be careful how I used them.

Other than that, they are no different from any of the lower mid tier luxury brands.


----------



## Eyenigma (Jan 20, 2014)

I can proudly say my Tag Heuer was the first decent watch I bought myself fresh out of college. I think it's great, for what it is: affordable and accessible low-end luxury. I think it's a great entry level watch to horology. AKA = The gateway timepiece. My only gripe with the brand is that they do too good a job (as weird as that sounds). I feel like everyone I see has the same Carrera, which has me itching for something different to put on my wrist. The price point and relative barrier to entry is very low, so it's a victim of its own success.


----------



## ErikS (May 21, 2009)

Eeeb said:


> ...........I don't hang out much in Public or Omeeeeeeeeeeeeega and seem to avoid many of them :-d ... works for me!


While I get the basic gist of the post - ya gotta admit a "no hate" while raggin on the Omega & Public forum is ironic (& funny)


----------



## Eeeb (Jul 12, 2007)

ErikS said:


> While I get the basic gist of the post - ya gotta admit a "no hate" while raggin on the Omega & Public forum is ironic (& funny)


I don't post obnoxious put downs of brands. So I show no hate here. (I think. At least I don't mean to.) But I do try to use as much humor as possible... it makes reading the forum more enjoyable.

One of the things I like about the TAGHeuer brand is it does not seem to attract brand bigots. Most of the folks here will readily admit other brands make wonderful watches. And we say it!

As to "Omeeeeeeeeeeeega", well, I find their forum traffic has a high density of what I perceive as brand bigots. "Omeeeeeeeeeeega" is a form of humor that seems to deflate or at least make light of their pomposity.

I don't hate Omeeeeeeeega. Actually I have more of them in my collection than TAGHeuers... But they are some of their more unique watches like their tuning forks and early Omega movement quartzs and specialty watches like the X-33... not their Aquaracer lookalikes LOL :-d

That last part is humor, appropriately marked, I think. I try.

Indeed, I don't hate brand bigots. They just suffer from limited perspective.


----------



## ErikS (May 21, 2009)

Eeeb said:


> I don't post obnoxious put downs of brands. So I show no hate here.............


Sigh, it would seem I wasn't clear........I understood all that from the 1st post - it was just funny when combined with the 2nd line. Like kidding someone about their sports team, good natured.

I actually find both forums (Omega & Public) just as funny as you do. I could start with why the hell does anyone care what watch someone _*else*_ wears. In the end it's still a Swatch.............but saying that is like telling Lexus folks it's a Toyota


----------



## Eeeb (Jul 12, 2007)

ErikS said:


> ...but saying that is like telling Lexus folks it's a Toyota


So you hate Toyotas? LOL

Thanks, I get your point.


----------



## ilitig8 (Oct 11, 2013)

I own a lot of watches from Seiko to Patek with brands like Omeg, Rolex and JLC in the middle BUT a Tag is my favorite watch to look at. Sorry for my poor photo skills!


----------



## ErikS (May 21, 2009)

Eeeb said:


> So you hate Toyotas? LOL


 

(but I might just poke a bit of fun @ someone who buys a $40,000 Camry ;-) )


----------



## Wisconsin Proud (Jun 22, 2007)

Eyenigma said:


> I can proudly say my Tag Heuer was the first decent watch I bought myself fresh out of college. I think it's great, for what it is: affordable and accessible low-end luxury. I think it's a great entry level watch to horology. AKA = The gateway timepiece. My only gripe with the brand is that they do too good a job (as weird as that sounds). I feel like everyone I see has the same Carrera, which has me itching for something different to put on my wrist. The price point and relative barrier to entry is very low, so it's a victim of its own success.


Three hand autos are approaching $3000. Chronos start at $3000 and quickly go to 4, 5, and $600+

Even the quartz F1s are near $2000.

I guess gateway will have to do for me.


----------



## GEZ7ch (May 13, 2009)

Love my WAN2110 and eager to get my new WAP2011 in a couple of weeks  
My experience with Tag Heuer was nothing but great so far and I did own a Rolex and a few Omega's. 
Enjoy your new Tag and don't bother with other people hate towards the brand.



















Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Vaxe (Jan 16, 2011)

IMO, perception toward TAG Heuer would improve once the company stops selling F1 at $2000.
I purchased this Caliper El Primero 36 in 2011 brand new from an AD for $4200. More value like this and less quartz would certainly help end the fashion brand label.


----------



## beeman101 (Nov 16, 2013)

Always loved their Grand carrerra line. Including yours. Never seemed to understand the F1 line and what it wants to be imo....


----------



## Eeeb (Jul 12, 2007)

IMHO the company would have a big loss if it stopped selling the F1 line. It is the direct connection to the history of the brand and serves as a wonderful entry point.

TAGHeuer has a presence in more shops than any other Swiss brand. This is because a retailer can, with one brand, sell a wide range of customers. The loss of the F1 would end this ability. 

Besides, the F1 is a nicer looking watch than the Grand Carrerra! LOL

BTW, the Calibre 11 was the first automatic chronograph you could buy. "The First" still can't hack it ;-)


----------



## WilliamP (Jun 26, 2012)

I bought my Tag heuer Aqua racer in October 2012 and still love it.
It was quite expensive (still university student), but I have a big chance of making quite a lot of money.
Chances are big that I will buy an new Carrera or Grand Carrera this year.

I just love the look and feel of the Tag Heurer watches, and everyone that notices that I have a Tag gives me a compliment.


----------



## Hr. Jensen (Jan 22, 2014)

GEZ7ch said:


> Love my WAN2110 and eager to get my new WAP2011 in a couple of weeks
> My experience with Tag Heuer was nothing but great so far and I did own a Rolex and a few Omega's.
> Enjoy your new Tag and don't bother with other people hate towards the brand.
> 
> ...


Congrats on your WAN2110. Got one myself a few weeks ago and I really love it. However, it seems like your WAN got the same "problem" as mine: The bezel is slightly off-centre - well it looks like that, when I look at your picture. It doesn't really bother me, though.


----------



## Richerson (Jun 18, 2006)

Mines spot on perfect - maybe it's just the angle on the picture - I've also been super lucky to have the crown logo line up perfectly too.


----------



## Hr. Jensen (Jan 22, 2014)

Richerson said:


> View attachment 1362166
> 
> 
> Mines spot on perfect - maybe it's just the angle on the picture - I've also been super lucky to have the crown logo line up perfectly too.


Lucky you - mine has neither  Still love the watch, though.


----------



## Richerson (Jun 18, 2006)

Hr. Jensen said:


> Lucky you - mine has neither  Still love the watch, though.


Over the years I've Learned to shop around even when you know which model you'll be buying, of course this means shopping at AD's and the higher price point.

But when small details bother you it's worth the trouble.


----------



## Vaxe (Jan 16, 2011)

I appreciate the F1 and believe TAG Heuer should continue to mfg the line for all the reasons you listed.
What I don't agree with is the price tag. The OP asked why TAG Heuer is often associated as a fashion brand, and frankly I think it's because they sell Ronda quartz at $2000 (just like LV and Gucci).

While $2000 plastic quartz is their bread and butter and contributes a much higher profit margin than automatics, is this business model sustainable?

Calibre 11 doesn't hack because it's an El Primero 400. b-)



Eeeb said:


> IMHO the company would have a big loss if it stopped selling the F1 line. It is the direct connection to the history of the brand and serves as a wonderful entry point.
> 
> TAGHeuer has a presence in more shops than any other Swiss brand. This is because a retailer can, with one brand, sell a wide range of customers. The loss of the F1 would end this ability.
> 
> ...


----------



## hayday (Aug 13, 2011)

Much of the rub also stems from the amount of money TAG spends on advertising, marketing and brand ambassadors. Yes, I know, they spend nothing what Rolex spends, and it's not like Omega is short on ambassadors (Daniel Craig, George Clooney), either. That said, logic and reason ain't got nuthin' to do with nuthin'. People love and hate things for completely illogical reasons, so good luck trying to find consistency.

I have an Aquaracer Calibre S Regatta Timer that I absolutely love. It was the first adult watch I bought.

-hayday


----------



## cpayton (Jan 3, 2014)

Have the same one, coolest quartz chrono ever! I like the polished center links, but as with any similair watch, you have to love the scratches too!


----------



## pronstar (Dec 28, 2013)

IMHO look to pre-owned pricing for the true value of watches. 

Many MSRP's are little more than wishful thinking.


----------



## hayday (Aug 13, 2011)

FINALLY! I thought I would never encounter another person who had this watch. Yeah, the polished center links are scratched to hell, but that only adds to the character.

-hayday



cpayton said:


> Have the same one, coolest quartz chrono ever! I like the polished center links, but as with any similair watch, you have to love the scratches too!


----------



## GEZ7ch (May 13, 2009)

Richerson said:


> View attachment 1362166
> 
> 
> Mines spot on perfect - maybe it's just the angle on the picture - I've also been super lucky to have the crown logo line up perfectly too.


Great thanks again Richerson! Can't wait to also get the WAP in a few weeks. As to my WAN bezel, it's actually lined perfectly so I guess it's the angle as you said. However, not so lucky like you to have the crown aligns perfectly, but this doesn't bother me that much 

All in all I just love TAG watches! Have on my wish list the WAK2111, WAK2120, WAK2121 and CAP2112 (big divers fan as you can see)

The rest of the wish list is Rolex watches with the 116622 with Pt dial being at the top of it. In the meanwhile I enjoy working at a Rolex AD although currently not owning a Rolex myself (I should fix that...)










Great day everybody 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Monocrom (Nov 11, 2010)

WOFTAM said:


> Hi all! New here from Australia and have recently bought a TAG Heuer Carrera 1887.
> 
> After browsing the other forums it looks like TAG cops a bit of flack. Is there a perception that TAG Heuer is overrated or what's the story? I'm not particularly fussed, just curious.


Check your PM inbox.

Sadly, some members are being disingenuous as to why TAG Heuer gets so much flak.


----------



## WillMK5 (Mar 2, 2009)

Monocrom said:


> Check your PM inbox.
> 
> Sadly, some members are being disingenuous as to why TAG Heuer gets so much flak.


Now I'm curious, can you PM me too?


----------



## Eeeb (Jul 12, 2007)

Monocrom said:


> Check your PM inbox.
> 
> Sadly, some members are being disingenuous as to why TAG Heuer gets so much flak.


It would be interesting to see if your assertion(s) could withstand wide scrutiny... PM is private. But we can all react to forum posts. But participation is voluntary... feel free to do what you are comfortable with.


----------



## Monocrom (Nov 11, 2010)

Eeeb said:


> It would be interesting to see if your assertion(s) could withstand wide scrutiny... PM is private. But we can all react to forum posts. But participation is voluntary... feel free to do what you are comfortable with.


My main assertion is one I've mentioned in numerous other topics regarding TAG Heuer in which someone asked why. My decision to take it to the PM system is because I honestly got sick & tired of the very same one of two reactions that it causes. One, pretending that it's not a big deal at all. Or, pretending it wasn't posted at all and ignoring it. Thus my comment above that certain members are being disingenuous when they say they wonder why TAG Heuer gets a certain amount of flak that other luxury brands do not. (Honestly Eeeb, after awhile that gets old.) Do I have my favorite brands? Absolutely! Do I pretend that they are 100% perfect? No. if a new member asks about them do I neglect to mention the negatives? No. I don't see the point in doing that.

Those members know who they are. They absolutely do. If any are wondering if I'm referring to them, then the answer is "No." Once again, they _know_ who they are. call me crazy, I think an honest question deserves an honest answer. Why?... I know what it's like to be on the other side. Not watch-related. Another hobby of mine. A certain high-end flashlight that others raved about. Being in a unique position, I was able to go out to an AD and try it without first having to buy it. (Something that in most parts of the world, folks would not be able to do. They'd have to buy it online first.)

Went, tried it out, and was literally disgusted by what I found. Went back to that online community and asked my fellow flashaholics basically.... "WTF??"

Now all of a sudden, I get comments such as _"Oh, now that you mention it; yes that is an issue with that model."
_
Really? Really.... You guys couldn't have mentioned that. Not one of you. At all. While you were raving that this was the greatest thing since the invention of the candle.

Now the thing is, it was blatant! Something anyone would have realized simply by doing a basic physical examination of the light. And, when I posted that particularly large disadvantage, I had to deal with certain members who absolutely refused to believe it. Despite the fact that it was so blatant. So much so that it became clear that those members so staunchly defending it, had obviously never owned one themselves. Yes, that's how blatant that defect was.

Main point: Give an honest answer to an honest question. Don't sugar-coat it. And you know I don't sugar-coat things. The reason I took it to the PM system was because it had gotten old. I'd mention the disadvantage and it was either ignored or certain members said that it wasn't _"that bad."_

I honestly have no problem posting it in an open forum on WUS. I've done so before. Okay, I'll do it again....

Gorgeous timepieces. Open up the caseback. And there's that big, ugly, black plastic, hollowed out, movement spacer.... The kind you'll find in a cheap $65 Seiko 5 automatic. There's a genuine issue. Awhile back in a different topic in a different sub-forum, I got some flak for pointing out that Nomos shouldn't be using plastic spacers in some of their watches, and charging as much as they were for their timepieces. Well, a small but vocal group of die-hard fans didn't like that. I realized I was getting nowhere with them, so I decided to ask a well-respected, independent, watchmaker what his thoughts were on the subject. He simply confirmed what my common sense was telling me. No advantage using plastic over metal as a spacer other than to save costs on each unit (watch) produced. That's it. Nothing else. None.

On a $65 Seiko, such a plastic spacer makes sense. Cost savings are obviously passed along to the consumer. On something like a, for example, a $2500 TAG Heuer WAN2110? Honestly.... No. On the outside it is absolutely gorgeous. On the inside, TAG Heuer chose to cheap out. Literally none of the recognized High-End brands use plastic spacers in their watches. One step down in the pricing tier, we come to Luxury models. It is extremely rare to find plastic spacers used inside of watches in this tier. TAG Heuer does. The vast majority of its luxury watch competitors, don't. That's rather telling.

Not only is there zero advantages to the buyer, but there is a huge negative. You buy a luxury watch, you give it routine servicing, you expect it to last quite a few decades. Well, according to the watchmaker whom I asked, the problem with plastic spacers is that they can actually dry out inside the case. Takes quite a few years. Doesn't happen quickly. But when it does, the spacer becomes brittle and can easily break apart during a routine servicing. When it does, that's it! Not as though the watchmaker can fix it or make a new one with a spare bit of plastic that might be lying around. Not as though he can just jam the broken pieces back inside the case. The only fix is to use the spacer from a donor watch of the same model. But no guarantees there that the spacer inside the donor watch hasn't dried out too. Metal spacers don't dry out. You buy a luxury watch, you take care of it; it should last a VERY long time. One shouldn't have to buy a new one because despite their best efforts, the spacer dried out and broke apart during a routine servicing. If that happened on a very inexpensive Seiko, no big deal.

All of that is what I included in my PM. Along with the fact that TAG Heuer makes some truly gorgeous watches, on the outside. And the fact that for some odd reason, those who typically criticize the brand; cannot seem to articulate why they're not happy with TAG Heuer.

You're right.... I'm absolutely comfortable with posting that on an open forum. Although since I've mentioned _why_, on this particular occasion, I chose to go the PM route; instead of the usual two responses, I'm sure this time there'll be some angry and defensive ones. Possibly causing the topic to degrade horribly. And that honestly wasn't my intent. My intent was simply to give an honest answer to an honest question posted by a new member who clearly was simply curious as to "Why?"


----------



## carton (Nov 30, 2013)

Had to turn away from the desolation of Peyton and wanted to ask some honest, surely non-WIS, maybe a little defensive (given that I own a fairly new WAN 2110), questions. I also would rather put them out in the open, but if they cross any lines please let me know and I'll quickly edit out anything that needs editing out. So, Monocrom, if you would humor me:

I only read about TAG using the plastic spacers on only a few rather new models (new Calibre 5 Aquaracers like my WAN in particular), is it more widespread among TAGs? Is it something TAG has always been known for?

I'm not a watchmaker and don't do much real engineering, but wouldn't it be fairly cheap and simple for TAG to keep the original injection mold, make a few extra spacers for spares every once in a while, and replace them on watches they service every so often?

Aside from Nomos (not a watchmaker I have heard many bad things about on WUS, at least nothing even remotely approximating the vitriol some seem to reserve for TAG Heuer) I read somewhere here that AP uses rubber to encase the movements on Royal Oaks, as does Glashutte for some models. Is this right? If so is rubber fundamentally different / more reliable / less likely to dry up watches?

From what I read on other forums on WUS prior to purchasing my watch plastic spacer rings are no big deal and might even add a little bit of shock absorption. I remember I even mistook a comment from you to mean that the plastic spacer ring issue was somewhat overblown (this was actually before I bought the watch, and those threads actually gave this novice a little bit more peace of mind, not that I would hold you in any way responsible for my misunderstanding). And I thought you were still considering the WAN in spite of the plastic spacer. Only now do I find there's more to the story. It seems clear you have informed others of you qualms, but do you really think you've made your case to so conclusively that its inconceivable that others genuinely might still be unconcerned with the issue, instead of being "disingenuously" engaged in trying to cover it up?

Finally, are you really saying that the plastic spacers belie more pervasive quality issues in TAG Heuers that other critics are right to allude to even though they have not been able to properly substantiate? Is that the real flaw you're rather indirectly asking more knowledgeable TAG forum members to concede? Or do you really believe the plastic spacer ring issue to be as long standing, well understood, and widely noticed as to be a major cause of TAG Heuer's bad reputation?


----------



## Eeeb (Jul 12, 2007)

I respect Monocrom's extensive reply.

Just to pick up on one point, I do point out there are more kinds of plastic than there are kinds of brass. And there has been a substantial evolution in plastics in the past 75 years. Not all plastics outgas, oxidize and become brittle. I even have some plastic movements that are now over 40 years old (and still work!). But I have no knowledge of what plastics TAGHeuer may be using.

Here is one of those plastic movements... 'self lubricating' is the claim. So far so good! :think:


----------



## drunken monkey (Jun 22, 2011)

That long post about the plastic part is *his* reason for not buying an Aquaracer; it is *not* the reason why a lot of people don't like TAGHeuer.
It also ignores the slightly absurd notion that a $1 part instead of a $0.20c part makes a watch more "worth it".

That isn't to say I don't agree with the principle of what he is saying (i.e why don't they just use a metal part? a guess would be simply because of legacy - that they already have the molds), just that in practice, it makes little to no difference.

The Seiko comparison is also not entirely valid.
The Seiko 7s26 is a derviation of the earlier 7002 which is itself a direct replacement of the 6309.
That means that Seiko have been using the same dimensioned movement for over 30 years in their lowest priced watches and their more refined watches also use derivations of the 7s26 (i.e 6r and 4r) movements.
I don't think I need to explain the principles of economy of scale here, especially when we're talking about a massive manufacturing company like Seiko.

The longevity of plastic has _some_ validity if it were backed up by some reference other than the word of an anonymous watchmaker.
Anecdotally, I have my dad's old Omega with a plastic movement ring that is over 30 years old and is still perfectly fine, even though the equally old rubber seal has rotted away and turned into mush.

The scenario of a failed/dried plastic movement holder as being the end of a watch is also a misleading dead-end.

If your watch maker has a lathe, it isn't that much work to machine a metal ring if you are that bothered by it so it isn't "the end" as he so dramatically puts it.
In the case of an ETA 2824 (or equivalent), if TAGHeuer are still using it, then why can't you order one from them?


----------



## justbecauseIcan (May 8, 2013)

I still have a TAG and had a couple that I flipped but one thing is true - you can't stop thinking that it is "pretty on the outside / pretty basic on the inside". I don't get the horological buzz with them. That may be different for some of their higher end models, but hey, for the same price there is a whole other bunch up for consideration so the argument does not really hold up. 

It's like a supermodel that never had to go to school. Great for a couple nights but not so much of a joy to live with 

I definitely thought more of TAG before entering the madness of WUS. I'm not someone that sucks up marketing gaga (I got a degree in that crap) but a mere mortal consumer does not engage in long ETA vs Sellita discussions just to find out that, whatever is in it, it is not the highest grade, does not have proper finishing, does not have a hairspring made from kryptonite or a balance wheel made from the tears of an old serene Swiss man. 

Fact is, as soon as I know, I care. And then I can't stop looking down at my TAG and thinking it is somewhat less than it tries to make you believe.


----------



## Monocrom (Nov 11, 2010)

carton said:


> Had to turn away from the desolation of Peyton and wanted to ask some honest, surely non-WIS, maybe a little defensive (given that I own a fairly new WAN 2110), questions. I also would rather put them out in the open, but if they cross any lines please let me know and I'll quickly edit out anything that needs editing out. So, Monocrom, if you would humor me:
> 
> I only read about TAG using the plastic spacers on only a few rather new models (new Calibre 5 Aquaracers like my WAN in particular), is it more widespread among TAGs? Is it something TAG has always been known for?


From what I know, no; not something the brand has always been known for. At first I thought it was only in their Aquaracer line. Took a look at their also gorgeous, non-chrono version of the Carrera. Guess what I found inside that one too. Have heard from others that quite a few TAG Heuer models use plastic spacers too. Just seems genuinely odd to me because even lesser-priced brands (entry-level Luxury) often don't use plastic spacers. For example, you won't find one on any modern-day Oris. Just one example.



> I'm not a watchmaker and don't do much real engineering, but wouldn't it be fairly cheap and simple for TAG to keep the original injection mold, make a few extra spacers for spares every once in a while, and replace them on watches they service every so often?


Seems like a simple solution. Though no idea if TAG Heuer has plans to keep making plastic spacer replacements for years down the road after a model is discontinued or changed significantly. And that's where the problem lies. The spacers don't dry out one or two years down the road. It can take quite a few before that happens... When your favorite TAG Heuer has likely either been discontinued or improved significantly, changed, or redesigned entirely. Then, finding spares does become a huge issue.



> Aside from Nomos (not a watchmaker I have heard many bad things about on WUS, at least nothing even remotely approximating the vitriol some seem to reserve for TAG Heuer) I read somewhere here that AP uses rubber to encase the movements on Royal Oaks, as does Glashutte for some models. Is this right? If so is rubber fundamentally different / more reliable / less likely to dry up watches?


Honestly, I have no personal experience with Those two brands. Though if AP does completely encase the movement in rubber on that model, that would offer some real shock protection vs. a greatly hollowed out plastic spacer. If for no other reason than the basic nature of rubber compared to plastic. The two are fundamentally different. Though I couldn't say if rubber would be less likely to dry up inside a watch case. My main concern when I asked that watchmaker was to find out if plastic spacers had any real advantages compared to metal ones. With regards to any advantages for the buyer, I got a resounding "No."



> From what I read on other forums on WUS prior to purchasing my watch plastic spacer rings are no big deal and might even add a little bit of shock absorption.


Yup, I read the same thing. _"No big deal." _

Then I asked the watchmaker. Someone who actually knows the ins & outs of watches (literally), said that it was a big deal. And to this day, even in other topics in which I've posted the facts about plastic spacers, I still get members who say, _"It's no big deal."_ (Okay, if one buys a brand new luxury watch once every handful of years and then gives away the old one; fair enough. In that case it would be no big deal. Honestly, have yet to meet anyone on WUS who does that.)

I also specifically asked the watchmaker about the two often cited so-called advantages to a plastic spacer. One, that it's self-lubricating. Some plastic watch parts indeed are self-lubricating. Plastic movement spacers are not. Those can easily dry out. And the second one is the myth about being shock-resistant. It's plastic. It's not soft rubber. In my previous post I mentioned that the spacer in the WAN 2110 is hollowed out. I meant that it is seriously hollowed out. There's barely any plastic with regards to thickness of the spacer. Plus, not as though the plastic spacer extends around the bottom and top of the movement. No shock resistance at all. Once again, the only advantage is lower costs per unit for the watch company by using plastic over metal for the spacer.



> I remember I even mistook a comment from you to mean that the plastic spacer ring issue was somewhat overblown (this was actually before I bought the watch, and those threads actually gave this novice a little bit more peace of mind, not that I would hold you in any way responsible for my misunderstanding). And I thought you were still considering the WAN in spite of the plastic spacer.


Honestly, I loved the look of that model so much that yes; for awhile I still seriously considered getting one. I thought that perhaps (just perhaps) if the spacer was thick enough... Then the thickness would make brittleness highly unlikely. But then I found a pic. of the WAN 2110 with its caseback off. Got an excellent look at that plastic spacer. I couldn't believe how extensively it was hollowed out! (I have that pic. saved on my computer. But since it's not mine and I don't remember whom it belongs to, I'm not going to post it here.) After seeing that, I could honestly see what the watchmaker meant regarding drying out, becoming brittle, and breaking apart years later during a routine servicing.

I won't lie, I still love the look of the watch. Honestly, it looks better than the current Rolex Submariner. Would I personally buy it? No.

Would some still buy it despite the use of a cheap plastic spacer inside? Yes. (Once again, it's a gorgeous watch. For some, looks are all that matters. Still, they should know all the facts before buying. That's the main thing.)



> Only now do I find there's more to the story. It seems clear you have informed others of you qualms, but do you really think you've made your case to so conclusively that its inconceivable that others genuinely might still be unconcerned with the issue, instead of being "disingenuously" engaged in trying to cover it up?


Not cover it up. And not based on what I've posted in the past. They know that it's a big disadvantage... Some knew it before I found out on my own. Some, despite knowing better, will intentionally leave out or pretend that no issues exist. To the point of saying "No clue," or something similar, when a new member notices that TAG Heuer seems to not be as well-loved as they (those new members) expected it to be after finding WUS and doing a bit of their own research. And I'm sorry, but when those particular members post "No clue;" they're being disingenuous. They do have a clue. They have more than a clue actually. Yet, instead of mentioning those issues then giving their take on them; instead we get something that can basically be summed up as "I don't know."

That's not an honest answer to an honest question. Though for some members it is, because it's just true that those who often criticize TAG Heuer can't seem to come up with anything better than "It sucks." For those members, they're giving an honest answer by saying, "I don't know." For others though, that "I don't know" isn't an honest response.



> Finally, are you really saying that the plastic spacers belie more pervasive quality issues in TAG Heuers that other critics are right to allude to even though they have not been able to properly substantiate? Is that the real flaw you're rather indirectly asking more knowledgeable TAG forum members to concede? Or do you really believe the plastic spacer ring issue to be as long standing, well understood, and widely noticed as to be a major cause of TAG Heuer's bad reputation?


I'm saying that I have no clue why TAG Heuer has decided to cheap out in that one regard, while promoting and marketing itself as a Luxury brand. And doing so in an area where most owners will never see it. Gorgeous on the outside... Why is there a big, black, ugly, hollowed out, plastic spacer on the the inside?... Underneath the caseback where the vast majority of owners will never see it. Another problem is that TAG Heuer absolutely has skilled watchmakers working for them. I have a hard time believing that I found the one and only watchmaker out there who knows these things regarding plastic spacers. How likely is it that not one of those experienced and skilled watchmakers ever inquired about the use of plastic spacers to an executive? It's not a cheap Seiko model. We're talking luxury watches that go for thousands of dollars.

Is it likely that Management has known about the major issue with plastic spacers? Yes, it's very likely. Doesn't seem to bother them though. Or the fact that the vast majority of other luxury brands don't consider plastic spacers to be good enough for use inside _their_ watches. But that particular part is just pure speculation on my part. Just seems highly unlikely that that sort of conversation never took place. Though admittedly, still speculation on my part.

The issue with plastic spacers isn't a widely recognized one by critics of the brand. Not at all. Once again, for some truly bizarre reason, the critics can't seem to articulate what it is they don't like about the brand other than they don't like it. To me, that's a big issue and a legite criticism.


----------



## Richerson (Jun 18, 2006)

Monocrom is the guy who finally convinced me to buy a WAN after years of liking the WAN and WAB before it, the main reason I held off was the lack of ceramic bezel, but after reading allot of posts on ceramics and points Monocrom made I decided to take the plunge. 

I can't say I wasn't a bit disappointed when I found out about the plastic insert because I was, Monocrom is correct that a watch of this price should have a metal movement spacer. It wouldn't have stopped me buying the watch. 

Having said that there's no reports of these spacers failing in Tag Heuer watches and as Eeeb pointed out there's loads of plastic types and none of us know what type of plastic is used within these watches, This isn't new though as Tag Heuer have been using these spaces way back even in the Kirium range again with no reports of failure's. 

My plan for this wan is to get the watch serviced by tag heuer after 5 and 10 years which I'm sure they will have said part as the watch is still in production and remains a strong seller, then I'll let the watch run until it stops or plays up when I'll let a local guy look at the watch, I'm fairly sure I'll get 20 years from it. By which time a new day beater will be in order. 

I can only go on what I've found with the watch, it keeps excellent time and has proven to be robust as a daily watch.

The fact remains it's a disappointment, only time will tell if it's an issue


----------



## justbecauseIcan (May 8, 2013)

How much do you estimate can be saved by using plastic spacers?


----------



## Monocrom (Nov 11, 2010)

justbecauseIcan said:


> How much do you estimate can be saved by using plastic spacers?


No clue. I'm not an accountant.


----------



## Richerson (Jun 18, 2006)

It would interesting to see this part out of the watch. 

I might see if I can source one as a backup


----------



## at2011 (Jan 23, 2011)

My Heuer 1000, one of the 80s Tag Heuers has a plastic spacer that broke. I had to use super glue to put it back together as Tag Heuer doesn't service those models anymore. I also had to upgrade the movement to what's available on that auction site because, you guessed it - Tag Heuer stopped servicing those models a long time ago. The reason I have Tag Heuers is because I like the watch, the only reason I don't buy the expensive models is that the maker turns them into disposables by quitting to service the watch. I have reason to believe that the expensive models you buy today will go the Tag Heuer 1000 route.


----------



## Richerson (Jun 18, 2006)

at2011 said:


> My Heuer 1000, one of the 80s Tag Heuers has a plastic spacer that broke. I had to use super glue to put it back together as Tag Heuer doesn't service those models anymore. I also had to upgrade the movement to what's available on that auction site because, you guessed it - Tag Heuer stopped servicing those models a long time ago. The reason I have Tag Heuers is because I like the watch, the only reason I don't buy the expensive models is that the maker turns them into disposables by quitting to service the watch. I have reason to believe that the expensive models you buy today will go the Tag Heuer 1000 route.


this is actually one of my main beefs with Tag and other watch company's, you have an old watch which the company will no longer service, I actually had this when a friend asked me to find a good watch repair guy when his rolex precision stopped and rolex return the watch stating they could no longer service the watch.

now that's from the 80s, tag are even worse and won't service some models only 10 years old, it's the reason I brought a simple basic automatic in the hope that 10 plus years down the road anyone can service it.

Hoping the the plastic insert holds out that is


----------



## carton (Nov 30, 2013)

Monocrom said:


> Still, they should know all the facts before buying. That's the main thing.


Thanks for answering all of my questions. That was a long, thorough, insightful and very informative response. Though there seems little left for me (and other members of the plastic-spacer-afflicted community) to do than hope TAG used high quality plastics and/or is prepared to replace the parts on these watches, because as drunkenmonkey pointed out it does seem a little silly that they would risk serious long term quality issues over what cannot possibly more than a couple dollars in savings, if that, on $2000+ watches. Because I do completely agree that it would be a real knock on the brand.



Monocrom said:


> The issue with plastic spacers isn't a widely recognized one by critics of the brand. Not at all.






Monocrom said:


> Though for some members it is, because it's just true that those who often criticize TAG Heuer can't seem to come up with anything better than "It sucks." For those members, they're giving an honest answer by saying, "I don't know." For others though, that "I don't know" isn't an honest response.


I like the fact you're being a gadfly and informing the public, and I really do appreciate the information, but you might be a little harsh in demanding that TAG defenders be so willing to provide those who attack the brand with a justification to do so when most seem to lack it. Particularly since you don't seem to imply that this betrays are more enveloping problem TAG Heuer has when compared to other brands, I'm not quite sure that this issue needed to be prominently disclosed by TAG aficionados themselves when explaining why TAG Heuer has a bad reputation among so many on WUS. A reputation which I still feel (and I'm not sure we disagree on this) is not entirely earned.


----------



## Richerson (Jun 18, 2006)

At the end of the day while it's disappointing to see plastic used in tag heuer watches the whole it will fail when the watch is old is purely anecdotal. There is no solid proof that the said part will fail in the Aquaracer range or any others for that matter. 

I think it's important that people know what they are buying and can make that choice.


----------



## Eeeb (Jul 12, 2007)

This has provoked good discussion (without acrimony! ... something moderators always like ). Thanks for taking the time to post it (... again! I know you have made many of these points before but few seem to look at old posts... such is life in the big city).


----------



## Richerson (Jun 18, 2006)

I decided to ask my own watch guy the same question. 


I've used him for 10 plus years and he's fix many watches I've flipped 


His answer was that you can buy almost any configuration of plastic movement holders and it's fairly simple to replace one even if some small doctoring is required. He went on to say that with a little improvisation it's possible to get anything to fit.


----------



## at2011 (Jan 23, 2011)

Richerson said:


> At the end of the day while it's disappointing to see plastic used in tag heuer watches the whole it will fail when the watch is old is purely anecdotal. There is no solid proof that the said part will fail in the Aquaracer range or any others for that matter.
> 
> I think it's important that people know what they are buying and can make that choice.


Plastic is plastic, it gets brittle over time, and I believe that to be fact. Now, every time a watch is serviced by the manufacturer (every 5 years at least?), any watch part that rots over time should be replaced - the (plastic) crystal gasket (on Tag Heuers), the rubber crown gasket and the rubber caseback gasket. The problem with Tag Heuer is that they stop servicing their own watches, some for even less than 30 years. The worst part is that these must have spares aren't available on the gray market. In 30 years or less, your 2k Tag Heuer quartz watch will be a 2K paperweight. Now wouldn't it have made more sense to buy an automatic for that much money instead?


----------



## Monocrom (Nov 11, 2010)

carton said:


> Thanks for answering all of my questions. That was a long, thorough, insightful and very informative response. Though there seems little left for me (and other members of the plastic-spacer-afflicted community) to do than hope TAG used high quality plastics and/or is prepared to replace the parts on these watches...


Honestly, I am hoping that someone at TAG Heuer will possibly see this topic and realize that it's an issue. Clearly not one that a member of the general public will even know about. (Or if they do, won't care because they don't know that the plastic spacers can dry out and break.) An enthusiast/collector though... That's a different story.

(I know, I know... Long shot at best. Still, I'm hoping one day there'll be such an improvement.)

I'll go out on a limb and say it's a pain for watch brands in general to stock parts for years, for specific models. Using a much more durable metal spacer would be one less replacement part to stock.

Assuming that the savings compared to a metal spacer would only be a few cents per unit (watch), it can easily add up when dealing with such a big company as TAG Heuer. On one unit, not impressive. On, for example, 10,000 units... now it really adds up. (And we know TAG Heuer puts out FAR more than 10,000 units per year.) I'm not an accountant, though it's clear that when you're a big company that puts out a large volume of product; being able to save even a few cents on each individual unit will have a big impact on your Bottom Line at the end of a year.



> I like the fact you're being a gadfly and informing the public, and I really do appreciate the information, but you might be a little harsh in demanding that TAG defenders be so willing to provide those who attack the brand with a justification to do so when most seem to lack it.


Honestly, that's not what I'm expecting at all. If some hater comes in here and simply posts, _"TAG Heuer sucks!"_ I don't expect any regular on this sub-forum to step in, ask them to be specific, and then provide a negative that the brand happens to have. I'd expect those members to ignore the troll and move onto the next thread on the list of topics in this sub-forum. That's what I would expect them to do.

However, that's not what took place in this topic. We weren't visited by a troll simply wanting to bad-mouth TAG Heuer. New member... Saw that TAG Heuer doesn't seem to get as much respect as he honestly expected it to... Asked us, "Why?"

Once again, honest question deserves an honest answer. It's one thing when a member genuinely is unsure why one of his favorite brands is getting so much flak, and then posts "I don't know." Quite another when a member does know, but still posts "I don't know." That new member who asked ONLY out of curiosity deserves an honest reply. He's not a troll, he's not a hater, he's not someone who deserves to be ignored. In the case of a curious new member who likes the brand and asks "why?" Let him know why if you know of negatives associated with the brand. But if a member is worried that a hater or troll might see the reply, okay; fair enough. Simply PM the new, curious, member. Either way, whether one posts in an open forum or in a PM; just post honestly. That's all I'm asking from those members who honestly know the answer, but still choose to post, basically, "I don't know." I don't believe that's asking too much at all, from those members who know better.



> Particularly since you don't seem to imply that this betrays are more enveloping problem TAG Heuer has when compared to other brands


Different brands have different issues. That's absolutely true. One problem or issue doesn't translate into an all-encompassing or bigger problem lying just underneath the surface. Still, when a single problem itself is big enough; that definitely is enough by itself. I have an Emerson Mini-Commander. Great folding knife. Except for one thing... The liner-locks on Emerson's Production line of knives tend to be crap. Great quality knives in every other respect. But a liner-lock is one of those things that to function reliably, _*must*_ be made perfectly. Even the absolute slightest variation is going to ruin it and end up placing your fingers in danger if the lock fails. I bought my Mini-Commander from a Brick & Mortar shop. (Not easy to do since there are few Emerson Knives ADs out there.) The display model was decent, but the lock bothered me a bit. First Mini-Commander the sales clerk handed me after I told him "I'll take it," had a lock that failed to engage properly. I asked him to hand me another one... And then another.

Then I realized this wasn't working. One poorly made liner-lock after another. Finally, I asked the clerk how many Mini-Commanders they had in stock. They had about eight. I told him to bring them all out, told him why; and then I picked the first one out of all of them that actually had its lock built properly. It was ridiculous. Absolutely ridiculous. I've never had to do that with any knife of similar quality from any other brand. Not with Spyderco, Benchmade, Kershaw... Hell, not even with CRKT (Which is decidedly below Emerson in terms of quality).

That just highlights how one issue by itself can be big enough that everything else can be done right, but there's still an underlying problem.



> I'm not quite sure that this issue needed to be prominently disclosed by TAG aficionados themselves when explaining why TAG Heuer has a bad reputation among so many on WUS.


I'm afraid I'm going to have to respectfully disagree. Among the general public, yeah; they're not going to care. On a forum full of enthusiasts/collectors, it's a different story. You buy a luxury timepiece (regardless of brand) you expect it to last quite a few years and even decades, provided you take care of it and get it serviced regularly. That's just a realistic expectation. You go to KFC, you expect to enjoy some chicken. You expect to walk out no longer hungry. Just a realistic expectation. With a plastic spacer that can dry out, the realistic expectation of your luxury watch lasting decades with proper care and servicing... Well, that goes out the window. That's a realistic expectation that is now no longer being met. That seems like a big enough negative, that it should be mentioned by those who are aware of its existence.



> A reputation which I still feel (and I'm not sure we disagree on this) is not entirely earned.


We definitely agree that TAG Heuer is far from crap. And I'll be perfectly honest about the fact that most critics who dislike or even hate the brand, have never brought up the issue which I have; with regards to TAG Heuer's use of plastic spacers when much of their competitors use metal ones. They simply tend to say, _"It sucks;"_ and then just leave it at that.

Honestly, as far as what type of plastic TAG Heuer uses; I've seen their plastic spacers. It looks like ordinary plastic. Nothing space-aged or advanced. And even with the advanced ones out there, my experience with the most advanced plastics is in use in the knife industry. Especially with Spyderco. Zytel is as good as it gets. That particular plastic is glass reinforced nylon. Very tough and light-weight as a handle material. Can be molded into any shape. Can even be molded with built-in ridges and grooves for an absolute excellent fit in the hand with plenty of traction so the knife doesn't slip from the hand if you're performing some sort of mundane, utilitarian cutting chore.

Yet, even Zytel has its limits. Early on, Spyderco incorporated integral molded clips made of Zytel into the handle designs. That came to an end rather quickly as quite a few customers (myself included) had the integral Zytel clips literally snap and break off. Without having subjected their knives to any type of abuse. As good as Zytel is, as advanced as it is, deep down... It's still plastic. The clips were thin on those First Gen. models. And thin plastic, even the most advanced formula version out there, can dry out to the point of breaking off and snapping apart completely. At its core, it's still plastic.

Spyderco tried using thicker integral molded Zytel clips after all the complaints came in. Didn't help. The clips kept snapping. Thankfully Sal over at Spyderco realized this wasn't working. (Nicest guy in the knife industry. Actually cares about his customers.) For quite a few years now, Spyderco's Zytel-handled offerings come with metal clips attached with metal screws. No more complaints of clips snapping in half. No issues with the handles. But keep in mind those are thick and molded as one piece for each knife. Their thickness, size, and one-piece construction keeps them from breaking. You just aren't getting that thickness and size in a hollowed out plastic spacer. You can get the one-piece construction, but once again it's hollowed out to a huge degree.


----------



## Monocrom (Nov 11, 2010)

Richerson said:


> I decided to ask my own watch guy the same question.
> 
> I've used him for 10 plus years and he's fix many watches I've flipped
> 
> His answer was that you can buy almost any configuration of plastic movement holders and it's fairly simple to replace one even if some small doctoring is required. He went on to say that with a little improvisation it's possible to get anything to fit.


I'm not a watchmaker myself. I can only go by what I was told. I do know the watchmaker I asked is experienced, respected and I saw how he saved a completely corroded Speedmaster and made it look like new again.

I was told that you can't just use any odd bit of plastic or simply purchase an aftermarket spacer the way one could buy an aftermarket crystal, just as long as its the proper size for your watch to fit over the dial. I was told that a donor watch of the same model would be needed.

Not saying that your watchmaker lied or anything remotely like that. Clearly, neither one of us are watchmakers and we were given different information from two different watchmakers.

From your previous post... I absolutely agree with you that a customer should be completely informed before making a purchase. With regards to the use of plastic spacers in a luxury watch, some won't care. Others will buy something else.


----------



## justbecauseIcan (May 8, 2013)

Monocrom said:


> I'm not an accountant, though it's clear that when you're a big company that puts out a large volume of product; being able to save even a few cents on each individual unit will have a big impact on your Bottom Line at the end of a year.


each unit has an arguably high contribution margin and cost-savings on that level are no argument if you are selling a luxury product. In other words, TAG saving a few cents per unit using inferior materials to much cheaper brands is nonsense as each single watch generates profits in the hundreds of dollars and not in the mere dollars or cents as it would be the case in other industries that have lower mark ups. The only difference is that they provide lower value. Again, most people are unaware or don't care so what TAG does is alienate those few who know. One could now argue that for ever single WIS they lose to the brand, they have to produce many tens of thousands of units with inferior spacers to recoup the lifetime revenue that would have been gained from said individual. And that for each individual.


----------



## Richerson (Jun 18, 2006)

Lemania 5100 still going strong decades later with plastic parts.


----------



## kelrod (Dec 17, 2013)

I've followed this thread from the very beginning and was alarmed by the plastic spacer comments. I contacted Tag Heuerer customer service and was told the plastic spacers/gears are limited to the F-1series

The representative offered the aquaracer series has rubber gears.


----------



## carton (Nov 30, 2013)

Monocrom said:


> I'm afraid I'm going to have to respectfully disagree.


Sure. Though I think what we share here is actually a fairly narrow difference of opinion (which combined with an attempt to be as thorough as possible might make this a long and fairly skippable post) that only really has major repercussions in how we view how forum members should have answered the question. I agree with much of what you're saying but I respectfully disagree with you on this subject. It mainly it has to do with how I understand the question. For as understand it, the question was not in any way



Monocrom said:


> Let him know why if you know of negatives associated with the brand


it was:



WOFTAM said:


> Is there a perception that TAG Heuer is overrated or what's the story? I'm not particularly fussed, just curious.


And the answer to that question, IMHO, has little to do with the plastic spacer problem. If forced to speculate on why many here consider TAG Heuer sub-par I would venture something similar to what the initial respondents stated (and largely deemed overdone): too much quartz, too much marketing, too cheap of an entry level line, too many units, too much TAG and too little Heuer, too much focus on aesthetics (as you have argued), and perhaps chiefly a certain amount of dried-out groupthink that has made TAG one of this forums' more picked on brands. I do not believe, and neither do you, as you've stated, that the plastic spacer issue is a significant motive behind anti-TAG sentiment on WUS. So I would think what was stated in the first few posts largely answered the question, and in fact, would consider that even mentioning the issue in responding to the question posted by the OP strains the scope of the question as asked pretty hard.

You can go somewhat broader in answering the question but I would never go as far as



Monocrom said:


> Let him know why if you know of negatives associated with the brand


Because, if, like many on this thread, you are not over-concerned with the use of plastic spacers or, like me, do not feel sufficiently informed and do not believe that their use in some models in and of itself constitutes a particularly glaring knock on the brand, then I think you would confuse more than inform most by mentioning the issue without really delving into the minutiae of what and why some people find it important. And if you were to attempt that for every concern someone found reasonable enough to raise against TAG Heuer (internal threading going once, internal...) on WUS you would have to chop down a veritable Amazon of digital trees to spell them out.

You allude to this by stating that:



Monocrom said:


> That's a realistic expectation that is now no longer being met. That seems like a big enough negative, that it should be mentioned by those who are aware of its existence.


What is a big enough negative? What is a realistic expectation? You have your own criteria but it surely is is based on subjective reasoning based on your own views on the issues that you have seen raised. I, for one, have come to be fairly concerned with it and consider that TAG changing to metal spacers would be a welcome change (although selfishly it might reduce the possibility of easily finding a plastic spacer for my own Aquaracer in the future). But I not ready to say that the use of plastic spacers is so glaring a compromise that it should be seen as damaging to TAG's reputation for making quality products. I would really need a little more evidence in order to make such an assertion. Not only of the problem: not only have people listed many examples of watches surviving the plastic-spacer-affliction for decades, they have also suggested the prognosis isn't quite terminal. But on a more general idea that other brands do not suffer faults of the similar nature to a similar degree - having to replace a part every few decades doesn't seem to be an undue burden - as to justify TAG in particular taking flak. If the expectation is that 35 years from now the spacer breaks down and I could order a new one or have one printed out, I would scarcely mind, particularly since don't foresee myself ever opening the case-back and my very basic understanding of material science still clashes somewhat with the assertion that hollowed out plastic is not in any way a better shock absorber, and noise and temperature insulator, than metal. Only if that event is forecast to take place far earlier and entail a complication such as procuring a donor part would I feel somewhat peeved. But that is what just I subjectively find to be reasonable. Again, in what I consider the broadest possible way to sensibly interpret the question that was being asked.

So I'm not quite saying that



drunken monkey said:


> That long post about the plastic part is his reason for not buying an Aquaracer; it is not the reason why a lot of people don't like TAGHeuer.


but I'm not quite disagreeing with it either. I think you took the question to a very specific place, and everyone else doesn't have to go there with you.

So I continue to contest the assertion that those that failed to mention the plastic spacer issue apropos TAG's WUS reputation were being disingenuous at all. And while I applaud your commitment to detail in bringing up the issue, and agree with many of the things you've said and have been interested in both what you have had to say and the rigorous manner in which you have stated it, I fear you are being too ambitious in holding even those who do not fully share your views to your particularly exacting standard of disclosure.

--

So to the OP:

Why the *hate*? Because *squirrel*. Yeah, there is a perception among some WUS members that TAG is overrated (for some of the reasons stated previously). IMHO it is hugely overblown. Enjoy your new watch!


----------



## Eeeb (Jul 12, 2007)

Richerson said:


> Lemania 5100 still going strong decades later with plastic parts.


Yep. The best designed chrono, ever IMHO. My Heuer made Torneau Lemania and all my others, including my Lemania Lemania  present no problems.


----------



## drunken monkey (Jun 22, 2011)

The point regarding the part not encasing the front or rear of the movement and therefore means it doesn't provide shock protection is in error.

The movement ring can provide lateral shock protection.
That could in part explain the skeletonised design; so that it can compress under shock, something a solid metal ring cannot do.
The part need not encase the whole movement. It does not have to provide protection in the vertical direction because that's what shock systems such as kif are for in the movement.


----------



## Monocrom (Nov 11, 2010)

kelrod said:


> I've followed this thread from the very beginning and was alarmed by the plastic spacer comments. I contacted Tag Heuerer customer service and was told the plastic spacers/gears are limited to the F-1series
> 
> The representative offered the aquaracer series has rubber gears.


You were lied to.

Once again, I have a pic. of the WAN 2110, not an old version by the way, with its caseback off. You can blatantly see the plastic spacer inside. There's a review on youtube where a non-Chrono Carrera owner is reviewing his new watch. He specifically mentions that he was disappointed when he found out that the watch has a hidden plastic spacer underneath the display caseback. But that to him, it's "no big deal."

Point is, it's not just the F-1 Series.


----------



## kelrod (Dec 17, 2013)

Monocrom said:


> You were lied to.
> 
> Once again, I have a pic. of the WAN 2110, not an old version by the way, with its caseback off. You can blatantly see the plastic spacer inside. There's a review on youtube where a non-Chrono Carrera owner is reviewing his new watch. He specifically mentions that he was disappointed when he found out that the watch has a hidden plastic spacer underneath the display caseback. But that to him, it's "no big deal."
> 
> Point is, it's not just the F-1 Series.


Can you share the photo ?


----------



## Monocrom (Nov 11, 2010)

> *carton* *~*
> 
> ... if, like many on this thread, you are not over-concerned with the use of plastic spacers or, like me, do not feel sufficiently informed and do not believe that their use in some models in and of itself constitutes a particularly glaring knock on the brand, then I think you would confuse more than inform most by mentioning the issue without really delving into the minutiae of what and why some people find it important.


That's true. However, once again, I was specifically referring to those members who know about the issue, know it's a very real concern, but purposefully decided not to mention it. That's very different than not being sure, not caring that such spacers are being used, or not knowing. If a member knows, realizes that yes; it's an issue. But decides he won't mention it because it paints one of his favorite brands in a less than flattering light... Well, that's very different story. While the use of plastic spacers isn't a popular, or often-cited criticism of the brand by the general public; it's one that would be considered a BIG one by quite a few enthusiasts/collectors.



> What is a big enough negative? What is a realistic expectation? You have your own criteria but it surely is is based on subjective reasoning based on your own views on the issues that you have seen raised. I, for one, have come to be fairly concerned with it and consider that TAG changing to metal spacers would be a welcome change (although selfishly it might reduce the possibility of easily finding a plastic spacer for my own Aquaracer in the future). But I not ready to say that the use of plastic spacers is so glaring a compromise that it should be seen as damaging to TAG's reputation for making quality products. I would really need a little more evidence in order to make such an assertion.


I'm sorry, but in the paragraph above, I'm just seeing one example after another of trying to rationalize away why the use of plastic spacers is perfectly fine for a luxury brand to use. I don't believe that what I've posted is subjective at all. Here's why...

Is it a big enough negative? Yes. Spending thousands on a luxury watch. Taking care of it for many years. Getting it serviced properly by an experienced and skilled watchmaker. Investing the money to make sure it lasts. Then one day, quite a few years later, you get a phone call from that watchmaker saying that your cherished watch is now a light paper-weight because the movement spacer dried out and broke apart while he was trying to service the watch. Yes, I can objectively say that is definitely a big enough negative. Especially if it turns out that a replacement plastic spacer isn't easy to source.

Now, there are two conflicting statements from two separate watchmakers. One saying that replacing a broken plastic spacer is going to be extremely difficult, while another one makes it sound as easy as opening a can of soda. Clearly, you've chosen to believe that it'll be easy to find replacement plastic spacers years down the road. I'm not convinced that's the case. But here's the thing, whether it'll be easy or nearly impossible; you're not going to need to replace a metal spacer. You're not going to need to hunt down a replacement one because the old one isn't going to dry out and break apart in the first place. Why hunt down a replacement plastic spacer at all?

Do you honestly believe that it's not a realistic expectation to think that a luxury watch will, once again with care and routine servicing, last its owner for decades? I think that's a perfectly realistic expectation. With regards to reputation for making quality products, once again I have to go over something that I covered already in an earlier post. _*None*_ of the recognized High-End brands use plastic spacers. (They use metal ones or make sure that the movements fit perfectly inside the cases.) The absolute vast majority of other luxury brands, TAG Heuer's competition, don't use plastic spacers. If you go one pricing tier below, into Entry-Level Luxury, you still run into a significant number of brands and individual models that don't use plastic spacers.

Oris doesn't use any across their model lines. All are metal. Let's take the WAN 2110 again. Definitely gorgeous. At half the price, we have the Longines HydroConquest. Also good-looking. Metal spacer inside. Let's go down another pricing tier. When I first saw the Christopher Ward C60 Trident Pro diver, I loved the look of it. But at only $500, I knew it was likely not going to be built like a typical luxury watch or even an entry-level luxury watch. Decided to buy it anyway, then lucked out. Another member posted a pic of his with the solid caseback removed. Once again, a metal spacer. Not plastic. That was a nice surprise.

Let's go down just a bit further. Seiko's Orange Monster which can realistically be found for around $200. That one has a plastic spacer. Staying with Seiko, we find their bargain line, the Seiko 5 range. Also, plastic spacers. Right around $65. When TAG Heuer decides to use one specific part in a mechanical watch with a self-winding rotor, a part clearly identified with only cheap watches; then yes, it does become a glaring compromise. Those who are into horology are very much likely to see it as damaging to TAG Heuer's reputation for making only quality products.

It honestly doesn't matter which industry we're talking about. If a company is marketing itself as a luxury brand, is seen by the general public as a luxury brand, but then uses a specific part (in this case plastic spacers) which are identified by knowledgeable individuals as something used in only cheap products from that industry... Then it hurts that brand's reputation for making quality products. It absolutely does so.

Let's look outside the watch industry to help illustrate my point. LEDLenser is a flashlight brand that is very popular with the general public. Very popular in countries where it is known. (Not as popular as [email protected] But still quite popular.) LL is not at all popular with enthusiasts/collectors. Why?... They charge rather high prices for lights that in many cases simply don't compete with the better brands out there when quality is the issue. For the same price as an LL, you can get a comparable model from Streamlight. And you'll get quite a bit more quality with the SL than the LL, for the same amount of money.

Though the biggest sticking point is that LL continues to make and use models that run off of 3AAA cells. Now that is rather telling... To folks who are knowledgeable, that's a huge red flag. It means that the company has completely cheaped out. 3AAA LED lights are what you find being sold for a dollar at the .99 Cent Store. (At that price, it's not a rip-off. Anything north of a dollar? Forget it!) To make a light function properly on 3AAA cells, you need a battery-carrier to hold them in place all around the inside of the light. These carriers are always made from cheap plastic. They are flimsy, fragile, break easily if the light is dropped; and if you find one inside a flashlight, you instantly know you're holding something cheap in your hands... regardless of what the asking-price happens to be.

The use of these carriers has absolutely hurt LL's reputation. Quality flashlight brands simply do not use 3AAA battery-carriers. They just don't. Not a single one of them. Similar to how not a single High-End watch brand uses plastic movement spacers. They just don't. That's rather telling. Two separate industries. Two separate but specific items clearly seen in products built to very low price points. A 3AAA carrier in a light from a No-Name brand at the Dollar Store, is perfectly fine. A plastic movement spacer inside a cheap Seiko automatic is also perfectly fine. No clue why LEDLenser uses such a carrier in some of their lights. No clue why TAG Heuer uses such a spacer in some of their watches. And yes, in both cases, it hurts their reputations. Not among the ignorant general public. But among those who are enthusiasts/collectors, it becomes a different story.



> Not only of the problem: not only have people listed many examples of watches surviving the plastic-spacer-affliction for decades, they have also suggested the prognosis isn't quite terminal.


Never said that in a few years it was guaranteed that the plastic spacers WILL dry out and break off while a skilled watchmaker is working on the watch. The watchmaker I consulted however made it clear that it's a very real probability. If you go on vacation at a tropical beach, how likely is it that a satellite will fall out of the sky and kill you? Not likely at all. Not a realistic concern. How likely is it that you'll get run over by a speeding car if you try to run across a busy expressway? Now that's very likely to happen. Same thing with plastic spacers. Not everyone is going to get run over. But clearly, regardless of which price tier their watches fall into, quite a few different brands would rather use the _metal_ pedestrian foot-bridge over the expressway rather than run out there and chance it.



> But on a more general idea that other brands do not suffer faults of the similar nature to a similar degree - having to replace a part every few decades doesn't seem to be an undue burden - as to justify TAG in particular taking flak. If the expectation is that 35 years from now the spacer breaks down and I could order a new one or have one printed out, I would scarcely mind, particularly since don't foresee myself ever opening the case-back and my very basic understanding of material science still clashes somewhat with the assertion that hollowed out plastic is not in any way a better shock absorber, and noise and temperature insulator, than metal.


Another point I'm trying to make is that there's no need to stock replacement plastic spacers at all. No need for a watch owner to try to hunt down a replacement spacer if TAG Heuer or any brand decides to no longer stock those spacers... Just use a metal one. It's such a simple solution.

Also, I don't honestly understand what you mean by you don't plan on ever opening up the caseback? You don't ever plan on getting your luxury watch serviced?? That sounds rather odd. But even if that's the case, keep in mind that it wouldn't matter. The plastic spacer can dry out inside the case. Not as though it has to have its caseback off for that to happen. (Although we have two different opinions regarding replacing plastic spacers, from two different watchmakes; both agreed that plastic spacers can dry out and break off inside a watch's case. That aspect isn't in dispute. How easy it would be to replace a broken plastic spacer, _that_ is where the two differ.)

As mentioned in a previous post, I too used to think that if the plastic spacer were thick enough, then it might not be an issue. Then, I got a good look at the spacer TAG Heuer uses. It is so hollowed out to such a huge degree that it's clear that there is zero shock protection. Seeing was definitely believing. That conclusion was confirmed by the watchmaker I spoke to. And again, I have to point out that the vast majority of not only TAG Heuer's comptitors but those brands both above and below TAG Heuer; have deciided that metal is better than plastic as a spacer material in every single way but one... Cost saving on the production of each individual unit. That's it. Rolex, VC, AL&S, PP, and numerous other brands have decided that metal spacers are superior to plastic ones in every single other way but the one mentioned above. These brands have been around longer than most of us have been alive. They know every detail of making a quality watch.



> Only if that event is forecast to take place far earlier and entail a complication such as procuring a donor part would I feel somewhat peeved.


If it took place far earlier, a replacement plastic bezel would be very easy to source. The brand would still have plenty of spares in stock. It wouldn't be an issue at all then. The problem comes several years down the road when your favorite watch has been discontinued or "improved" into basically a different model. If the problem crops up then, it can become a big issue if the brand no longer stocks the needed part. And once again, we're getting two conflicting opinions about just how easy it is to source that particular donor part after quite a few years have gone by. There's a good chance you'll still end up peeved.



> ...I think you took the question to a very specific place, and everyone else doesn't have to go there with you.


I'm not saying they do. With regards to the OP's question regarding "Why?"... I gave him one reason. Once again, no it's not one that the general public would bring it. But it is one that a WIS might bring up. Keep in mind that the OP found out that TAG Heuer doesn't get the level of respect he thought it would... _After he found WUS, and came here._

This is a forum full of enthusiasts/collectors. Sure, once in awhile we get a new member who simply wants to buy a nice watch. Perhaps for himself or a loved one. And has decided he either doesn't want to spend Rolex prices or is curious if there are other brands out there which can compete with Rolex. But those members are not even close to what the average member is on WUS. Plus, those members tend to never come back once they get the answers to their questions. An enthusiast/collector's take on why TAG Heuer doesn't get a huge amount of respect compared to other luxury brands, well; that's going to get certain responses that members of the general public aren't going to give.



> So I continue to contest the assertion that those that failed to mention the plastic spacer issue apropos TAG's WUS reputation were being disingenuous at all.


We're just going to have to disagree on that point. Not knowing about it is one thing. So is knowing about it, but not knowing that such spacers can dry out and break apart. So, is knowing but not caring since one believes finding a spare spacer will be the easiest thing in the world to do. But when someone knows it's an issue, chooses not to mention it because it might make one of their favorite brands possibly look bad... Well, those individuals are indeed being disingenuous.



> And while I applaud your commitment to detail in bringing up the issue, and agree with many of the things you've said and have been interested in both what you have had to say and the rigorous manner in which you have stated it, I fear you are being too ambitious in holding even those who do not fully share your views to your particularly exacting standard of disclosure.


An honest question asked by a fellow enthusiast on a forum such as this one, deserves an honest answer. I see it as simple as that. Never thought of it as holding others to a very high or exacting standard. If one wasn't aware of the use of plastic spacers by TAG Heuer or honestly thought it wasn't a big deal, then not mentioning would be understandable. Otherwise, if one knows, then help out the fellow enthusiast who is obviously asking simply out of curiosity.


----------



## Monocrom (Nov 11, 2010)

kelrod said:


> Can you share the photo ?


Only if one of the moderators approves it. As I said earlier, it's not my pic. and I can't give credit to the one whom it belongs to.

But here's the video review of the Carrera on youtube that I mentioned as well. (Though the reviewer says chapter ring instead of spacer.) He mentions exactly what he found inside when he opened up his TAG Heuer compared to his Longines. The review is a bit long. Skip to about 4:30, and watch starting from there.


----------



## Wisconsin Proud (Jun 22, 2007)

"TOG" lol.......


----------



## Richerson (Jun 18, 2006)

Guess i'll just have to take the pain of wearing my aquaracer for 20 years


----------



## Wisconsin Proud (Jun 22, 2007)

dont let that plastic spacer get wet. it will disintegrate!!!


----------



## Monocrom (Nov 11, 2010)

Wisconsin Proud said:


> don't let that plastic spacer get wet. it will disintegrate!!!


Actually, getting it wet would keep it from drying out. ;-)


----------



## Richerson (Jun 18, 2006)

Will do thanks - I'll leave the crown open when I'm off swimming

so if that's the case I'll ask the service guy to wet the plastic spacer during a service ? Maybe in oil


----------



## Monocrom (Nov 11, 2010)

Richerson said:


> Will do thanks - I'll leave the crown open when I'm off swimming


Yeah for the benefit of any new members who might find this topic... Don't do that.


----------



## pronstar (Dec 28, 2013)

Since this has become a "my watchmaker said..." thread, I'll choose to believe the post below.

Which echoes what my "watch guy" said. 
I brought up the "spacer concerns" from this thread, and he just laughed.



Richerson said:


> I decided to ask my own watch guy the same question.
> 
> I've used him for 10 plus years and he's fix many watches I've flipped
> 
> His answer was that you can buy almost any configuration of plastic movement holders and it's fairly simple to replace one even if some small doctoring is required. He went on to say that with a little improvisation it's possible to get anything to fit.


----------



## Monocrom (Nov 11, 2010)

pronstar said:


> Since this has become a "my watchmaker said..." thread, I'll choose to believe the post below.
> 
> Which echoes what my "watch guy" said.
> I brought up the "spacer concerns" from this thread, and he just laughed.


Which ironically would put him in the minority since both of the other two consulted watchmakers agree that plastic spacers can realistically dry out inside watch cases.


----------



## drunken monkey (Jun 22, 2011)

ok, if you're going to talk at length about it, at least get the mechanics right.
They don't "dry out".

Plastics fail because they absorb moisture from the air which alters their structural properties. More often than not, they don't go brittle, they go soft and crumbly.

And lets be clear here, this literally can take decades to happen.


----------



## samer0214 (Aug 11, 2013)

at2011 said:


> The problem with Tag Heuer is that they stop servicing their own watches, some for even less than 30 years. The worst part is that these must have spares aren't available on the gray market. In 30 years or less, your 2k Tag Heuer quartz watch will be a 2K paperweight. Now wouldn't it have made more sense to buy an automatic for that much money instead?


I wholeheartedly agree, speaking from personal experience. Although admittedly my Heuer is not a 2K one (it's the 1000 series diver), it's a special watch to me, as it was the 1st "nice" watch I bought back in 1980. About 10 years ago, the movement stopped working on it, and when I took it to my AD for repair, I was told that TAG no longer had the parts for it. I ended up fixing it with a non-TAG quartz movement. Now that I would like to replace the bezel and insert, they are both not available from the factory either. And this on a model that was no doubt manufactured by the thousands!

That to me, is one of the reasons why I personally am not very enthusiastic about the TAG brand.


----------



## carton (Nov 30, 2013)

Monocrom said:


> Why hunt down a replacement plastic spacer at all?


Not disagreeing with you here...not sure what you're arguing against.



Monocrom said:


> None of the recognized High-End brands use plastic spacers. (They use metal ones or make sure that the movements fit perfectly inside the cases.)


So you found the info on the Royal Oaks?



Monocrom said:


> It honestly doesn't matter which industry we're talking about. If a company is marketing itself as a luxury brand, is seen by the general public as a luxury brand, but then uses a specific part (in this case plastic spacers) which are identified by knowledgeable individuals as something used in only cheap products from that industry... Then it hurts that brand's reputation for making quality products. It *absolutely *does so.


No. So you think AP's brand reputation should've never recovered from the release the Royal Oak because comparable watchmakers of the time thought steel was beneath them? Are Furla bags not luxury enough because the're made of plastic? How about Samsonite suitcases? Any watchmaker who uses titanium? Any artist that sketches on paper instead of canvas? Wears fake fur? Uses composite materials to make airplanes? Should the Oysterquartz forever tarnish Rolex's image?
Regardless, you can use any criteria you want on making a value judgement. Its *absolutely *your prerogative. I wouldn't quite share your idea that just because a material is seen as cheap it should be completely taboo for luxury brands to use it. And I struggle to adjudicate criteria, used to proffer a decision on what impact on a watchmakers reputation should a manufacturing decision have, to be *absolute *or *objective*. In my subjective opinion, any such criteria would be irredeemably subjective.



Monocrom said:


> Another point I'm trying to make is that there's no need to stock replacement plastic spacers at all. No need for a watch owner to try to hunt down a replacement spacer if TAG Heuer or any brand decides to no longer stock those spacers... Just use a metal one. It's such a simple solution.


Again, who are you arguing against on this forum who stated that they actually preferred the plastic spacer? Is there an unhide post button I am unaware of?



Monocrom said:


> Also, I don't honestly understand what you mean by you don't plan on ever opening up the caseback?


 Just that I'm probably never going to see the spacer in my life. So I got that going for me, which is nice.



Monocrom said:


> There's a good chance you'll still end up peeved.


There's a chance, that's what I'm worried about, but I have yet to see any real evidence that it is in fact a good chance. It seems like plastic spacers have a good chance of lasting over twenty years. And I'll take my chances that at least I'll be able to have a new one 3D printed by then if I need it. I would rather not have to need it. I would rather the watch have a (insert any word of your choice here) metal spacer. But I'm becoming less and less bothered by the plastic one. And honestly I'm much more worried about my chances of drying out and becoming brittle in twenty years than my watch's.



Monocrom said:


> I'm not saying they do. With regards to the OP's question regarding "Why?"... I gave him one reason. Once again, no it's not one that the general public would bring it. But it is one that a WIS might bring up. Keep in mind that the OP found out that TAG Heuer doesn't get the level of respect he thought it would... _After he found WUS, and came here._


I'm perfectly ok with you providing your take, I've never said anything against you voicing your opinion: I just don't think that it was particularly apropos to the question. But I still know of no one who *hates *TAG Heuer mainly due to their use of plastic spacers. And yeah, you don't count: because from what you've said, you don't *hate *TAG Heuer nor think it overrated as a brand.



Monocrom said:


> If one wasn't aware of the use of plastic spacers by TAG Heuer or* honestly thought *it wasn't a big deal, then not mentioning would be understandable. Otherwise, if one knows, then help out the fellow enthusiast who is obviously asking simply out of curiosity.


You seem to know a lot more about the true opinions and intentions of the members you're referring to than is attainable through what was posted in this thread. If that's the case, can't you just state something factual along the likes of "several people who replied to this thread have previously told me they find plastics spacers to be serious reliability issue and and/or an earned stain on TAG Heuer's reputation.", for clarity's sake?



Monocrom said:


> I'm sorry, but in the paragraph above, I'm just seeing one example after another of trying to rationalize away why the use of plastic spacers is perfectly fine for a luxury brand to use. I don't believe that what I've posted is subjective at all.


I would imagine a real die-hard TAG man would not rationalize away your arguments in the fashion that you believe I have. I picture the type going in the opposite direction. They might state that true haute horlogerie is basically sold as jewelry, and that the use of metal spacers is just for show, and to get purists of the world off their backs for not having a better designers and a better fit for their movements for mere cents. Or argue that TAG Heuer has a long and earned history of being concerned mainly with accuracy, sticking with quartz for longer than most in spite of higher premiums to be had elsewhere and investing millions in developing the most accurate mechanical chronogaphs in the world, year after year. Even contend that the Green Monster probably holds up much better than a Sky Moon Tourbillon to ten times as much abuse. They might even go on to say that the very accomplished engineers at La Chaux-de-Fonds, after having surely spent thousands of francs investigating how to stabilize high speed chronometers, and thousands more developing the Advanced Dynamic Absorber for the Monaco, might have slightly better idea than even your trusted watchmaker on whether or not a hollow plastic spacer makes for good shock absorption.

Maybe that's the case you want to go to bat against. Have at it. Enjoy yourself, _objectively _if need be. But the truth is that no one here has (seriously) made the argument that luxury brands should use plastic spacers. It's just that some of us have come to the conclusion it might not a major concern and therefore don't consider the use of plastic spacers to be a brand-tarnishing issue. Yeah, maybe there's a hint of denial in what some of us are saying. Maybe some posters may have come in defense of the brand due to concern over pre-owned prices cratering due to this issue (although I get the feeling most of us plastic-spacer-afflicted expect to hold on to our timepieces). But maybe some of us, deigning ourselves no paragons of objectivity, have managed to at least partially overcome our own biases and learn from your arguments; but have come away with slightly different conclusions in the process. We are not the droids you're looking for.


----------



## Redrum (Sep 17, 2008)

No one in the real world hates them, it's just a couple of weirdos that spend waasaay too much time on some watch forums.


----------



## Monocrom (Nov 11, 2010)

carton said:


> So you found the info on the Royal Oaks?


Concerning AP's use of rubber in that line of watches? No.

Just dealing specifically with _plastic_. Two different materials.



> No. So you think AP's brand reputation should've never recovered from the release the Royal Oak because comparable watchmakers of the time thought steel was beneath them? Are Furla bags not luxury enough because they're made of plastic? How about Samsonite suitcases? Any watchmaker who uses titanium? Any artist that sketches on paper instead of canvas? Wears fake fur? Uses composite materials to make airplanes? Should the Oysterquartz forever tarnish Rolex's image?


Let's take them one at a time. Steel is no longer considered a material associated with cheap watches. In the example I gave regarding LEDLenser, the 3AAA battery-carriers have always been associated with very cheaply-made lights. Have always been a blatant example of a flashlight company cheaping out. (At least to knowledgeable flashlight enthusiasts/collectors.) Always been that way. Hasn't changed. And objectively speaking isn't even remotely likely to change.

$250 for a bag made from plastic? Some of them see-through?? I'm sorry, no offense towards you... I honestly hadn't heard of Furla bags before you mentioned them. Did a Google search and nearly burst out laughing. In the case of Furla bags, yes; the use of plastic absolutely cheapens any reputation of luxury that particular brand might have. I'm not into hand-bags. I have dated some women who had excellent taste. I've seen a wide variety of luxury hand-bags over the years. I've never seen one of them walk around with or even mention "Furla."

You consider Samsonite to be a luxury brand? I genuinely find that odd. Yes, Samsonite is well-known as a luggage brand. But far from a luxury brand. And their prices reflect that.

You consider Titanium to be cheap?? I've seen it used in a variety of different products in a variety of different industries. The one thing that is consistent in every industry that uses it... Not cheap. Often far from it. It's an excellent material to use in a watch that a brand wants to promote as a luxury timepiece. The big issue is that traditionalists equate weight with quality, when it comes to watches. With titanium, that weight is greatly reduced compared to the same model that uses a steel case. But titanium itself is an excellent material. I have a handful of different EDC items made from titanium. Absolutely excellent.

Art is a world onto itself. The richest "artist" in the world right now, is little more than a con-_artist_ who creates garbage and is very charming (as are all con-artists) in convincing his wealthy patrons who have no eye for real art, that what he creates are masterpieces worth hundreds of thousands of dollars; or even millions. I've seen his so-called "creations." Along with those of other con-men pretending to be artists. Art is the creation of beauty. Art exists for its own sake. No practical purpose at all. Keep those in mind, and differenciating between Art, and crap presented as Art becomes ridiculously easy. Speaking of crap, in some cases; I mean that literally. (Imagine going to an Art exhibit and seeing a normal painting that has been smeared with feces from the so-called "Artist." Oh by the way, he bought the painting at the Dollar Store. Yeah....... No. More like Hell no.)

Assuming we're not including the con-artists masquerading as artists, and fooling wealthy patrons who are genuinely unsophisticated that they can't tell real Art from garbage; we still encounter the fact that Art is a world onto itself. An unknown but talented artist could create something incredibly beautiful. Something that touches the soul of everyone who sees it. Something that brings a tear to one's eye because it is so beautiful... It doesn't matter if he painted it on a traditional canvas or on the sidewalk. (And I've seen some incredible works of Art that deserved to be called "Masterpieces" which were drawn on the sidewalk by unknown artists.) But let's say that incredible work of art was created on something that could be bought, picked up, taken home, and hanged on one's wall. Let's compare that to a scribble drawn by a very popular artist who once used to put in real effort in the past. He could make that scribble on a cocktail napkin and sign it. Which of those two creations would likely fetch an obscene amount of money, and which one can be bought for about $10? In the Art world, _who_ you are counts far more than what you've created, how beautiful it is, or whether it was created on a traditional canvas or a piece of paper. That's sad. That's genuinely sad. But in the World of Art that's just how it is.

Nowadays, any Lady who wears anything BUT fake fur; is likely to get assaulted by the Animal Rights wackos. I love animals. I've donated to the ASPCA. Just please don't lump me in with those sometimes violent fanatics who think that an animal's life is on the very same level as that of a human-being's. And I realize I'm skating dangerously close to the edge of turning this into a politics discussion, so I'll move on from fake fur.

Using composite materials to make certain types of airplanes makes sense. Some folks say that if the Black Box is guaranteed to survive a crash, why not make the entire plane out of the same material as the Black Box. Ignoring the obvious reason that human-beings would die from the impact anyway, it's just easier to point out to those asking that question that the plane would be too heavy to actually take off if it were made from the very same material as the Black Box.

Hell, some composite materials are a great way for some companies to jack up prices. Want a bicycle with a light-weight carbon-fiber frame? It'll cost you quite a premium compared to getting the same model with a more traditional aluminum frame.

As far as the old argument regarding quartz vs. mechanical watches, I never bought into the B.S. that for a brand to be seen as "Upscale," it simply must get rid of all of its quartz offerings. Rolex has nothing to be ashamed of with regards to it's quartz offerings in the past.



> Regardless, you can use any criteria you want on making a value judgement. Its *absolutely *your prerogative. I wouldn't quite share your idea that just because a material is seen as cheap it should be completely taboo for luxury brands to use it. And I struggle to adjudicate criteria, used to proffer a decision on what impact on a watchmakers reputation should a manufacturing decision have, to be *absolute *or *objective*. In my subjective opinion, any such criteria would be irredeemably subjective.


I'm sorry but once again, I cannot agree with you. Yes, one can use any criteria. But an objective one would be to compare industry standards for lower-priced brands vs. luxury or High-End brands within an industry itself. If a specific material is used for a specific application across the entire industry, then that's one thing. If there's a clear cut variation, then that's something else. And once again, it is very telling that High-End brands simply don't use plastic spacers. Most Luxury brands don't use plastic spacers. Quite a few Near-Luxury brands also don't use them. The industry standard for what's found inside a luxury watch, TAG Heuer is the exception to the rule.

Open up the casebacks from a wide variety of watches from a wide variety of different price-ranges, one sees plastic spacers used in very inexpensive timepieces. Going up in price as each caseback is examined, one finds fewer and fewer watches that use plastic spacers. Eventually, when one gets to the recognized High-End models, they won't find any at all. Looking at what's found across the watch industry, a plastic spacer is common as dirt inside of very inexpensive automatics. But very rare inside of luxury watches. And then one notices that those types of spacers are used inside of TAG Heuers costing thousands of dollars.

From an objective point of view, that's surprising and baffling. Why is TAG Heuer using something in the construction of their luxury watches, that is typically found in only very inexpensive watches from lower-tiered brands? I mean, if luxury brands start to use the same types of parts commonly found in inexpensive/bargain brands; then what's the point of paying more for those luxury brands? And, what is it that then makes them "luxury;" which would then command a bigger premium over lesser-priced brands? I'm sorry but simply increased prices doesn't automatically make any brand a luxury one. There's more to it than that.

I get it, there's more to a luxury watch than simply the parts used inside of it. (Though any WIS will take notice of what's contained inside.) Still... Seiko has nice cases. Even a cheap Seiko 5 looks very nice with the details taken care of.



> Again, who are you arguing against on this forum who stated that they actually preferred the plastic spacer? Is there an unhide post button I am unaware of?


No one has said that they prefer it. Though clearly you and I are seeing the same posts from other members. Some are saying that it's no big deal that TAG heuer is using cheap plastic spacers inside their luxury watches, while their direct competitors use metal ones.



> Just that I'm probably never going to see the spacer in my life. So I got that going for me, which is nice.


I honestly don't understand the rationale behind that type of thinking. Not as though this is solely a cosmetic issue that can be solved thanks to a solid caseback. Honestly, if the absolute biggest disadvantage to a plastic spacer was that it looks ugly... I'd be wearing a TAG Heuer WAN 2110 on my wrist and not even typing this post.

Granted, for some it'll be "out of sight, out of mind." For others... You know it's down there. Hiding behind that caseback.



> There's a chance, that's what I'm worried about, but I have yet to see any real evidence that it is in fact a good chance. It seems like plastic spacers have a good chance of lasting over twenty years.


I wouldn't be satisfied with 20 years. For a luxury automatic? Lasting that long is like a new car lasting you 20,000 miles. With care and proper servicing, it (the watch or the car) should easily last longer than that. As WIS, but not as watchmakers, neither one of us is likely to see plastic spacers dry up and break apart often enough to call it seeing _"... any real evidence that it is in fact a good chance."
_
Sometimes you have to take an experienced, skilled, and respected professional at his word.



> And I'll take my chances that at least I'll be able to have a new one 3D printed by then if I need it. I would rather not have to need it. I would rather the watch have a (insert any word of your choice here) metal spacer. But I'm becoming less and less bothered by the plastic one. And honestly I'm much more worried about my chances of drying out and becoming brittle in twenty years than my watch's.


Yeah, I'm worried about my parts getting worn out ahead of their time too.

Must admit, 3D printing has its possibilities.

To me, I'd like to be able to pass my watches down someday. Don't have kids of my own. But there's a good chance that'll change down the road. Even if it doesn't, I do have a niece and nephew. Both very young. Both adorable. I'd like for them to at least each have one of my watches after I leave this world for a better one. If I'm paying several thousands of dollars for a luxury watch, it better outlive me by several decades.



> I'm perfectly ok with you providing your take, I've never said anything against you voicing your opinion: I just don't think that it was particularly apropos to the question. But I still know of no one who *hates *TAG Heuer mainly due to their use of plastic spacers. And yeah, you don't count: because from what you've said, you don't *hate *TAG Heuer nor think it overrated as a brand.


True. I still consider it to be a negative. But must agree that it doesn't fall into the category of reasons why some hate the brand.



> You seem to know a lot more about the true opinions and intentions of the members you're referring to than is attainable through what was posted in this thread. If that's the case, can't you just state something factual along the likes of "several people who replied to this thread have previously told me they find plastics spacers to be serious reliability issue and and/or an earned stain on TAG Heuer's reputation.", for clarity's sake?


Honestly, if I clarified that statement further; I believe it would cause this topic to degrade horribly. (As those members whom I'm referring to would make angry and defensive posts.) Truthfully, I'm sure some of them would be happy if this topic degraded to the point that Eeeb was forced to lock it. You and I have had a great, thought-provoking discussion. Not everyone is interested in that... unfortunately.



> I would imagine a real die-hard TAG man would not rationalize away your arguments in the fashion that you believe I have. I picture the type going in the opposite direction. They might state that true haute horlogerie is basically sold as jewelry, and that the use of metal spacers is just for show, and to get purists of the world off their backs for not having a better designers and a better fit for their movements for mere cents. Or argue that TAG Heuer has a long and earned history of being concerned mainly with accuracy, sticking with quartz for longer than most in spite of higher premiums to be had elsewhere and investing millions in developing the most accurate mechanical chronogaphs in the world, year after year. Even contend that the Green Monster probably holds up much better than a Sky Moon Tourbillon to ten times as much abuse. They might even go on to say that the very accomplished engineers at La Chaux-de-Fonds, after having surely spent thousands of francs investigating how to stabilize high speed chronometers, and thousands more developing the Advanced Dynamic Absorber for the Monaco, might have slightly better idea than even your trusted watchmaker on whether or not a hollow plastic spacer makes for good shock absorption.
> 
> Maybe that's the case you want to go to bat against. Have at it. Enjoy yourself, _objectively _if need be. But the truth is that no one here has (seriously) made the argument that luxury brands should use plastic spacers. It's just that some of us have come to the conclusion it might not a major concern and therefore don't consider the use of plastic spacers to be a brand-tarnishing issue. Yeah, maybe there's a hint of denial in what some of us are saying. Maybe some posters may have come in defense of the brand due to concern over pre-owned prices cratering due to this issue (although I get the feeling most of us plastic-spacer-afflicted expect to hold on to our timepieces). But maybe some of us, deigning ourselves no paragons of objectivity, have managed to at least partially overcome our own biases and learn from your arguments; but have come away with slightly different conclusions in the process. We are not the droids you're looking for.


An open and honest discussion... That's all I'm looking for. From my view. Looks like I found it. That's the main thing.


----------



## Richerson (Jun 18, 2006)

Regarding the watch marker topic


After some very quick googling i found a number of sites and forum topics including one from watchuseek detailing just how you replace and repair movement spacers, even replacing movements of a different size into different cases 


Anyone can look for themselves


----------



## drunken monkey (Jun 22, 2011)

Richerson said:


> After some very quick googling i found a number of sites and forum topics including one from watchuseek detailing just how you replace and repair movement spacers, even replacing movements of a different size into different cases


I'm still at a loss as to why it is thought that you can't machine a replacement part out of whatever material you want to, be it plastic or metal.


----------



## Richerson (Jun 18, 2006)

No one knows why tag heuer have used a plastic spacer in a luxury watch, the cost saving is one idea. 


Or is it that actually these spacers do offer shock protection and during testing It was found that when said spacers were used the movement survived bigger impacts. 


Now I know people will jump in saying it offers no better protection, but without actually knowing or seeing real test data it's all guess work


----------



## Nauticqua (Nov 27, 2013)

While upon opening my waf2010 case back, I was actually surprised to see it had a plastic spacer. My first thoughts were, "wow, that's kinda cheap". The more I look at the piece itself though, it does not really look cheap and flimsy, though it is plastic.

Here is a pic of my old aquaracer for everyone to see:



















Judge for yourselves. I could see that being potentially helpful in shock absorption. Much better than a steel against steel spacer.


----------



## Richerson (Jun 18, 2006)

Does anyone have proof that a plastic movement space can't be replaced other then anecdotal quotes from a watch maker when tones of websites state that not only can you replace the movement holder it's also quite reasonable to replace a whole movement and it's spacer in any given watch case. Don't forget you can buy empty watch cases for projects. 


Does anyone have proof that the current spacers in the tag heuer lines will disintegrate in 20 years time?


Do you know what type of plastic Tag use?


Other then a cosmetic appearance when the case is removed I fail to see how anyone can come to the conclusion that this is an issue, its disappointing I'll agree but if a plastic spacer has saved my watched from failure due to shocks I thinks it's a good reason to use one. 


The fact remains a much bigger issue with tag and a lot of watch brands is when the watch is 20 plus years old it's just luck it you can get parts that have failed regardless of weather it's hands dial, or a bezel, plastic spacer. 


Just look at rolex - they no longer stock parts for the precision movements from the 80s, rolex and only rolex can make the parts so if you have said watch and it requires a part you are stuck with a paper weight. 


Tag heuer has the advantage that it uses very standard watch parts that any watch maker can source, movement wise.


All I can go on is I have a watch that not only keeps perfect +3 a day time, it has great bezel and crown alignment, and there's no flaws on the watch face even under magnification and has take a lot of abuse given I don't take it off even to sleep in. 


Ok I'll face the spacer issue in 20 years time if the watch lives that long, it's a beater, it's designed to be worn and maybe just maybe it can be repaired 


until then everyone is guessing


----------



## Eeeb (Jul 12, 2007)

samer0214 said:


> I wholeheartedly agree, speaking from personal experience. Although admittedly my Heuer is not a 2K one (it's the 1000 series diver), it's a special watch to me, as it was the 1st "nice" watch I bought back in 1980. About 10 years ago, the movement stopped working on it, and when I took it to my AD for repair, I was told that TAG no longer had the parts for it. I ended up fixing it with a non-TAG quartz movement. Now that I would like to replace the bezel and insert, they are both not available from the factory either. And this on a model that was no doubt manufactured by the thousands!
> 
> That to me, is one of the reasons why I personally am not very enthusiastic about the TAG brand.


TAGHeuer appears to have a 20 year stocking level for parts... i.e. a 20 year supply. Patek Philippe has an infinite level as they claim they will even make parts for you. Of course you can buy 20 TAGs for the price of 1 PP... and service 20 TAGs for the price of 1 PP service.

They could go to a 30 or 40 year stocking level. But price points would rise even higher and many would complain they could not afford TAGs. It is a compromise.

I am curious as to where you found a watch with a Heuer quartz movement. All their movements were ETAs for which many replacements are available. It is actually one of the good reasons for buying them, replacements are easily available. Now, I admit the replacement will not have the TAG Heuer date stamp... but they stopped putting those stamps on movements decades ago.


----------



## kelrod (Dec 17, 2013)

The Tag Huerer hate debate in 2009. The CEO, C. Baggins at the time responding to critics about seiko movement in the 1887.

https://www.watchuseek.com/f2/tag-h...manufacture-cal-1887-bought-seiko-336032.html


----------



## justbecauseIcan (May 8, 2013)

Jup, and again, all this is WIS specific "nitpicking" in the great scheme of things. The extreme majority of TAG customers would not even come across the mere thought that any movement in their TAG is anything other than made by TAG. In the end, that's what people believe they are actually doing. Non-WIS buy a watch from xy because they have a perception that they are a quality watch maker and most people are extremely surprised to learn that some cheap Invicta runs on the same movement as their "luxury watch" from a "Swiss watchmaker". As long as they rename a Sellita to "Calibre 5" and a 7750 to "Calibre 16" and so on, it all sounds exclusive. Little do most people know that the vast majority of watch brands and pretty much all in the mainstream sector don't do much more than assemble casings around the same old movement. That these Calibre jokes are nothing other than fluff becomes clear when they actually substitute an ETA with a Sellita or other and still call it the same Calibre, when it is technically not the same movement anymore (copy or not, 1 jewel difference or not, it is not the same and that's the end of it).

I just had that discussion last week when someone asked me about Breitling and how good their watches are. Reminds me of the days when I thought what watch brands boast about on their websites has any significance at all.

I've owned my share of different grade ETAs and in the future, unless they've used the Chronometer version with plenty of movement modifications and a reasonable amount of decorative, brand-distinctive touches to the finish, I will not be interested.

If I was to make these decisions, I would also fake exclusivity to seduce the dumb masses and give sales persons some french words to throw around instead of pleasing the angry WIS freaks.



kelrod said:


> The Tag Huerer hate debate in 2009. The CEO, C. Baggins at the time responding to critics about seiko movement in the 1887.
> 
> https://www.watchuseek.com/f2/tag-h...manufacture-cal-1887-bought-seiko-336032.html


----------



## Monocrom (Nov 11, 2010)

Richerson said:


> Regarding the watch marker topic
> 
> After some very quick googling i found a number of sites and forum topics including one from watchuseek detailing just how you replace and repair movement spacers, even replacing movements of a different size into different cases
> 
> Anyone can look for themselves


Links, please. Would love to check those out. Though honestly, how do you replace a broken spacer with one of a different size? The size of the movement inside the watch hasn't changed. Nor has the room inside the case.

Were these topics discussed by watchmakers or just enthusiasts/collectors posting what they believed to be true?


----------



## Monocrom (Nov 11, 2010)

Richerson said:


> No one knows why tag heuer have used a plastic spacer in a luxury watch, the cost saving is one idea.


On a cheap Seiko, the cost saving benefit makes sense. In a luxury brand... Why? Just increase the prices a bit to cover the expense of using a metal one instead of a plastic one. TAG Heuer is a well-known luxury brand. Not as though most of their customers will get upset and buy something else. If anything, a price-hike nowadays would simply be seen as expected from a luxury brand. Any luxury brand.



> Or is it that actually these spacers do offer shock protection and during testing It was found that when said spacers were used the movement survived bigger impacts.


I'm sorry, but I've seen what the spacer looks like. Going over old ground, but once again there is no cushioning on the top or bottom of the movement. And, the spacer itself is so incredibly hollowed out that it's blatantly clear that it offers no shock protection. Which, once again, was confirmed by the watchmaker I asked. It's there ONLY as a cost cutting measure.



> Now I know people will jump in saying it offers no better protection, but without actually knowing or seeing real test data it's all guess work


No, not really. There are skilled watchmakers out there who form their opinions based on experience, not guess work.


----------



## Richerson (Jun 18, 2006)

Moderators if these links aren't valid please delete

this is the first website I found - half way down the page they take about making and replacing movement spacers

Learn Watch Movement Replacements | Watch Repair Education | Esslinger.com

watchuseek forum topics - there are loads if you look

https://www.watchuseek.com/f6/where-source-movement-ring-spacer-947546.html


----------



## Monocrom (Nov 11, 2010)

Nauticqua said:


> While upon opening my waf2010 case back, I was actually surprised to see it had a plastic spacer. My first thoughts were, "wow, that's kinda cheap". The more I look at the piece itself though, it does not really look cheap and flimsy, though it is plastic.
> 
> Here is a pic of my old aquaracer for everyone to see:
> 
> ...


I clicked on the 2nd pic. to make it bigger. It just shows what I've been saying. It's incredibly hollowed out to an extreme degree. It's plastic, not softer rubber. I don't see any shock absorbing characteristics from it.

Thank you for posting that pic. so other members could get a good look and make up their own minds.


----------



## Monocrom (Nov 11, 2010)

Richerson said:


> Does anyone have proof that a plastic movement space can't be replaced other then anecdotal quotes from a watch maker when tones of websites state that not only can you replace the movement holder it's also quite reasonable to replace a whole movement and it's spacer in any given watch case. Don't forget you can buy empty watch cases for projects.


I'm sorry but it seems you've misinterpreted my previous posts. The watchmaker I spoke to never said that a broken spacer can't be replaced at all. His take was that it could be very difficult since, according to him, you'd need a donor watch containing the same sized plastic spacer.

Why replace a perfectly good movement if the spacer is the only broken part? Why replace the entire case too?



> Does anyone have proof that the current spacers in the tag heuer lines will disintegrate in 20 years time?


Never said that all TAG Heuers have a twenty year shelf-life or that the plastic spacer inside every TAG Heuer is guaranteed to dry out within a couple of decades, and thus will easily break. As pointed out in an earlier poat of mine, it's a realistic probability. Not a flat out guarantee.



> Do you know what type of plastic Tag use?


Another topic which has already been covered. Plastic is plastic. Even the best version out there, Zytel (glass filled nylon) can also dry out and break. Plus, Zytel has a certain look to it that is difficult to describe. But one thing for sure, it doesn't look like the one used inside the TAG Heuer pictured above with it's caseback off.



> Other then a cosmetic appearance when the case is removed I fail to see how anyone can come to the conclusion that this is an issue, its disappointing I'll agree but if a plastic spacer has saved my watched from failure due to shocks I thinks it's a good reason to use one.


Let's see, based on my knowledge of the fact that metal spacers are common in the luxury watch segment. Plastic spacers are common in cheap watches. Why is a luxury brand using a component in the construction of their luxury watches that is typically only found on cheap watches built to a low price-point? A component that other luxury brands don't consider to be good enough to place inside _their_ offerings. That's how I honestly came to that conclusion. A conclusion that was confirmed by an experienced watchmaker.

I'm sorry but you're trying to rationalize why TAG Heuer uses a cheap plastic spacer. It was done as a cost cutting measure. No one has presented any evidence that it's there as a benefit to the consumer in the form of shock resistance. I've already mentioned why I don't believe it offers any at all, and that that suspicion was also confirmed by the watchmaker whom I asked. Now we have a pic. posted above that shows what I've been saying. Plastic spacers so hollowed out that there's nothing standing in the way of a shock getting transmitted to the movement itself. I could see shock resistance if TAG Heuer had found a way to insert soft rubber stripes inside the hollowed out portions, and if they fitted such an improved spacer around both the top and bottom of the movement. But that's not what they chose to do.



> The fact remains a much bigger issue with tag and a lot of watch brands is when the watch is 20 plus years old it's just luck it you can get parts that have failed regardless of weather it's hands dial, or a bezel, plastic spacer.


True... But with a metal spacer, there wouldn't even be the possibility of a need to track down a new one after 20 years or a few decades longer.



> Just look at Rolex - they no longer stock parts for the precision movements from the 80s, Rolex and only Rolex can make the parts so if you have said watch and it requires a part you are stuck with a paper weight.


Yup. No one said Rolex is perfect.



> Tag Heuer has the advantage that it uses very standard watch parts that any watch maker can source, movement wise.


TAG Heuer isn't the only brand that enjoys that advantage.



> All I can go on is I have a watch that not only keeps perfect +3 a day time, it has great bezel and crown alignment, and there's no flaws on the watch face even under magnification and has take a lot of abuse given I don't take it off even to sleep in.


Once again, TAG Heuer makes gorgeous watches. Unfortunately, none of what you've mentioned above has anything to do with long-term (several decades) of durability.



> Ok I'll face the spacer issue in 20 years time if the watch lives that long, it's a beater, it's designed to be worn and maybe just maybe it can be repaired


Beater or not, it's still a cherished TAG Heuer. Who wouldn't want their TAG Heuer to last several decades with a bit of TLC and routine servicing.



> until then everyone is guessing


Everyone expect the experienced watchmakers who make a living working on the innards of watches.


----------



## Richerson (Jun 18, 2006)

We agree that it's a shame they use such a spacer, but the original quote was that if or when such a spacer brakes without a donor watch it's not possible to fix


This isn't the case as the links show you can buy loads of movement rings in all shapes & sizes.


----------



## Monocrom (Nov 11, 2010)

Richerson said:


> Moderators if these links aren't valid please delete ...


Took a look at the links in case they get deleted. Nothing conclusive shown in the other WUS topic.

The first one though was interesting. Not sure I believe the part about melting a plastic spacer to make it fit inside a case properly. (Especially if it's soft plastic.) Also, couldn't find who authored that article? Did I miss it? Would like to research the author to verify his advice. It's the sentence on melting plastic spacers to fit that has me concerned. Thanks for posting that link.


----------



## Richerson (Jun 18, 2006)

Monocrom said:


> Took a look at the links in case they get deleted. Nothing conclusive shown in the other WUS topic.
> 
> The first one though was interesting. Not sure I believe the part about melting a plastic spacer to make it fit inside a case properly. (Especially if it's soft plastic.) Also, couldn't find who authored that article? Did I miss it? Would like to research the author to verify his advice. It's the sentence on melting plastic spacers to fit that has me concerned. "Thanks for posting that link.


No problem - glad to be of help


----------



## Minimalist1972 (Jul 15, 2013)

Wait, why is a plastic spacer inferior to a metallic spacer? It might be more cost-effective, just because I guess plastic costs less than metal, but it might also have some engineering advantages. For instance, plastic doesn't expand and contract with temperature changes. Plastic may also be break more easily, but it won't bend or warp over time. 

Also, I take it spacers in general are used because the movements are all the same size regardless of size of the cases, right? For example, all ETA 2824's are the same size, but they stick them in watches as small as 32mm and as large as 50mm, so with bigger watches they'll need spacers to hold the movement in place, right? 

These are genuine questions.

When I first heard about the plastic spacer issue--from Monocrom on this site (it could have been no other)--I intuitively shared his disappointment. But when I wondered why, I had no good answers, other than that plastic seems cheaper than metal. But that doesn't seem like an especially good reason not to buy a TAG, which seems to be Monocrom's reasoning. I mean, some Blancpain Bathyscaphes come with a NATO strap rather than a metal bracelet or a leather band. NATO strap seems cheaper than metal or leather. But who's disappointed by a BB?


----------



## pronstar (Dec 28, 2013)

Monocrom said:


> Also, couldn't find who authored that article? Did I miss it? Would like to research the author to verify his advice.


By the same token...who are you?

We get it about the spacers. Your lengthy posts have become repetitive.

But I do enjoy this thread, because something that I consider a non-issue really irritates you, and it's fun to watch LOL


----------



## vwpilot (Jan 16, 2014)

Monocrom said:


> I clicked on the 2nd pic. to make it bigger. It just shows what I've been saying. It's incredibly hollowed out to an extreme degree. It's plastic, not softer rubber. I don't see any shock absorbing characteristics from it.
> 
> Thank you for posting that pic. so other members could get a good look and make up their own minds.


It could very well be the hollowing out IS what is providing the shock absorption. Solid plastic does not give much more than solid steel. Hollowed out plastic provides a sort of spring which can give a bit when needed.

So its entirely possible that having it hollowed out like that is the entire point of using the plastic to begin with. We also do not know the type of plastic used, as was mentioned, and there are many that can last quite a long time and be very strong.

On the surface, I dont really like the idea of it either, however, I've not written it off as a reason not to buy one of their watches if I really like the design. Especially since I dont really know the specifics behind it all.


----------



## Monocrom (Nov 11, 2010)

Minimalist1972 said:


> ... These are genuine questions.


No offense but we're going over old ground. I get it... If one owns a watch with a plastic spacer inside, a luxury watch which cost thousands; hearing that the use of plastic in that regard carries zero advantages other than for the company to save money on each watch produced... Not an enjoyable feeling. So folks tend to start speculating of possible ways that it's actually better than the alternative. It's a natural response.



> When* I first heard about the plastic spacer issue--from Monocrom on this site* *(it could have been no other)*--I intuitively shared his disappointment. But when I wondered why, I had no good answers, other than that plastic seems cheaper than metal. But that doesn't seem like an especially good reason not to buy a TAG, which seems to be Monocrom's reasoning. I mean, some Blancpain Bathyscaphes come with a NATO strap rather than a metal bracelet or a leather band. NATO strap seems cheaper than metal or leather. But who's disappointed by a BB?


I'll take that as a compliment. I know... I have an annoying tendency to scratch below the surface. I don't always like what I find. (Sometimes I really regret what I find.) But not as though this issue is a pet topic of mine. (According to some, that would be the use of ceramic bezels on newer dive watches. ;-))

The nice thing about a very comfortable NATO or Zulu strap, is... Well, it's the basically custom fit to your own wrist. No getting stuck with one hole in the strap that is just a bit too loose, or the very next one that is just a bit too tight. (Damn that's annoying.) But yeah, another aspect is that you can pull it off and attach a nice bracelet or leather strap if you wish. Can't really swap out spacer materials as easily.


----------



## Monocrom (Nov 11, 2010)

pronstar said:


> By the same token...who are you?


I'm the Lizard King. Bow down before me or I'll send Jim Morrison's shirtless ghost to haunt you.



> We get it about the spacers. Your lengthy posts have become repetitive.


Lengthy?... You should have seen how long they were before I edited them down. Hell of a thing bumping up against the character limit for a single post on WUS. Ernie was nice enough to set it very high.



> But I do enjoy this thread, because something that I consider a non-issue really irritates you, and it's fun to watch LOL


I get it. Common debating tactic. Don't like an aspect someone else brought up... Pretend it's completely a non-issue. Pretend it doesn't matter at all, to anyone at all. Yeah, I'm aware of it.

Thanks for letting me use that Lizard King comment though. Just came to me off the top of my head.


----------



## Monocrom (Nov 11, 2010)

vwpilot said:


> It could very well be the hollowing out IS what is providing the shock absorption. Solid plastic does not give much more than solid steel. Hollowed out plastic provides a sort of spring which can give a bit when needed.


Not sure it's the same principle that exists in martial arts, but whenever you see someone breaking several boards of wood at a time, you'll notice they use spacers in between the boards. This creates gaps from one board to the other. When the top board is broken, energy is transferred more easily to the ones below it. Causing those to break as well. Far from absorbing the shock, the gaps help it travel further down. Breaking, for example, 5 boards is MUCH harder if one were stacked directly on top of the other.

If there were soft rubber strips inside the hollowed out portions of the spacers, then that would help with shock resistance from a side impact. Being hollowed out might actual make the shock transfer worse than being solid, or filling the hollowed out portions with soft rubber.



> So its entirely possible that having it hollowed out like that is the entire point of using the plastic to begin with. We also do not know the type of plastic used, as was mentioned, and there are many that can last quite a long time and be very strong.


Sorry, but I've covered this before. Basic formula or advanced formula, plastic has certain traits. Among them is becoming brittle if it dries out. It happens even with the most advanced plastic formula out there. Even Zytel can break apart. And from what I've seen, TAG Heuer isn't using Zytel spacers.



> On the surface, I don't really like the idea of it either, however, I've not written it off as a reason not to buy one of their watches if I really like the design.


If you like it, buy it. I'm not telling anyone not to. I just believe that a consumer should be aware of what he's getting. Including any potential, realistic, issues one might encounter later down the road.


----------



## at2011 (Jan 23, 2011)

Richerson said:


> Moderators if these links aren't valid please delete
> 
> this is the first website I found - half way down the page they take about making and replacing movement spacers
> 
> ...


A watch without its original parts doesn't hold value as the watch that does. It's ok if Tag sells affordables in the +-$200 pricepoint, not ok if you spend a lot on it. Any manufactured spacer which is not made 1:1 has the possibility of ending-up being too tight or too loose inside a watch. Too loose, it may damage something else, too tight might warp another part in high temperature. There is nothing like an OEM fit. And by the time spacer wears-out, how many watchmakers/ aftermarket manufacturers do you think will be able to make you a proper fitting plastic part? I'm not hating on Tag Heuer the watch, I just feel that customers deserve more respect from Tag Heuer the company.


----------



## Eeeb (Jul 12, 2007)

I have bought large bags of assorted sized movement rings... my watchmaker has drawers and drawers of them. I doubt if replacement requires a donor watch.


----------



## pronstar (Dec 28, 2013)

Monocrom said:


> I'm the Lizard King. Bow down before me or I'll send Jim Morrison's shirtless ghost to haunt you.
> 
> Lengthy?... You should have seen how long they were before I edited them down. Hell of a thing bumping up against the character limit for a single post on WUS. Ernie was nice enough to set it very high.


Well played.
I told you I loved this thread, and this is why |>



Monocrom said:


> I get it. Common debating tactic. Don't like an aspect someone else brought up... Pretend it's completely a non-issue. Pretend it doesn't matter at all, to anyone at all. Yeah, I'm aware of it.


I think it would be more accurate for you to accuse me of Observational Selection.
But since I only stated that it's a non-issue to me, and never stated it's a non-issue to others, I'd accuse you of coming to a Hasty Generalization :-d


----------



## GEZ7ch (May 13, 2009)

Richerson said:


> View attachment 1371010
> 
> 
> Guess i'll just have to take the pain of wearing this for 20 years


It's a wonderful 'pain' 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Richerson (Jun 18, 2006)

Eeeb said:


> I have bought large bags of assorted sized movement rings... my watchmaker has drawers and drawers of them. I doubt if replacement requires a donor watch.


Correct - a replacement is an easy find


----------



## Richerson (Jun 18, 2006)

Monocrom said:


> According to some, that would be the use of ceramic bezels on newer dive watches. ;-))
> 
> Why, what's wrong with ceramic bezels ?, the watch companies say they can last forever


----------



## Nauticqua (Nov 27, 2013)

Richerson said:


> Monocrom said:
> 
> 
> > According to some, that would be the use of ceramic bezels on newer dive watches. ;-))
> ...


----------



## justbecauseIcan (May 8, 2013)

Ceramic = brittle = a hit can cause it to crack rather than dent as aluminium would = expensive replacement

however

ceramic = pretty

so have both


----------



## drunken monkey (Jun 22, 2011)

Richerson said:


> Why, what's wrong with ceramic bezels ?, the watch companies say they can last forever


because as many people have trouble with them as they do with plastic movement spacers.


----------



## Nauticqua (Nov 27, 2013)

justbecauseIcan said:


> Ceramic = brittle = a hit can cause it to crack rather than dent as aluminium would = expensive replacement
> 
> however
> 
> ...


I don't really see that as a valid argument. How many manufactures are moving back to acrylic due to a sapphire's brittleness?

I think these parts are more often scratched on a regular basis, rather than being smashed and cracked.

The move to ceramic makes a hell of a lot more sense to me than having the anodized aluminum.

Almost every used watch you see has at least one scratch in its aluminum bezel. Unless it's a company like steinhart, that has replacements readily available, the inserts are costly to replace regardless of material.


----------



## Turkzee (Oct 25, 2010)

after carefully reading this thread and many others about Tag I still can't find the resources to hate or even dislike them
actually i am even more ready to buy a WAK2180.FT6027 than I was a couple of weeks ago
why? i like it and I think that the price is fair for what it offers - i like the ceramic bezel, the titanium, the rubber bracelet and I simply like the brand


----------



## Richerson (Jun 18, 2006)

Turkzee said:


> after carefully reading this thread and many others about Tag I still can't find the resources to hate or even dislike them
> actually i am even more ready to buy a WAK2180.FT6027 than I was a couple of weeks ago
> why? i like it and I think that the price is fair for what it offers - i like the ceramic bezel, the titanium, the rubber bracelet and I simply like the brand


nice choice - don't forget to post pictures once you have that nice new watch


----------



## vwpilot (Jan 16, 2014)

Monocrom said:


> Not sure it's the same principle that exists in martial arts, but whenever you see someone breaking several boards of wood at a time, you'll notice they use spacers in between the boards. This creates gaps from one board to the other. When the top board is broken, energy is transferred more easily to the ones below it. Causing those to break as well. Far from absorbing the shock, the gaps help it travel further down. Breaking, for example, 5 boards is MUCH harder if one were stacked directly on top of the other.
> 
> If there were soft rubber strips inside the hollowed out portions of the spacers, then that would help with shock resistance from a side impact. Being hollowed out might actual make the shock transfer worse than being solid, or filling the hollowed out portions with soft rubber.


No offense, but I dont think you quite understand the physics behind this. Your example is a poor comparison. The reason its easier to break five boards with space between them is because you're really only breaking one board at a time. When you stack five boards with no space, you're creating, essentially one board that is five times as thick and therefore, very strong. By having space, you break through the first thin board, then through the next thin board, etc.

When we talk about shock absorption, we're talking about how much it will or will not damage the item coming in contact with the spacer. Which hurts your hand more, hitting a solid thick board that doesnt give at all or hitting a thin board that does give (by breaking in your example)? Your hand is the movement and obviously receives less damage when the board gives way.

By having space or a hollowed out area, you allow the first level of the plastic to give and deform and absorb the shock, then it can return to its original shape. Air space allows for the plastic to become a spring and give, therefore absorbing shock that would be transmitted to the movement.



Monocrom said:


> Sorry, but I've covered this before. Basic formula or advanced formula, plastic has certain traits. Among them is becoming brittle if it dries out. It happens even with the most advanced plastic formula out there. Even Zytel can break apart. And from what I've seen, TAG Heuer isn't using Zytel spacers.


Again, it all comes down to the engineering behind the materials. Just because Zytel is a high quality advance plastic, it doesnt mean that it has more shock absorption properties than another "lesser" quality plastic. Nor does it mean it can last longer. There are different plastics and chemical makeups that are better for different applications and engineers know the best ones to use for the job.

There are all kinds of plastic items out there that have lasted 2, 3, 4 decades and more without fail. Who is to say this cant be done here? After all, its not like its baking in the sun, or being exposed to harsh chemicals, or being put under constant strain or abuse. I see no reason why a properly designed part, made from an appropriate chemical makeup, cant last for 50 years or more inside a watch.

Bottom line is you dont know what the engineers have designed or considered. Neither do I and I can only hope that the Tag engineers know what they're doing, only time will tell.

I'm not saying you're wrong and you have every right to buy what you want if you're not comfortable with it. I just think you're making a much bigger deal out of it than it possibly is. Who knows, maybe in ten years PP, AP, VC and all the other top tier guys are also using plastic spacers because its proven to help lengthen the life of movements by sacrificing a cheap plastic part to take the abuse that a movement may normally take.

Then again, maybe not.


----------



## carton (Nov 30, 2013)

Monocrom said:


> As WIS, but not as watchmakers,





Monocrom said:


> You and I have had a great, thought-provoking discussion.





Monocrom said:


> An open and honest discussion... That's all I'm looking for. From my view. Looks like I found it. That's the main thing.


Thanks for that. And though I'd hate disagree on a compliment, I should clarify that I do not purport to have earned my WIS badge yet. I also believe in general this has been a lively, thought-provoking and good-natured debate. However, I'm sorry but I did take issue with your description of my arguments, as well as Richerson's, as rationalizations:



Monocrom said:


> I'm just seeing one example after another of trying to *rationalize *away





Monocrom said:


> I'm sorry but you're trying to *rationalize *why TAG Heuer uses a cheap plastic spacer.


I think it is generally good for debate to allow everyone at least the pretension of having adequately attempted to strive for impartiality, and to contend on the arguments and not the arguer's motivations, particularly when they have been transparent in copping to their own biases.



Monocrom said:


> Did a Google search and nearly *burst out laughing*... I have dated some women who had excellent taste. I've seen a wide variety of luxury hand-bags over the years. I've never seen one of them walk around with or even mention "Furla."


So (tongue lodged firmly in cheek), the women you've dated wouldn't be caught dead in a $650 Furla or $8,500 Chanel tote, never mind a $250 gauche contraption bought in that prêt-à-porter rag shop that is Bloomingdales (and worn by b-list celebrities -the horror-). Good for you, my man. You clearly have very sophisticated tastes and the game and the bread to satisfy them. However, I should think a man of your means would show a little noblesse oblige in allowing some of us middle and upper-middle class folk to partake in the self-deception of considering those to be luxury items.

Which blends well into the general point I've been unsuccessfully trying to make. I'm no expert on semiotics, but from my experience and comprehension, people's definition of what qualifies as luxury item or brand vary wildly enough that coming up with an objective set of criteria to classify them as "luxury" would be nigh on impossible. Some people find the $4,000 titanium Pelagos rather utilitarian. In a similar vein, others might scoff at calling a Submariner a luxury watch, much less a Sellita-gasp-driven Aquaracer. Given the standards of luxury you generally keep, it is somewhat subjectively surprising you are not amongst the latter.



Monocrom said:


> From an objective point of view, that's surprising and baffling.


And on that note as I see it I find the notion that something can be found to objectively elicit a particular emotion such as surprise a shade self-contradictory.



Monocrom said:


> I get it, there's more to a luxury watch than simply the parts used inside of it.


But we definitely agree on here, I appreciate the concession.

Even on more tangible issues, I again consider that our opinions on those matters may not be as technically sound as you would have them be. With that disclaimer, my own analysis on the structure of the spacers would echo vwpilot, courtesy of long forgotten undergrad Physics courses and a quick trip to Wikipedia: "At normal speeds, during a perfectly inelastic collision, an object struck by a projectile will deform, and this deformation will absorb most, or even all, of the force of the collision. Viewed from the conservation of energy perspective, the kinetic energy of the projectile is changed into heat and sound energy, as a result of the deformations and vibrations induced in the struck object." In other words, since you don't want the movement to deform, it is the spacer, acting as a cushion, that has to "deform under shock for it to function" as a shock absorber. Hence, a solid (non-hollowed out) spacer made of a relatively stiff (high compressive strength) material will not deform and will transmit the majority of the impact onto the movement. If, however, a spacer is hollowed out, the horizontal edges, since pressure equals force over surface area, will have a better chance of deforming and absorbing a significant amount of shock. The amount to which it will suffer permanent deformation, creep, is largely dependent on its fatigue strength -which is usually difficult to assess- and will negatively impact the ability of the spacer to avoid eventually breaking. An optimal material for a long lasting but useful shock absorber would have a low modulus of elasticity but high fatigue stress. This tradeoff means that hollowed-out plastic or metal spacer with higher fatigue stress may last longer than a foam spacer (just due to shocks, I'm not addressing rot issues) but absorb shock less well. Or vice-versa: it would depend on the characteristics of the individual foam / plastic /metal. This is also why if situation is reversed, and you put a thin board made out of a low-stiffness (impact strength) wood (like Cedar) and put it on solid steel legs, you can break the board with a karate chop, no problem.

Or, more concisely:



vwpilot said:


> By having space or a hollowed out area, you allow the first level of the plastic to give and deform and absorb the shock, then it can return to its original shape. Air space allows for the plastic to become a spring and give, therefore absorbing shock that would be transmitted to the movement.


Again, I am not referring to the issue of plastic (on which I concede you clearly know much more about -although vwpilot seems to have made a fair point-) vs. metal. But that's my hardly demonstrative take on the hollowed-out structure of spacers I've never seen and never intend on seeing. On a further note, I would expect metal spacers, for similar reasons of shock-absorption and cost-effectiveness, to also be quite hollowed-out and not almost-centimeter-thick chunks of brass.

I allow myself such blatantly lazy speculation because, on a whole, this is not empirical research we're conducting here. We are taking sometimes very informed analysis on the merits of individual mechanical devices and mixing it with sometimes quite extensive anecdotal evidence. Add in some appeals to fairly controvertible authorities. No one is making measured assertions on the ductility or tensile strength of different materials, conducting an exhaustive force diagram examination on the different structures, developing the mechanical profiles of the different materials/structure combinations from repetitive shock and stress tests, or publishing a peer-reviewed statistical study on the relevant and significant analytics derived from long term service reports controlling for said materials and structures...and thank god for that, we'd be boring the heck out of everyone (if we haven't been doing that already), and the conversation would likely quickly advance beyond at least my own understanding.

Restating what I've previously stated several times but still warrants restating, I'm not saying this has not been a useful debate, and that the information and arguments presented have not been enlightening: quite the opposite. Even the insightful asides on flashlights and knives, topics I know even less about than watchmaking, added light and levity to the discussion. But if it's not too forward of me, I'd like to suggest you could be a smidge more realistic about the possibility that a man -or even mankind in its present state of evolution- might come into possession of the *absolute, objective, material truth *on the issue of plastic spacers on wristwatches. Or ceramic bezels. Or, really, any other contentious issues of a similar nature.

I'll add that I, for one, feel that as the discussion wore on Eeb, Richerson, (particularly) Druken Monkey, et al. have continued to make a very compelling case that your initial level of concern on this issue might be slightly overwrought. You are, I'm sure, free to continue to disagree, especially given the collegial and impartial way in you have done so.



Redrum said:


> it's just a couple of weirdos that spend waasaay too much time on some watch forums.


I may be overly sensitive or overly self-critical but I think that post might be at least partially alluding to me. And maybe also warranted. 
So good luck, good talk, and peace out. See you on another thread.


----------



## RYANBROOKLYNBOSTON (Sep 16, 2013)

I bought my Carrera in 2007. Since discovering the plastic spacer a few years ago, I’ve considered selling the watch or trading it in for something else. To say the least, I was disappointed that it was there, cradling an otherwise nice-looking movement. As TAG Heuer continues to use these plastic pieces in some of their watches–and they are likely commonplace in TH watches that were made just a few years back–I think this discussion is appropriate and maybe even important. I remain conflicted about TAG Heuer and my Carrera, unfortunately. The spacer is a large part of it. Here are some thoughts:

1. What’s under the hood–even though I can’t see it–just gets at me. Highly polished indices sparkle on the dial; they’ve been “hand applied” in a sweeping ring of silver. The movement is decorated in perlage. Through the exhibition case back, the rotor states “TAG Heuer Calibre 5” in gold text. Hidden behind steel…black plastic. Like a flat, wide bottle cap. So there’s a sense that the watch has been excellently dressed up while the undesirable part is covered. Take a look behind the curtain and it’s not quite as appealing. The metaphors about plastic, obscured from view, holding the movement in place, are unfortunately more resounding to me at times than those that are more visible on the dial or when watching the balance wheel move.

2. If you do a quick Google search for "plastic movement spacer," you'll see that they're used in lower-end watches. It’s clearly a cost saver and fine for a watch that runs a few hundred dollars; not fine, IMO, for TAG Heuer, which has marketed itself as horologically significant; one of the best brands in the mid to high-end luxury range; and the progeny of Heuer.

3. You'll see that these plastic spacers are consistently used in fakes. In fact, a plastic spacer can be an identifying feature of many knockoff high-end luxury brands.

4. Clearly there’s no technical or functional benefit to plastic here. If there was, TAG Heuer would market it, and other mid to high-end brands would use plastic as well. Perhaps we’d see spacers made of “moon plastic,” “temperature defying Carbon infused plastic,” etc. I’m sure someone would find a catchy name for it. It seems that TH has been phasing these parts out for years. But why not just stop using them altogether? TH could easily do this.

Finally, TAG Heuer continues to use plastic inside of their watches. It's as simple as that. It’s certainly affected my feelings toward my watch, so I think that the discussion of the movement spacer is appropriate and probably helpful to many. I’m sure there are many TAG Heuer owners who would be surprised to find out that this is inside of their watch. Monocrom has seen it used in recent examples, contradicting the statement made by TH to another member. This affects resale value, it perpetuates the “hate” among WIS and WUS members, and should be a considered factor when one is thinking of purchasing a TAG Heuer watch.


----------



## Eeeb (Jul 12, 2007)

I heard similar arguments when car makers switched from natural rubber to synthetics (plastics). I don't hear those arguments anymore. LOL Someday we'll stop hearing 'horrors! there is plastic in my watch'! But that day is evidently not yet...


----------



## franken21 (Jan 8, 2014)

^ that was the longest post I am yet to see on WUS.


----------



## Monocrom (Nov 11, 2010)

Eeeb said:


> I heard similar arguments when car makers switched from natural rubber to synthetics (plastics). I don't hear those arguments anymore. LOL Someday we'll stop hearing 'horrors! there is plastic in my watch'! But that day is evidently not yet...


I'm sorry Eeeb, but fact remains that the recognized High-End brands don't use plastic spacers. The vast majority of TAG Heuer's direct competitors (other luxury brands) don't use them. Even brands that could arguably be thought of as "Entry-Level Luxury," quite a few of them don't use plastic spacers. That's rather telling.

Why is it that so many brands both above, below, and at the same level as TAG Heuer; why have they decided that plastic spacers aren't suitable to use inside their watches while TAG Heuer has?

Realistically, I doubt we'll get an answer to that question. About the only thing we've all learned from this discussion, thanks to carton, is that replacing such spacers seems easier than needing a donor watch.


----------



## Monocrom (Nov 11, 2010)

franken21 said:


> ^ that was the longest post I am yet to see on WUS.


Honestly?.... Search through some of my past posts. ;-)


----------



## drunken monkey (Jun 22, 2011)

I still haven't heard/read anything that answers what difference it really makes between using a 0.20cent piece instead of a $1 one.

Slamming it as "cost cutting" is easy but that does also ignore that it could easily be more accurately be a case of not adding cost.
The two are not necessarily the same.

It also doesnt take it into account how many of those cheaper watches are Swatchgroup brands. once again, scale of economy comes in it, especially if you _are _ the manufacturer.

Back when TVR were still making cars, they didn't hand-turn metal control knobs and wiper arms because it was more "premium" or because of some sense of "added value". They did it because they couldn't afford the cost of getting tooling made for having plastic parts production and then managing the costs associated with maintaining contracts/supplies. Getting tooled up and maintaining plastic part production themselves was even more out of the question.

Making them by hand, by themselves was cheaper. 
i.e the use of metal parts was, to use the popular term in this thread, cost cutting.


----------



## k_man (Nov 30, 2013)

I miss TVR....I wish I could get a Sagaris imported here in the States...


----------



## bluefoam (May 5, 2011)

This whole arguement about spacers is out of control and irrelevant... There may be very good reason why Tag use plastic spacers. Maybe they have come up with a composite material that has properties not previously achievable... Maybe they are industry leaders in the area of plastic spacers... and that their competitiors have not yet caught up with them. Maybe they have the patent on the design and material of the plastic spacers and their competition are not in a position to follow their design lead...

Maybe they got the spacers as a prize in a packet of kelloggs coco pops.... Who cares, does it effect the quality of the watch - most likely not. Does it increase the quality function of the watch - probably. does it save massive amounts of money? - probably not, their manufacturing scales are not that large that an item like this would have massive effects on economies of scale...

I'm willing to guess that the plastic spacer is used for as number of reasons, including servicing of the watch - I'm guessing that the traditional spacer had certain problems in its design & was replaced by the plastic due to technical reasons & that it was easy to supply large quantities to watchmakers for servicing purposes...

Either way, I doubt they would mess with quality to save less that a cent a watch... yes, I estimate the cost at less than a euro cent per watch & yes I have enough manufacturing knowledge to make this assumption.


----------



## Monocrom (Nov 11, 2010)

bluefoam said:


> This whole arguement about spacers is out of control and irrelevant... There may be very good reason why Tag use plastic spacers. Maybe they have come up with a composite material that has properties not previously achievable... Maybe they are industry leaders in the area of plastic spacers... and that their competitiors have not yet caught up with them. Maybe they have the patent on the design and material of the plastic spacers and their competition are not in a position to follow their design lead...
> 
> Maybe they got the spacers as a prize in a packet of kelloggs coco pops.... Who cares, does it effect the quality of the watch - most likely not. Does it increase the quality function of the watch - probably. does it save massive amounts of money? - probably not, their manufacturing scales are not that large that an item like this would have massive effects on economies of scale...
> 
> ...


And.... Perfect example of what I was afraid of the thread turning into.

Very first sentence above says it all.

Point out realistic issues with one of someone's favorite brands, which happens to be one of your favorites too, and they get upset, defensive.... They say the entire subject is irrelevant. But then spend a couple of paragraphs on the very same "irrelevant" subject. Trying to come up with any sort of possible justification why one of their favorite brands is using something that is clearly a cost-cutting measure without the savings being passed along to the consumer.

As far as out of control goes.... If that was true, Eeeb would immediately step in to get it back under control. I'm not seeing massive Rule #2 violations all over this topic.

Plastic spacers have been around for a long time. Seiko uses them in their least expensive automatic models. From a $65 Seiko 5 to a $200 Orange Monster. If anyone is an industry leader in the use of plastic spacers, it's Seiko; not TAG Heuer. And luxury watch brands besides TAG Heuer would have looked into the use of plastic spacers. Would have adopted it if it truly offered something they could market to their consumers, and increase the premium asked for on the sale of each watch. That hasn't happened.

As far as possibly using some sort of advanced formula plastic.... I've covered that in at least two previous posts. Likely more than two. Both subjects of ordinary plastic as well as the disadvantages inherent in the advanced formula plastics out there. I'm not going to cover old ground yet again. If anyone actually knows (compared to simply wishful thinking or hopeful guessing) that TAG Heuer uses some sort of super plastic that actual excels Zytel, and has zero disadvantages compared to every other plastic formula that currently exists; then please post about it.

Does the use of plastic spacers effect the overall quality of the watch? Good question.

Let's see what all of the recognized High-End brands and most of the recognized Luxury brands have to say about this particular issue. Looks like their take on that question is a definite "Yes".... Since they don't use plastic spacers. Why not? Well, perhaps all of those other brands feel that plastic spacers aren't good enough for use in _their_ watches. An assumption on my part. But honestly, a realistic one. Thus, those other brands clearly feel that the use of such spacers would effect the quality of their offerings.

More old ground that I and others covered.... Savings involved in using plastic spacers.

Is it huge? Yes, but not on the sale of each individual watch. TAG Heuer is not a small, boutique watch brand. In terms of sheer volume of sales, if the cost reduction per watch is only a few cents at best, at the end of the year when TAG Heuer has sold all of those watches that it normally does in an average year; its Bottom Line is going to reflect a helluva lot more than just a few cents or even a few hundred dollars. Only a few cents at best per unit, large company that does very impressive sales each year, over thousands upon thousands of units each year.... Take a calculator, times the number of cents saved per unit by the total volume of sales from say a typical year. And there's your answer. Simple concept, simple multiplication. No economics degree needed. Hell, no calculator needed actually.

Unfortunately, guessing is indeed all that's going on. carton and other members at least did some research into this subject. If traditional metal spacers did have problems or issues when it came to servicing, would they still be used today in so many brands? Would those brands just sit back and happily deal with angry, upset customers year after year? (Customers who'll tell, post, and blog about the migraine-inducing servicing issues they've encountered.) Of course not.

When Sal at Spyderco knives saw that his knives were developing a bad reputation for the integral Zytel clips snapping off without owner abuse as the reason, he changed the design. No more integral Zytel clips. Too fragile. Started using metal ones that screw into the handles. Problem solved! No more customer complaints regarding clips snapping off. No more perception of lowered quality of his knives due to that issue.

If there genuinely are servicing issues associated with the use of metal spacers (actual ones, not simply guesswork), then several watch brands would no longer be using them. They would look at metal spacers as not being good enough for use inside their watches. That's not the case. No need to guess at all.


----------



## RYANBROOKLYNBOSTON (Sep 16, 2013)

Monocrom said:


> Does the use of plastic spacers effect the overall quality of the watch? Good question.


Can't say that it does. After about seven years, my Carrera is keeping +/- 3 seconds a day. But its inclusion in the watch cheapens the watch. I don't think anyone can seriously believe that there's a benefit to the use of basic plastic as a movement spacer other than saving TAG Heuer money. Or...maybe my watch contains the never publicized TAG Heuer XBR1 Zero Gravity Moon plastic? Maybe...

Also, let's remember that we're talking about ETA movements placed in standard sized cases. That is, there's no special sizing concerns possible. Case and movement are as standard as can be.


----------



## drunken monkey (Jun 22, 2011)

to recap

i) plastic spacers has _nothing_ to do with the original post's question
ii) plastic spacers takes years, if not decades to deteriorate *if* they do at all in the first place
iii) plastic spacers are far easier to replace and/or otherwise replace than it is suggested

biggest molehill I have ever seen.


----------



## RYANBROOKLYNBOSTON (Sep 16, 2013)

drunken monkey said:


> to recap
> 
> i) plastic spacers has _nothing_ to do with the original post's question
> ii) plastic spacers takes years, if not decades to deteriorate *if* they do at all in the first place
> ...


I _think _that I agree with you on points 2 and 3. I'm not too concerned about the inside of my watch crumbling before its next service. And the fact that the watches in question use ETA movements housed in standard-sized cases means that replacements shouldn't be a big issue.

But clearly the spacer issue is pertinent to the OP's query. This thread and our excellent discussion of the topic is evidence of that. The history of discussions of this issue is evidence that plastic components inside TAG Heuer watches that cost thousands of dollars is relevant to the OP's query.

I don't mean to "hate" on anyone's love for the brand. I don't think that's what anyone is trying to do. If you're a proud TAG Heuer owner, good for you. Enjoy your watch. TAG Heuer is a brand that will likely be around for a long time. It does seem that they've made (and are making) better decisions over time (excluding the decisions to make sunglasses, cell phones, and other "accessories," of course). Just look at the watches they're producing now vs. the 90s. Forums like WUS, and discussions like this, in which we pour over the good and the bad, are ultimately a positive thing for the industry. They hold brands accountable, reinforce positive trends, and further others' interest in watches.


----------



## Wisconsin Proud (Jun 22, 2007)

You could find something with each brand to write a 16 page thread about as long as there are 3-4 people that want to volley back and forth.

A coulple months ago it was the fact that TAG didnt decorate movements that sat behind solid casebacks. Fine. One person said a "respected brand like Ebel would never do that". i proved them wrong by showing my $5000 Brasilia with a common 2894. No response from that chap after I posted pictures.

Then there's the chinese bracelets, friction pins instead of screws...screws are more "luxurious" but usually are more of a problem than friction pins.

Cartier sells a $8500 Roadster with a 2894..........but peple buy it.

Yet you agonize over a plastic spacer.


----------



## underpar (Jan 26, 2009)

Wisconsin Proud said:


> You could find something with each brand to write a 16 page thread about as long as there are 3-4 people that want to volley back and forth.
> 
> A coulple months ago it was the fact that TAG didnt decorate movements that sat behind solid casebacks. Fine. One person said a "respected brand like Ebel would never do that". i proved them wrong by showing my $5000 Brasilia with a common 2894. No response from that chap after I posted pictures.
> 
> ...


All true, however the above quoted is just a small example of other mass produced brands that rip people off.

In other words, you just want people to call out other brands that are selling over-priced trinkets, much as TAG Heuer is doing these days with many of their pieces. Correct?

I have read you post, on more than one occasion, that the last few price increases would deter you from buying a new TAG, an opinion that I share as I continue to find myself turned off by the newer TAG models and price points and more drawn to the older models.


----------



## RYANBROOKLYNBOSTON (Sep 16, 2013)

Wisconsin Proud said:


> You could find something with each brand to write a 16 page thread about as long as there are 3-4 people that want to volley back and forth.


To an extent, I agree with you. But what's wrong with the conversation? Why can't we be slightly critical of watches that we spend so much interest, time, and money on and still enjoy them? Good for TAG Heuer for working on their image and their product over these last several years; moving away from cheap parts. I hope that you agree that conversations like this only better them.


----------



## Richerson (Jun 18, 2006)

I think it's important people are informed about the products they may be buying. 


What's disappointing for some people is when they have already brought the watch and coming looking to share their excitement only to find disappointment.


Either way good honest friendly discussion is healthily


----------



## underpar (Jan 26, 2009)

Richerson said:


> I think it's important people are informed about the products they may be buying.
> 
> What's disappointing for some people is when they have already brought the watch and coming looking to share their excitement only to find disappointment.
> 
> Either way good honest friendly discussion is healthily


I think keeping everyone informed is important, positives and negatives, as long as it's constructive.

Here's the deal with TAG Heuer and every other mass-produced, mega-marketed Swiss watch manufacturer...someone has to pay Tiger, Leo, Clooney and all the others, and that someone is the consumer.

If you go into it knowing that you are not just paying for the watch but instead the Brand and it's marketing then there is no reason to be disappointed. Many people are shocked to learn they have a $90 movement in their $2000+ watch but that is the reality with many of the brands we are discussing.

I find myself drawn to the micro-brand Swiss and German companies these days. When you immerse yourself in these companies, you begin to learn what a quality automatic should cost without all the marketing dollars attached.


----------



## Nauticqua (Nov 27, 2013)

I'm liking the more constructive and positive route this thread is taking. All good points guys!


----------



## Wisconsin Proud (Jun 22, 2007)

underpar said:


> All true, however the above quoted is just a small example of other mass produced brands that rip people off.
> 
> In other words, you just want people to call out other brands that are selling over-priced trinkets, much as TAG Heuer is doing these days with many of their pieces. Correct?
> 
> I have read you post, on more than one occasion, that the last few price increases would deter you from buying a new TAG, an opinion that I share as I continue to find myself turned off by the newer TAG models and price points and more drawn to the older models.


Pretty much sums it up. But other brands are like teflon - nothing sticks.


----------



## justbecauseIcan (May 8, 2013)

Wisconsin proud, I remember you saying you will never buy another TAG after encountering those silly crown issues with an Aquaracer? What changed your mind? Or am I mistaken..


----------



## Wisconsin Proud (Jun 22, 2007)

justbecauseIcan said:


> Wisconsin proud, I remember you saying you will never buy another TAG after encountering those silly crown issues with an Aquaracer? What changed your mind? Or am I mistaken..


No, not because of the crown issues. Ive had 2 AR500 watches - one with the issue and one not. Issue was taken care of in 4 weeks under warranty which I found acceptable. Since then I had purchased a slightly used AR chrono.

My reason is strictly related to the rising prices forcing me to look at other brands and secondary market should I buy a TAG.

I still love and support the brand for the product they have. Sadly, I'm no longer in their demographic for new watches.


----------



## justbecauseIcan (May 8, 2013)

Australia is worse, I got about $700 discount on a new WAK2110 but still paid hundreds more than you'd get it for in the US.

Now I'm trying to sell it after wearing it less than a couple weeks and will be at the mercy of all those guys who argue "I can get it from the US for xxxxx". Last watch I'll buy new in this country. Should've waited until June when I'll go visit family in Switzerland & Germany. Not sure whether I will actually buy a watch this time around because I am happy with what I got as a daily wearer now. Which is a first.



Wisconsin Proud said:


> No, not because of the crown issues. Ive had 2 AR500 watches - one with the issue and one not. Issue was taken care of in 4 weeks under warranty which I found acceptable. Since then I had purchased a slightly used AR chrono.
> 
> My reason is strictly related to the rising prices forcing me to look at other brands and secondary market should I buy a TAG.
> 
> I still love and support the brand for the product they have. Sadly, I'm no longer in their demographic for new watches.


----------



## Nauticqua (Nov 27, 2013)

justbecauseIcan said:


> Australia is worse, I got about $700 discount on a new WAK2110 but still paid hundreds more than you'd get it for in the US.
> 
> Now I'm trying to sell it after wearing it less than a couple weeks and will be at the mercy of all those guys who argue "I can get it from the US for xxxxx". Last watch I'll buy new in this country. Should've waited until June when I'll go visit family in Switzerland & Germany. Not sure whether I will actually buy a watch this time around because I am happy with what I got as a daily wearer now. Which is a first.


What's your daily wearer now?


----------



## Norm S (Nov 24, 2013)

My 300m aquaracer was the first real watch i bought. Unfortunately almost a year ago i was still a bit green and foolishly bought it at an AD at full retail in while vacationing in denmark. Eventhough the price is much higher than what i know it is now (especially over grey market) i havent once regretted it. Its just such a nice and reliable watch. And i dont mind the ETA movement. Just means when its maintenance time i can send to any trusted watchmaker and they'll be able to find whatever parts it needs at a much lower price. 
I guess some of the hate comes from how hard TAG markets their products. It just seems alot of bark but horologically wise not much bite. Either way i love my TAG. 









Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Wisconsin Proud (Jun 22, 2007)

Norm S said:


> My 300m aquaracer was the first real watch i bought. Unfortunately almost a year ago i was still a bit green and foolishly bought it at an AD at full retail in while vacationing in denmark. Eventhough the price is much higher than what i know it is now (especially over grey market) i havent once regretted it. Its just such a nice and reliable watch. And i dont mind the ETA movement. Just means when its maintenance time i can send to any trusted watchmaker and they'll be able to find whatever parts it needs at a much lower price.
> I guess some of the hate comes from how hard TAG markets their products. It just seems alot of bark but horologically wise not much bite. Either way i love my TAG.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Nice watch. More than likely it has an SW500 Sellita movement


----------



## Richerson (Jun 18, 2006)

It is a very nice watch - post some pictures


----------



## drunken monkey (Jun 22, 2011)

Wisconsin Proud said:


> Pretty much sums it up. But other brands are like teflon - nothing sticks.


That's not strictly true.
Whenever any Planet Ocean stops, it'll be because of the 2500C issue, whether or not it is that actually that issue causing the stoppage.
The biggest difference is that while the all know that it happens, they don't rush to shout about it as they would with things to do with TAGHeuer.

Then when something else comes up, the automatic assumption is that it is wrong/false/a lie.

There was one guy who went around in circles trying to think up of ridiculous reasons why a bracelet part might have a receipt originating from China accompanying it.
if it were TAGHeuer, it would've just been _"oh yes, of course, cheap and low quality Chinese parts, what did you expect?"_


----------



## Eeeb (Jul 12, 2007)

Folks, thank you all for a fairly civil discussion and disagreement (we can't always agree... it is a fact of life!!)

Over in Vintage the mods have had to intervene on a "you are wearing a woman's watch!" "No I am not" "Yes you are" "No I'm not" "Yes you are" subthread.

The TAGHeuer Crew has been much better behaved... My personal thanks!!


----------



## Richerson (Jun 18, 2006)

I think everyone's come up with great conversation pieces in this thread. One I've personally found very interesting. 

its nice to see the tag Heuer forum getting some action.

I have a contacted Tag Heuer via email outlining some of the questions raised within this thread and they replied by saying they have sent the questions over to the head office in Switzerland. 

If I get a response I'll post it here. One thing Im sure of after some thought is if these spacers were a shock resistance item and not just a cost cutting one they would surely advertise this, but they don't. Something that has got me really thinking. 

I still don't think you'll have an issue locating a replacement In years to come and I'll continue to enjoy my tag Heuer watches for what they are, nice expensive watches which we all have to work hard to buy

My my dad has an old watch which is now almost 30 years old and cost less then a bargain bucket of chicken at KFC and it's still going strong. I'd like to think any tag heuer can match this


----------



## RYANBROOKLYNBOSTON (Sep 16, 2013)

Richerson said:


> I have a contacted Tag Heuer via email outlining some of the questions raised within this thread and they replied by saying they have sent the questions over to the head office in Switzerland.


Thanks for doing this, Richerson.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## enricodepaoli (Feb 24, 2008)

What attracts me most to become a fan and user of certain brands, is the type of personalities that brand tends to gather. Tag Heuer people usually are very nice. That itself makes me a proud owner.


----------



## enricodepaoli (Feb 24, 2008)

Norm S said:


> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


A Tag and a Mercedes in the same picture just makes my heart beat happier


----------



## williakz (Nov 19, 2013)

Can you guys explain something to me? From what I can see, the future of timekeeping is the "atomic" watch with myriad electronic functions coupled with a "good enough" +/-15sec/month "movement." This will provide all the functionality anyone could want with cumulative accuracy unmatched by the best electro-mechanical movement in existence +/- half second FOREVER with zero maintenance and/or adjustment. So beyond the "I can afford it, you can't" factor, what's up with TAGs, Omegas, and other high-end watches going into the future? I am asking the question earnestly even though my personal bias should be obvious.


----------



## anonymousmoose (Sep 17, 2007)

I'm a new Tag Heuer owner since last week. So I thought I'd share 'why the hate'.

Although I never 'hated' Tag Heuer, they were never anything special to me personally. There are some super nice mid-high end Tag Heuers but I although like what Omega and IWC had to offer for the pricerange better. What swung me around to Tag Heuer was their current line-up. Previously when I did window-shopping I always glanced over the Tag Heuer lineup, particularly their entry level watches, but never got excited enough to take a closer look. But since their newest line-up in the F1 range, it did make me stop to have a 2nd peek. I was very impressed with the finish and detail of the current entry-level Tag Heuer lineup and it seems they have come some way since I looked at them years ago. Deal was done and I bought a very entry level F1 Grande Date. It reminds me of what the old Quartz Omega Seamasters where like quality wise. Detailed texture on dial, good applied marking... everything that I like about a watch.

So thats my story. Why I was not keen on Tag Heuer and now I am. They have evolved nicely and to me, to another level.

Also; I guess a lot of people see Tag as a bit of a lower end brand as they still make Quartz watches and sell in run-of-the-mill jewellery stores. Where as a lot of brands are now a bit more exclusive. But 10 years ago, brands like Omega was selling in those very stores. But IMO, back then the Omega's (especially at an entry level price-point) were the better watches design wise.


----------



## TimeGrooves (Sep 15, 2013)

well said, Enricodepaoli!


----------



## anonymousmoose (Sep 17, 2007)

enricodepaoli said:


> A Tag and a Mercedes in the same picture just makes my heart beat happier


I miss my Benz... 









Our new Audi is a great car, but a Benz is a Benz. There is just something about the way they are built and how they drive.


----------



## Norm S (Nov 24, 2013)

anonymousmoose said:


> I miss my Benz...
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I had one of those. Great cars the one pictured above with my aquaracer is a 2013 ML. Definitely not as agile or fast as that. But still nice to drive.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## drunken monkey (Jun 22, 2011)

in my head TAGHeuer is forever Porsche and McLaren


----------



## Eeeb (Jul 12, 2007)

williakz said:


> Can you guys explain something to me? From what I can see, the future of timekeeping is the "atomic" watch with myriad electronic functions coupled with a "good enough" +/-15sec/month "movement." This will provide all the functionality anyone could want with cumulative accuracy unmatched by the best electro-mechanical movement in existence +/- half second FOREVER with zero maintenance and/or adjustment. So beyond the "I can afford it, you can't" factor, what's up with TAGs, Omegas, and other high-end watches going into the future? I am asking the question earnestly even though my personal bias should be obvious.


So called 'atomic' watches are nice, if you can get signals. In about 50% or more of the world you can't get them reliably. Here in the Great Lakes region of the US I often go for weeks without a synch. And to have any chance of a synch I have to keep the watch in a window overnight. When I go for accuracy, I get a thermocompensated quartz. If you get a Swiss one, it can be regulated and is reliably accurate. Combining the two would be nice but no one has done it.

I have no knowledge of the 'I can afford it - you can not' aspect of TAGs. But I rarely buy new so I can always afford it, as can you!

People buy watches because they like them. When/if that ever changes the future of watches will change... but it won't.


----------



## Richerson (Jun 18, 2006)

Tag heuer second hand value is low, I've myself lost more money then I care to mention on selling tag Heuer's 


So even for the foreseeable future I believe you'll be able to pick up tag watches very cheap as long as you don't mine looking at the second hand market


----------



## Simon-77 (Sep 10, 2012)

Richerson said:


> Tag heuer second hand value is low, I've myself lost more money then I care to mention on selling tag Heuer's


Omega is like that too. That is why from now on, I only get the designs that I like the most. If I lose money, then at least I have no regrets. That being said, even the Porsche Design P6530 Titan is on my list, although PD has the worst resale value.


----------



## rjstuf001 (Jul 21, 2011)

The consensus among WIS is pretty much this: their MSRP's are way inflated when you consider the fact that they outsource their movements (ETA, Sellita and Seiko). I personally would never pay full price for a Tag but I like many of their models, in fact my last 2 acquisitions were Tags (a Calibre 5 Carrera and a ceramic Aquaracer). I purchased them used but in mint condition and at very reasonable prices. The designs and build quality are outstanding and I'm extremely satisfied.


----------



## Eeeb (Jul 12, 2007)

rjstuf001 said:


> The consensus among WIS is pretty much this: their MSRP's are way inflated when you consider the fact that they outsource their movements (ETA, Sellita and Seiko). I personally would never pay full price for a Tag but I like many of their models, in fact my last 2 acquisitions were Tags (a Calibre 5 Carrera and a ceramic Aquaracer). I purchased them used but in mint condition and at very reasonable prices. The designs and build quality are outstanding and I'm extremely satisfied.


IMHO all new watch prices are inflated :-d But I confess I am cheap LOL

TAGHeuer sources NO movements from Seiko. They did buy rights from Seiko for one movement (which they make entirely themselves) because it was still patent protected. Seiko did not have to buy rights from TAGHeuer for the original design because the parts which were originally from Heuer were no longer patent protected. I don't think the 1887 TAGHeuer movement required any rights acquisitions.

I don't know if anyone noticed but all new watches are getting more expensive! It is up to the individual's own utility curve to decide if they are worth it. Being primarily a vintage collector, used never bothers me and used is, as rjstuf001 says, much cheaper


----------



## Simon-77 (Sep 10, 2012)

Eeeb said:


> IMHO all new watch prices are inflated :-d But I confess I am cheap LOL


In that context, we all are cheap!


----------



## Richerson (Jun 18, 2006)

I haven't received a response from Tag regarding my email,. 

for people reading this thread in the future, if I've not responded after this point you can take that as I never received a response


----------



## BadBlue (Feb 17, 2014)

pbv said:


> Show me one watch brand that isn't over priced.


Timex


----------



## Eeeb (Jul 12, 2007)

BadBlue said:


> Timex


Timex is a long lived watch company. When it was called Ingersoll, it made pocket watches largely for the American market that were called dollar watches. They were low cost stamped metal watches that kept time to a minute or two every day. Every year for decades they sold more watches than all the highly jeweled pocket watch makers combined. The evolution into Timex kept that track record through the 50s when they sold (in the States) more watches than the entire rest of the watch industry combined.

There is a group of buyers who appreciate such watches even today. Few ever call them overpriced  But TAGHeuer does not compete in this market. :-d ...


----------



## drunken monkey (Jun 22, 2011)

Wait, considering how much a Timex sells for compared to their production costs, wouldn't that make them over-priced too anyway?


----------



## justbecauseIcan (May 8, 2013)

Ingersoll..haha..saw an Ingersoll Tourbillon in some small jewellery shop in a mall with staff that didn't know jack about watches... Retailed for 3500-4000 bucks or so, research revealed that it has the cheapest chinese tourbillon that powers other watches that go for $600. 

Great value.


----------



## RYANBROOKLYNBOSTON (Sep 16, 2013)

drunken monkey said:


> Wait, considering how much a Timex sells for compared to their production costs, wouldn't that make them over-priced too anyway?


Do you actually know what Timex's production costs are?


----------



## drunken monkey (Jun 22, 2011)

RYANBROOKLYNBOSTON said:


> Do you actually know what Timex's production costs are?


Now think about this before you answer, why do I need to know their production costs to know that their watches are made for less than they sell them?

I can't tell if that would be a troll fail or success.


----------



## RYANBROOKLYNBOSTON (Sep 16, 2013)

drunken monkey said:


> Now think about this before you answer, why do I need to know their production costs to know that their watches are made for less than they sell them?
> 
> I can't tell if that would be a troll fail or success.


Ah, the "troll" card. You must really feel that your arguments hold water...Unsubscribe.


----------



## drunken monkey (Jun 22, 2011)

I notice the lack of answering my question.


----------



## RYANBROOKLYNBOSTON (Sep 16, 2013)

drunken monkey said:


> I notice the lack of answering my question.


Exactly, because your question and earlier statement are flawed and illogical and because it's beneath me to correct you. I get it, you love arguing with people here. You resort to calling me a troll when you've got nothing clever to say. You have a few fans. Wow. I won't perpetuate this and I won't respond to you again.


----------



## drunken monkey (Jun 22, 2011)

Confused.

You're the one who came in here and picked my post to respond to. You're the one who opened discussion with me.


----------



## Eeeb (Jul 12, 2007)

drunken monkey said:


> Confused.
> 
> You're the one who came in here and picked my post to respond to. You're the one who opened discussion with me.


This thread is dying - jumbled and confused. I am putting it out of its misery and closing it. If anyone wants to restart the general topic, start a new thread.


----------

