# Question regarding Omega automatic watches vs. Omega quartz watches



## Teeebone

I am new so be gentle please. I have a new Quartz Seamaster on the way. I did so because I wanted an Omega watch for a long time (love the way they look and have heard great things about Omega watches) and now is a good time for me to get one. Aside from a 10 year old Tag I paid around $500 for I never had a high end watch (if you call Tag high end). In all honesty I could not even consider an automatic Omega because I just can't afford that price tag and for me personally what I spent for this one is my limit for a watch. The Seamaster Quartz fit the bill nicely. I read all the arguments and if funds were unlimited for me I would get one of each, but in the real world my only choice was the Quartz or a different brand. Anyway, after reading through several threads on this board it seems like 90% of the people here think if you are going to buy a Quartz watch just go to Wal-Mart and get one for $50 - it will work the same. Does this mean that unlike the inner workings of the Omega Quartz watches that the inner workings of the Omega Automatic watches are far superior to the cheaper automatic watches you can find? I haven't heard one person say "why spend thousands on an automatic watch when you can get a good one for a few hundred dollars." In terms of craftsmanship, are the Omega automatic watches really that superior to the Omega Quartz watches (and to other less expensive automatic watches)? If so why?


----------



## iam7head

Hi and welcome

first thing first, there's nothing wrong with an omega quartz movement, however most people tense to associate it with cheaper time piece.(and Omega's marketing to phase it out)

it all breaks down to what do you need/want, most modern quartz(even the cheap eta g10) will keep better time for far less maintenance cost, but again people buy a luxury time piece for different reason.(even for TC-Quartz/HEQ)

at the end of the day whatever tickle your pickle


----------



## Taswell

It's just that different people go for different things.
... and there is a certain snobbery that causes some people to feel that anything less expensive must be inferior.
But there's nothing inferior about an Omega Seamaster quartz.
They use the same cases, bracelets, dials* and hands as their more expensive automatic siblings.
Their movements are accurate and rugged.
And apart from members of watch forums, almost no-one would notice the difference.

The quartz SMP is just as fine a timepiece as an auto SMP and will run rings around any auto for accuracy and run perfectly if you put it down for a week.
They're fabulous watches. Here's mine.

*yeah .. I know the date window position is slightly different, cases are slightly thinner etc .. nothing that makes any substantial difference.


----------



## Runitout

Ask yourself what the job of a quality sports watch is. 

1. To tell the time. Accuracy and stability is a must.
2. To endure. Shock protection, scratches, changes in temperature, exposure to water and pressure.

Your new quartz watch does each of these things as well or better than the automatic watch. Its shock protection and guaranteed accuracy are vastly superior. And it looks, for all intents and purposes, identical.

There is nothing inherently superior about an automatic movement, in any horological or functional way. Certain automatic movements are nicer than certain quartz movements, but I would rather a watch with the Omega 1538 quartz than a bog standard 2824-2, let alone a Miyota, or a 7s26. The latter two might be fully in-house autos, but the quartz is sinply a better movement.


----------



## Teeebone

Thanks for the responses. I am hoping someone who frowns on the Omega quartz watches chimes in and tells me why is it that if one can buy a cheap reliable quartz or a cheap reliable automatic watch that we only hear that the quartz watches are frowned upon. I thought if it was an Omega watch that I was purchasing every bit of Omega craftsmanship and that the automatic feature wasn't the only thing that made Omega tick (so to speak). Is there something about the work that Omega puts into the automatic watches that sets them aside from the so called inferior brands? Couldn't someone who truly appreciates the engineering that creates the automatic movement just purchase an automatic watch for a couple hundred dollars which essentially does the same thing (as one could with Quartz at even cheaper prices)? I guess this question does not simply pertain to Omega watches as it does to high end watches in general - is the gap between the engineering of an good $200 quartz watch and a high end $2,000 quartz watch really that much less than the gap between a good $300 automatic watch and a high end $ 3,000 automtic watch (I honestly have no idea - that is the question I am asking)?


----------



## joeuk

Search on the forum for a thread, I think the title was something like "whats the most you will spend on a quartz". The build quality on your quartz is great just like the auto and as you say time keeping is also better then an auto. But I think my price limit on a quartz watch would be around the £250 price. And as for auto or mechanical wind watch it would vary from £0- £unlimited if I had the funds. Nothing at all wrong with you buying a omega quartz still a great watch to own and if you see post by M4TT very robust. Hope you understand I am and like most people dont dislike your watch because its a quartz, still a great watch, its just people have a price limit on quartz.


----------



## Mystro

I have owned a SMP quartz watch and really liked it. That being said,..... When someone buys a expensive watch, it is almost always a automatic. The reason is they want a little engine that is usually powered by their movements. A battery is impersonal and therefore the watch doesn't live by the owners movements. A automatic watch is a symbiotic relationship. The idea that gears and cogs are working away to produce a accurate time is very attractive. The quartz watch goes against the idea and what most consider blasphemy. When a Omega case shares a quart movement and a automatic movement, it rubs many the wrong way. A quartz guts in a Omega case is much like stuffing a electronic keyboard into a Steinway grand piano. Yea, it will never go out of tune but........? You get the point. I have personally reached a point in my watch collecting that even my beater watches are automatics. Yea, I have a Suunto Core but a watch that has a computer in it requires a battery and needs a digital face and in my mind is not even the same animal as my automatic watches. There I said it.:-d


----------



## Teeebone

Ok - I understand why people would choose an automatic over a quartz but I am still trying to figure out if high end watches put more work with better craftsmanship into automatic watches as opposed to their quartz watches. It isn't like you can't buy inexpensive automatic watches that are reliable. Is this simply a matter of people prefering automatic watches over quartz watches and really having little to do with the quality of the watch itself? Is an Omega automatic watch really manufactured that much better than an Omega quartz watch or is it just the fact that is it automatic that is the draw to it?


----------



## joeuk

I think people just prefer autos to quartz on here, does not mean no one owns a quartz. 
With certain models omega uses a modified ETA movement and the ETA movement is one of its higher grade movements. You have of a co-axial in omegas today which keep the watch to a great accruate time and a stable movement. With the new 8500 and 9300 these are now in house movements which will only be found in omega. Like you said the casing on yours is the same of an auto. And also like you said you can also buy cheaper autos take seiko great watch cheap price. But Omega do make a nice watch design, and again I own many cheap mechanical watches, which run good. Its not a simple case of saying lets say, you idiot why spend all that money, its a case I WANTED that watch


----------



## Perseus

Teeebone said:


> I am still trying to figure out if high end watches put more work with better craftsmanship into automatic watches as opposed to their quartz watches.


In all honesty the average quartz watch should beat the average auto on accuracy and durability 9 times out of 10. Still, most enthusiast prefer autos. Similar to how my daily driver is a Acura but my love is my '67 Mustang.



Teeebone said:


> Is an Omega automatic watch really manufactured that much better than an Omega quartz watch or is it just the fact that is it automatic that is the draw to it?


A Omega is a Omega. Both are made to a high standard and should be for the additional cost them command. If you're buying a watch simply for telling time then all watch enthusiasts are suckers for buying anything more than a $25 Timex. We spend too much money on watches because we're passionate about them and all the details and specs involved. Auto's with all their gears and levers etc. are more romantic which means watch makers (like Omega) will make more moneyselling those than they will quartz pieces.

*Personally, I'd much rather a quartz Omega than a budget auto!


----------



## refugio

Teeebone said:


> It isn't like you can't buy inexpensive automatic watches that are reliable.


Um, yes you can - look at the Seiko divers! There are so many of them that there's a rich sub-industry of companies providing mods - one of them (MKII) that grew into its own watch company!

At the moment, all 3 of my divers (I have another one incoming) are quartz. I'm particularly keen on quartz when setting the time involves a screw-down crown. My daily wearer Omega 200M with 1438 movement is within 1.5 seconds of when I set it for the DST change several months ago (damn near the accuracy of a termo-compensated 1441), I don't have to worry about putting it on the winder when I swap to one of my automatics, and a full service is less than half that of the automatic version and is required less often. Depending on how the restore of my full-size 200M works out, I am casually looking for a 2264 to become my everyday watch.

Now for a dress watch...I don't think I'll ever own a non-automatic. But for a tool watch, I can certainly see the advantages.


----------



## Teeebone

refugio said:


> Um, yes you can - look at the Seiko divers!


I think you mis-read my post. I said it isn't like you can't buy inexpensive watches that are automatic...meaning you can. But for some reason everyone talks as though there is no such thing as inexpensive automatic watches.


----------



## hidden by leaves

Teeebone said:


> But for some reason everyone talks as though there is no such thing as inexpensive automatic watches.


I really think you'd benefit from spending some more time/reading around WUS if this is your impression... in particular the Affordables forum.

Cheers,
HBL


----------



## scooby

Teeebone said:


> I am new so be gentle please. I have a new Quartz Seamaster on the way. I did so because I wanted an Omega watch for a long time (love the way they look and have heard great things about Omega watches) and now is a good time for me to get one. Aside from a 10 year old Tag I paid around $500 for I never had a high end watch (if you call Tag high end). In all honesty I could not even consider an automatic Omega because I just can't afford that price tag and for me personally what I spent for this one is my limit for a watch. The Seamaster Quartz fit the bill nicely. I read all the arguments and if funds were unlimited for me I would get one of each, but in the real world my only choice was the Quartz or a different brand. Anyway, after reading through several threads on this board it seems like 90% of the people here think if you are going to buy a Quartz watch just go to Wal-Mart and get one for $50 - it will work the same. Does this mean that unlike the inner workings of the Omega Quartz watches that the inner workings of the Omega Automatic watches are far superior to the cheaper automatic watches you can find? I haven't heard one person say "why spend thousands on an automatic watch when you can get a good one for a few hundred dollars." In terms of craftsmanship, are the Omega automatic watches really that superior to the Omega Quartz watches (and to other less expensive automatic watches)? If so why?


I had similar feelings to you. I've slowly been working my way up to higher end pieces. I fell in love with the seamster bond series and wanted one in quartz. Once I found out Omega was doing away with quartz, I ended up snatching 3 Seamasters, all in quartz. As others have mentioned, I prefer my divers to be quartz so that I don't have to over use the screw down crown every time I want to set the watch. I also didn't want to pay the high maintenance costs associated with a mechanical. I have a few mechanicals for nice occasions, but my every day wear watches are quartz. I wouldn't worry, your Seamaster Quartz is a high quality piece indeed.


----------



## Will_f

I like both. Generally I buy mechanicals because of the cool factor (I'm a mechanical engineer), but also because most quartz watches have cheaply made uninteresting mostly plastic movements. There are exceptions of course and Omega is one of them. Would I buy an Omega quartz? Yes. Would I pony up the extra money for an auto movement version? Yes, if I had the money.


----------



## Teeebone

hidden by leaves said:


> I really think you'd benefit from spending some more time/reading around WUS if this is your impression... in particular the Affordables forum.
> 
> Cheers,
> HBL


I admit that I strictly kept my time/reading dedicated to this Omega forum - all of my searches were on this forum because I wanted to see what Omega owners thought about the quartz lines. My impressions were purely based on comments made on this particular forum. Countless people who prefer automatic Omega watches mentioned you can get a good Quartz watch cheap but not one mentioned that you can also get a good automatic watch cheap. I'm learning here and I am beginning to think that perhaps it really is just all about preference as opposed to an Omega quartz watch being an inferior timepiece to an Omega automatic watch.


----------



## refugio

Teeebone said:


> I think you mis-read my post. I said it isn't like you can't buy inexpensive watches that are automatic...meaning you can...


Oops - the double negative got me!


----------



## MKIVdan

To the OP, Theres nothing wrong with a quartz Omega, How could you dog on this watch?


__
https://flic.kr/p/6669064135

I am currently working on purchasing my next omega that is an auto and the quartz for a quick go to when im in a rush. But Ive never had anyone dog on my AT cause its quartz. If anything it gets compliments out the wazoo.


----------



## iinsic

Teeebone said:


> I admit that I strictly kept my time/reading dedicated to this Omega forum - all of my searches were on this forum because I wanted to see what Omega owners thought about the quartz lines. My impressions were purely based on comments made on this particular forum. Countless people who prefer automatic Omega watches mentioned you can get a good Quartz watch cheap but not one mentioned that you can also get a good automatic watch cheap. I'm learning here and I am beginning to think that perhaps it really is just all about preference as opposed to an Omega quartz watch being an inferior timepiece to an Omega automatic watch.


As already observed, an Omega is an Omega. While Omega might be phasing out the quartz SMPs, the watch still is a superbly made piece. The early SMPs had solid case backs, so the only real difference visible to the user was the thinner case on the quartz (an advantage, as far as I'm concerned) and the lack of the sweep seconds hand.

My first SMP, bought in the spring of '96, was a quartz. I considered both the quartz and mechanical, as price was not an issue at the time. I went with the quartz for two reasons: I'd had lots of problems with the automatics in my Rolexes in the 80s and 90s, and my SM120 PDL - which was a quartz - had performed flawlessly for almost 10 years at that point. I never regretted that choice. The watch was beautiful, functional and reliable. And after 15 years, it went to live with a happy new owner in New Zealand - still going strong.

If you want a quality timepiece, the SMP will fit the bill, regardless of the movement you choose.

Rob


----------



## BlackLight

I buy watches that pique my interest. Usually the type of mechanism is tightly woven into the watch itself, for example:
I love the Speedmaster Moonwatch because I only wear it once a week, let it run down between, and it takes minimum of effort to get it wound, set and on the wrist. I could not wear it if it was automatic or battery powered.
But I also wear a X-33 once a week. Just pick it up, 1 press to activate the Day, Date, Month, Year display, and off we go. (Also have a cool movement...)









Now the Seiko SBDB001 needs attention every 3 or 4 days, because I am doing a long term accuracy test, and do not want it to run down.

The automatics are more work, but personally I think the co-ordination and ingenuity required to control the electron storm in a quartz is equally impressive as a the brilliance to design a patiently ticking mechanical symphony...


----------



## om3ga_guy

I'm not crazy about quartz (I already own the chronograph model also), but i've religiously always been a Bond fan and the Seamaster Professional has always been my #1 fav watch. 

The quartz SMP was the intro SMP to the Bond series... A lot of people mistaken this for the Chronometer...

Alec Trevelyan holding up 007's SMP next to his (in the black band)


----------



## Robby H

l love auto's. But I never hate quartz, especially for the seamaster quartz. I had the black bond quartz. I think its nothing wrong with omega quartz. It has the same build quality with the auto. 
And i really like it Especially because it had the quick-hour-change feature that really useful for me when traveling to other different timezone. Plus you dont need to set the time after a while you dont wear it, just grab and wear it anytime anywhere...


----------



## KatGirl

Firstly, congrats on your new Seamaster. It's a beautiful watch. Many of us here own at least one nice quartz watch, along with our autos. Personally, _I like *watches*._ Generally, I'm drawn to an aesthetic, and then I become interested in how it works. Most of my watches, are, indeed, autos, or manual wind. I have vintage, I have new, I have Omega autos, and an Omega quartz. In short, I have many different types of watches, at different price points. They _all_ fascinate me. Currently, I'm awaiting delivery of a watch that has _both mechanical and quartz _components. It's a small boutique brand. I'm as excited about it, as _any new _incoming. Welcome to the forum, and don't forget to post pics of your new Omega. We love pics.


----------



## Mystro

His watch also had this nice feature..











om3ga_guy said:


> I'm not crazy about quartz (I already own the chronograph model also), but i've religiously always been a Bond fan and the Seamaster Professional has always been my #1 fav watch.
> 
> The quartz SMP was the intro SMP to the Bond series... A lot of people mistaken this for the Chronometer...
> 
> Alec Trevelyan holding up 007's SMP next to his (in the black band)


----------



## KatGirl

Mystro said:


> His watch also had this nice feature..


:-s:-s I just checked my blue Bond......._Mine doesn't have that.......;-)_


----------



## ChronoScot

om3ga_guy said:


> I'm not crazy about quartz (I already own the chronograph model also), but i've religiously always been a Bond fan and the Seamaster Professional has always been my #1 fav watch.
> 
> The quartz SMP was the intro SMP to the Bond series... A lot of people mistaken this for the Chronometer...
> 
> Alec Trevelyan holding up 007's SMP next to his (in the black band)


Here are a couple of photos of the SMP use in The World is Not Enough (pic courtesy of Robert-Jan Broer). It was an automatic though and, as you can probably see, it's going to sit quite high on the wrist on account of the thickness. Just ignore those wires ;-)



Robert-Jan Broer said:


>


----------



## CrystalBall

There are advantages and disadvantages to both quartz and mechanical watches. Although most watch enthusiasts prefer mechanical, the accuracy and convenience of quartz is perfect for daily use. I personally don't suscribe to the "a mechanical watch is like a living thing/has a soul" thing. Both quartz and mechanical are inanimate objects, and the idea that one is somehow "more real" than the other is down to personal perception, nothing more. It's also true to say that you can have cheap mechanical as well as cheap quartz watches. In the Far East, you can buy locally produced mechanical watches for a few pounds. The same used to true in Europe in the 1950s and 1960s, before mass produced quartz took over the popular market. Many of these cheap mechanical watches were Swiss made to boot! So don't believe for a moment that a quartz SMP is second best. You will have an excellent watch with great accuracy, durability and low maintenance costs.


----------



## andy-g

I'm not too bothered about the internal workings of a watch , to me it's all about the aesthetics !!

When I got mine I knew I wanted a 2254 or a 2264 , there were no new 2254 available so got the alternative !!

2 years old in feb and not a moments trouble , still looks as stunning as when I got it !!


----------



## tk1971

I think some people just like the sweeping motion of the seconds hand in a mechanical. It doesn't help that the seconds hand doesn't exactly match up to every minute marker on many expensive quartz watches. This gives people a misconception that there is a lower quality standard in producing a quartz watch.

As far as technological innovation, the Seiko Spring Drive (which incorporates a mechanical movement with electronic regulation without batteries of any type) has a continuously moving seconds hand with no ticking what-so-ever.

I think the real question is why wouldn't watch enthusiasts want them all?


----------



## Teeebone

tk1971 said:


> I think the real question is why wouldn't watch enthusiasts want them all?


That in fact could very well be the real question!! To each his own as far as quartz or automatic, but I am very happy that not one person (not even the people who don't like Quartz watches) has come back in this thread telling me that the automatic features of an Omega make it a superior manufactured watch to the Omega Quartz. I guess that is why I was confused when I kept reading the "Go to Wal-Mart if you want a Quartz". Now hear is the funny part - I may actually go to Wal-Mart to get an Automatic just to try one out for a while and see if I like it....and if so my next good watch will be an Omega Automatic (if I ever come in to a little more money!).


----------



## grace2939

Teeebone said:


> That in fact could very well be the real question!! To each his own as far as quartz or automatic, but I am very happy that not one person (not even the people who don't like Quartz watches) has come back in this thread telling me that the automatic features of an Omega make it a superior manufactured watch to the Omega Quartz. I guess that is why I was confused when I kept reading the "Go to Wal-Mart if you want a Quartz". Now hear is the funny part - I may actually go to Wal-Mart to get an Automatic just to try one out for a while and see if I like it....and if so my next good watch will be an Omega Automatic (if I ever come in to a little more money!).


Greetings!
Not all automatics are equal; buy a nice quality one to begin with and I think you'll be pleasantly surprised. A number of years ago, when I first looked for an automatic (after wearing only quartz for years), the only ones I could find that were fairly rugged and yet affordable for a poor student, were Seiko dive watches, their low end 007 line with the 7S26 movement. I found them to be less than stellar in performance, with a low power reserve (skip a day wearing it and it would stop), and not very long lasting (two didn't last two years). I realize many others have had good results with these, but I decided to upgrade when I finally got some jingle in my pocket and found a new mid-size automatic James Bond Omega which has been a joy to own/wear, with none of the problems of those low end Seikos.


----------



## Teeebone

KatGirl said:


> Welcome to the forum, and don't forget to post pics of your new Omega. We love pics.


Thank you....and as requested - a picture. Just got delivered a couple hours ago. Ace is THE PLACE! (ordered it Saturday in my U.S. hands today!). I love this thing - everything about it. The look, the feel and just knowing I have a real nice watch on my wrist from Omega. Actually had to get it re sized - wasn't about to take any links out on my own right now so took a 15 minute drive to the Omega boutique and they did it in a couple minutes and the guy who did it acted as though it was me doing him the favor. Offered something to drink while I waited - just made me feel special being an Omega owner (no charge of course) . I know to some Omega owners money may be no object but I may never be able to afford one of these again so even though it is a Quartz I could not be happier with it!


----------



## om3ga_guy

ChronoScot said:


> Here are a couple of photos of the SMP use in The World is Not Enough (pic courtesy of Robert-Jan Broer). It was an automatic though and, as you can probably see, it's going to sit quite high on the wrist on account of the thickness. Just ignore those wires ;-)


Awesome photos! Thanks for sharing.

I believe Goldeneye was the only Bond movie with the quartz SMP. All other films used the Chronometer...


----------



## joeuk

Teeebone if you are happy thats all that matters. Everything about this watch is great, great build, great looks etc. If you ever want to own a auto or manual wind watch without the expence, why not try a vintage watch. Tissot built some very good movements in the day, about the same as any omega movement back then. Always great to own a modern piece and a vintage watch.

Congrats and you will still look at the watch with a smile on your face in many years to come, I still do 2yrs on.


----------



## Ukshaker

If a quartz smooth is good enough for the future king of England I wouldn't worry about it being inferior in anyway. I have owned my quartz smp for the last year and have never regretted a day of choosing it over anautomatic. I ave since bought myself a PO, so I really view te quartz smp as the ultimate gateway drug into te world of watch collecting.


----------



## Chris Hughes

I have lots of autos including my PO. I'm kind of obsessed with the Seamaster 300m right now. I'm probably going for the quartz, not by budget but by choice. I like the slimmer case and I want a nice high-ish end watch that I can wear casually. Beat it around a bit and not worry as much about it. Of all the expensive quartz watches out there the Seamaster 300m is one of very few I'd consider owning.


----------



## yande

For some reason I feel if you are a one watch person, quartz is the way to go. If not, I'm sure you'll be buying a quartz of one desxription or another whilst Omega (Swatch) services your Omega. Personally I loved my Quartz SMP so much I gave it to my wife. More so due to the mid size, not the movement. I still love that watch and quite often use it to set my manuals. The best of both worlds.

Main thing is, those that mind don't matter, those that matter, don't mind..... I love your quartz! It's an Omega!


----------



## hlbrem

I recommend you save a little more longer to buy a automatic watch. The automatic SMP is not much more expensive than the quatz but it has higher status. I dont like quatz, just looking how the automatic hand moving make me happy. you can find a very good used automatic SMP on ebay, if the co-axial version too expensive for you, buy the normal version (1120). Buy the best you like, i think it is much better that man buy just 1 time and satisfied and love it even its alittle more expensive than buy a cheaper and then dont like and always wish for the better. you can afford a automatic SMP, believe me, i am just a student and i earn 350Euro a month but i can afford a SMP, limited edition James Bond....noways that you can not afford it. Remember that maybe you buy a watch for 10-20years so you should buy the best, you should enjoy and love it. so, Follow your heart!!!
Here is my watch...i love it, i want to carry it even when i sleep (but i dont, i am afraid that i will scratch it wenn i dream :-d)


----------



## Teeebone

hlbrem said:


> The automatic SMP is not much more expensive than the quatz but it has higher status.


Not much more expensive?? From what I am seeing they are generally around 60% more expensive which is a pretty penny!


----------



## hlbrem

Teeebone said:


> Not much more expensive?? From what I am seeing they are generally around 60% more expensive which is a pretty penny!


No, go to ebay, you will see. I am in Germany, a quatz is about 800-900Euro, the Automatic i can buy with about 1200-1300Euro. so 400Euro is not a big deal. You are in USA, the Price there is even much lower than in Europa.


----------



## Chris Hughes

I'd be careful about trying to manage other people's budgets. Just sayin'.


----------



## Patrick333

Mate, I am from Germany too and you are just talking about a used one. The price for a new 300M in quartz is Euro 1800.00 (UVP) and for the automatic 300M it costs Euro 2900.00 (UVP).

You can get both with a 20% discount on the grey market (Grauhändler) online, but even than it's Euro 1440.00 vs. EUro 2320.00 which makes a difference of Euro 880.00!

For most people the differnce is a lot!

I got the quartz as well (one reason was the price, the other one the fact that I have already 18 watches and I was
planning from the begining that this one would be my daily"rocker". Since I got it 10 days ago I did not wear any of my other watches so far!

Here is mine:



One last thing for the anti-quartz watch lovers: My 300M quartz is running -0,7 sec. vs. the atomic watch and that in 7 days since I last adjusted it!

cheers


----------



## Chris Hughes

There's a place for a fine quartz watch in every collection. I'll be adding a Seamaster 300 in quartz this year for reasons stated above.

One thing to bear in mind: like autos, there are different levels of quartz movements. There are cheap ones, mid range ones and high end ones. The movements Omega uses are closer to the high end than the low. A Seamaster 300 quartz isn't just an auto case with a $5 quartz movement stuck in it.


----------



## hlbrem

@Patrik333: Hi Patrick, i dont talk about UVP of Omega, I talked about the Price on Ebay where many authentic and very new watches sold. a 100% new automatic SMP can never sold over 2000Euro, there are many 95-99% new automatic SMP co-axial with 1700-1900. It´s about the co-axial version, a normal automatic version of SMP will never over 1700Euro evenif they are 100% new. an avergared Price of one used normal SMP version ist about 1300-1500 at most. 
The Quatz Version ist about 1100 so the difference is not big about 400Euro like i said.
i dont anti Quazt and i dont try to manage the Budget of the Topic owner. I just tell him what i think. It´s a liar to tell that he can not afford an automatic SMP because the Price different is not big. In case he likes the Quatz and just want to buy the Quatz then i dont have comment anymore but i know that he likes the automatic more. Its not fair if he like the automatic but bought a Quatz then dont love it and continue dreaming about the automatic.

Here you can find the completed listing of the automatic SMP from ebay.com, it is not as high as you thought. 
http://www.ebay.com/csc/i.html?LH_Complete=1&_nkw=omega%20seamaster%20professional&_dmpt=Wristwatches&_fln=1&_ssov=1&_trksid=p3286.c0.m1539&Movement=Mechanical|!


----------



## iinsic

@*hlbrem*: Your opinion has been offered. There really is no need to belabor the point. Your experiences with eBay aside, the OP preferred a new watch from an Omega AD. Given that preference - and I wholeheartedly applaud the sagacity of it for his first fine watch - the difference between the automatic and quartz is significant. His decision to purchase a new quartz SMP makes much sense on many levels. And, given that he has already _made_ his purchase, common courtesy dictates that one not take issue with his choice.


----------



## theomegas

Those who make comments like "if you want a quartz, just go to Wal-mart" are either just snobby or wannabe snobby. Acting as if automatics are the end-all, be-all is just narrow-minded.

I wonder how they would feel if someone said "why waste your money on cheap automatics like Omega and not save up to buy a nice Patek?"

There are many different levels of watches and levels of interest people have in them, whether practical or horological. 

There's nothing wrong with a quartz bought at Wal-mart or at an Omega boutique. And likewise for an Omega auto or a Patek auto. In fact, I would think that those who are truly fascinated by watches would want a piece of both worlds.

Enjoy your new watch.


----------



## JarrodS

To me, the movement inside is less about status (the Brand itself defines most of that) and more about the buyer's needs. They both have their place.

Are you buying to have a piece of mechanical art strapped to your wrist, or for something that's a bit more unique than the every day watch? Get an Auto. Do you care more about accuracy, durability, and a lower price point? Get a Quartz. For this reason, I think it's silly for Omega to phase out making Quartz watches.

As was stated above, the Omega Quartz is not a cheapie $5 throwaway. These are fully servicable movement and should last a lifetime or two with proper care and maintenance.

Mine, caught mid-tick:


----------



## om3ga_guy

JarrodS said:


> To me, the movement inside is less about status (the Brand itself defines most of that) and more about the buyer's needs. They both have their place.
> 
> Are you buying to have a piece of mechanical art strapped to your wrist, or for something that's a bit more unique than the every day watch? Get an Auto. Do you care more about accuracy, durability, and a lower price point? Get a Quartz. For this reason, I think it's silly for Omega to phase out making Quartz watches.
> 
> As was stated above, the Omega Quartz is not a cheapie $5 throwaway. These are fully servicable movement and should last a lifetime or two with proper care and maintenance.
> 
> Mine, caught mid-tick:


Nice shot!


----------



## om3ga_guy

iinsic said:


> @*hlbrem*: Your opinion has been offered. There really is no need to belabor the point. Your experiences with eBay aside, the OP preferred a new watch from an Omega AD. Given that preference - and I wholeheartedly applaud the sagacity of it for his first fine watch - the difference between the automatic and quartz is significant. His decision to purchase a new quartz SMP makes much sense on many levels. And, given that he has already _made_ his purchase, common courtesy dictates that one not take issue with his choice.


+1 well said...


----------



## hlbrem

iinsic said:


> @*hlbrem*: Your opinion has been offered. There really is no need to belabor the point. Your experiences with eBay aside, the OP preferred a new watch from an Omega AD. Given that preference - and I wholeheartedly applaud the sagacity of it for his first fine watch - the difference between the automatic and quartz is significant. His decision to purchase a new quartz SMP makes much sense on many levels. And, given that he has already _made_ his purchase, common courtesy dictates that one not take issue with his choice.


Oh i am sorry, i didnt read his post carefully, it thought that he is torning between Quatz and Automatic, he cant make a decision. so i tried to convince him that he can buy a automatic if he wants. I read again and realize that he bought the watch. i am sorry all again, i tried to make good things but it turns to show how rude i am...sorry.


----------



## refugio

Chris Hughes said:


> There's a place for a fine quartz watch in every collection...


Alternative POV: There's a place for a fine *mechanical *watch in every collection

(just saying mechanical so that the hand-winders don't feel left slighted)

Speaking as someone who recently had a quad-winder filled, I have to say that getting off the mechanical addiction has been...relaxing. Kind of like being on vacation <smile>


----------



## Chris Hughes

Agree. Room for both. I'm looking forward to adding a 300m quartz as soon as I find one at a good price.


----------



## TimeValue

Talking about mechanic vs. quartz, does each brand have its own preferences on favoritism? Cartier has tons of quartz, most are for women that can price at 10-20 grand and some men's models also price at nearly 10 grand. Do they have this heated debate on mechanic vs. quartz? Brietling also have tons of quarts. But I do remember one member's comments on quartz: it's like you put an electronic keyboard inside a Steinway grand piano. It almost never plays music wrong but ... ...


----------



## msp1518

I love autos, but have never been in the income bracket to buy high end. My first Omega is a the Seamaster Pro 200m Pre-bond two toned quartz. It's a peculiar piece and the only quartz I would spend money on. But some people will see it and think I have a fake on my wrist.

Here in the NYC area those who know watches immediately think FAKE when they see an Omega quartz. They just associate quartz with replicas and therefore have this snobbish attitude. "Is that real?" How insulting to ask that. But they believe it must me. 

The irony is years ago I bought a fake Omega Seamaster Pro (Bond version) with an auto engine and it fooled numerous snobs during the two weeks I wore it (before smashing it to pieces in a music video... the reason why I bought it). Most Seamaster fakes on NYC street corners are autos. Most Rolex fakes on street corners are quartz. Go figure.


----------



## Taswell

msp1518 said:


> Here in the NYC area those who know watches immediately think FAKE when they see an Omega quartz. They just associate quartz with replicas and therefore have this snobbish attitude.


Those then, obviously don't know much at all.


----------



## msp1518

It was a general statement. Many people I know or have run into in either business or socially have a small knowledge of watches and associate autos with real and quartz with fake (when looking at Omega or Rolex). So if they see a Quartz Omega, they think fake. 

I'm hoping my point got across: Those people are jerks.


----------



## BarracksSi

TimeValue said:


> Talking about mechanic vs. quartz, does each brand have its own preferences on favoritism? Cartier has tons of quartz, most are for women that can price at 10-20 grand and some men's models also price at nearly 10 grand.
> [snip]


I think they base quartz vs. mechanical on their intended market. The idea of populating the women's watches with quartz models would be that women treat their watches more as jewelry, so they'd only get worn occasionally, and mechanicals would run down if they're not on a winder.

The rest of the watch would account for the high total price, of course.


----------



## rselin

I think your question was if an automatic movement is superior to a quartz movement. The answer is no. Is a quartz movement, then, superior to an automatic movement? No. It is comparing apples and oranges. Different people will be drawn to one or the other type of movement for different reasons.

Good discussion of quartz vs mechanical here:
http://people.timezone.com/library/archives/archives631703148375478424

Mechanical movements are more complex to manufacture and assemble than quartz movements. There is often a high degree of finishing of the parts. This helps explain part of the higher cost of a mechanical movement. Compare these photos of an Omega 1438 quartz movement and an Omega 8500 co-axial movement:

1438quartzmovementcrop.jpg

omega-8500-11.jpg

That said, no amount of rationalization of cost of materials or labour will ever justify the cost of any watch over about $200.

The only knock I have against quartz is that I believe over a period of decades, the quartz movement is more likely to fail and be more difficult (or even impossible) to repair. This could be a concern if you are looking for a watch to hand down as an heirloom. Here is an example of the sad fate of an otherwise fantastic (but admittedly very rare) Omega La Magique quartz watch:

No luck - Omega La Magique | Watch Guy


----------



## georges zaslavsky

Some vintage quartz movements are no more serviced by firms and good luck for finding spare parts. Though for some mechanical movements like the 321 and some older ones, Omega is restricting access to spare parts for these for watchmakers based in the UK and in the US, so you will have to be very selective of the condition of the watch you buy which at the end could end you more expensive than was the so called epray bargain. The durability of vintage Omega is outstanding and on the same level than Rolex.


----------



## clarosec

Hi there,

i must admit I am a total noob to this site, and a relative noob to fine timepieces. My fascination with Omega in particular began with a quartz, specifically a Seamaster De Ville Quartz that my father gave my grandfather when I was, oh... four and which I subsequently inherited about 10 years ago. What can I tell you abour this watch? 10k gold, roman numerals on the face, it's a pain in the butt to set because the crown does the hour hand and the minute and second hands require a ball-point pen and some practice at five-finger fillet! Oh yeah, and the battery lasts about eight months because it takes a 388 button cell, for which the "best" alternative is a 329 with a sleeve, and the "less good" alternative is a 392 straight up. Battery life on these guys was never stellar. With the mercury cell 388 you got 20-24 months. With a 392 you get 8-10 months. 

But... it was my grandfather's watch which was a gift from my dad and damnit I'll keep it running! Well. Up until three days ago it sat in a drawer and told the correct time twice a day. Says me: "It's quartz movement, pry open, and not waterproof so I can't wreck the seals? Why don't I..."

Pop... 1342 7 jewel movement and a TINY screw holding down the battery strap. One sharpened screwdriver and a trip to Home Hardware later, it's up and running again. 

Yes, I know a very good watchmaker/repair guy in Ottawa. He services the 1958 Omega Constellation that's sitting next to the De Ville as I write this. But I asked him: "Hey... the batteries cost $2.99, what are the odds I mangle it if I try to swap it myself?"

He walked me through it, no charge.

I have plenty of sports watches of varying quality, most of which were for utilitarian purposes (Casio Yacht Timer, Citizen Aqualand Duplex, etc), and a Fossil casual dressy watch that is my "it's raining" office watch when I have to walk in to work.

They're all neat, but the fact that I can do the basic "heart surgery" on my grandfather's Omega makes me feel really good. 

Basically, watches are like cameras or other fun mechanical doodads (guns?): They have a purpose. They have a form that can be utilitarian, beautiful, ugly or some combination of all three. They come at all price points, but the price point doesn't necessarily determine the quality of the result (Leica cameras have produced more fuzzy pictures, I swear!), and "gear-heads" are fascinated about their operation.

For example, I got my wife a Citizen Eco Drive because she wanted a watch that she didn't have to change the battery on every other year. It works a treat and it's pretty. This year for her birthday she asked about a mechanical watch that she could wear that would... supplement her wardrobe. Now she's wearing my mother's Seiko Hi-Beat and basically refuses to take it off because she's fascinated by its operation (she's a mechanical engineer).

Anyway - an extremely long first post to say that they're all neat. My parents prefer Rolex, I prefer Omega. I like mechanicals but if I'm acutally going to go diving I'll take my Citizen. My wife did her gardening with a Timex indiglo today. I like the concept of mechanical but my budget says that to add more, I'm looking at Seiko and Orient. Well okay, they're nice too!

I doubt I'll ever buy a "new" Omega. But there are plenty of previously enjoyed ones for me to pick from...


----------



## omega2915

clarosec said:


> Hi there,
> 
> i must admit I am a total noob to this site, and a relative noob to fine timepieces. My fascination with Omega in particular began with a quartz, specifically a Seamaster De Ville Quartz that my father gave my grandfather when I was, oh... four and which I subsequently inherited about 10 years ago. What can I tell you abour this watch? 10k gold, roman numerals on the face, it's a pain in the butt to set because the crown does the hour hand and the minute and second hands require a ball-point pen and some practice at five-finger fillet! Oh yeah, and the battery lasts about eight months because it takes a 388 button cell, for which the "best" alternative is a 329 with a sleeve, and the "less good" alternative is a 392 straight up. Battery life on these guys was never stellar. With the mercury cell 388 you got 20-24 months. With a 392 you get 8-10 months.
> 
> But... it was my grandfather's watch which was a gift from my dad and damnit I'll keep it running! Well. Up until three days ago it sat in a drawer and told the correct time twice a day. Says me: "It's quartz movement, pry open, and not waterproof so I can't wreck the seals? Why don't I..."
> 
> Pop... 1342 7 jewel movement and a TINY screw holding down the battery strap. One sharpened screwdriver and a trip to Home Hardware later, it's up and running again.
> 
> Yes, I know a very good watchmaker/repair guy in Ottawa. He services the 1958 Omega Constellation that's sitting next to the De Ville as I write this. But I asked him: "Hey... the batteries cost $2.99, what are the odds I mangle it if I try to swap it myself?"
> 
> He walked me through it, no charge.
> 
> I have plenty of sports watches of varying quality, most of which were for utilitarian purposes (Casio Yacht Timer, Citizen Aqualand Duplex, etc), and a Fossil casual dressy watch that is my "it's raining" office watch when I have to walk in to work.
> 
> They're all neat, but the fact that I can do the basic "heart surgery" on my grandfather's Omega makes me feel really good.
> 
> Basically, watches are like cameras or other fun mechanical doodads (guns?): They have a purpose. They have a form that can be utilitarian, beautiful, ugly or some combination of all three. They come at all price points, but the price point doesn't necessarily determine the quality of the result (Leica cameras have produced more fuzzy pictures, I swear!), and "gear-heads" are fascinated about their operation.
> 
> For example, I got my wife a Citizen Eco Drive because she wanted a watch that she didn't have to change the battery on every other year. It works a treat and it's pretty. This year for her birthday she asked about a mechanical watch that she could wear that would... supplement her wardrobe. Now she's wearing my mother's Seiko Hi-Beat and basically refuses to take it off because she's fascinated by its operation (she's a mechanical engineer).
> 
> Anyway - an extremely long first post to say that they're all neat. My parents prefer Rolex, I prefer Omega. I like mechanicals but if I'm acutally going to go diving I'll take my Citizen. My wife did her gardening with a Timex indiglo today. I like the concept of mechanical but my budget says that to add more, I'm looking at Seiko and Orient. Well okay, they're nice too!
> 
> I doubt I'll ever buy a "new" Omega. But there are plenty of previously enjoyed ones for me to pick from...


Wow! That has to be the best first post EVER. The writing alone was impressive, but the content was interesting as well. I first wanted to congratulate you on changing your own batteries. One would hope everyone would try to do this, but many fear marring their watches, or they can't find batteries, so they pony up the 15 or 20 bucks at the mall or jeweler. I haven't worn a watch that uses a battery since the 80s, (vintage mechanical snob) but my wife has a few quartz watches&#8230;.that keep perfect time, look great, and never need wound, (or serviced) and I change those batteries. If you go on Ebay and search for batteries, you'll find those little cells of all sizes for next to nothing. Seriously. You can buy them 10 for a dollar with free shipping, but at the worst, maybe 10 for 5 bucks. I have a battery collection as large as the guy at the mall and only about 20 dollars for the entire inventory. (hyperbole) The moral: Buy watch cells on Ebay.

Now&#8230;.quartz vs auto. Cmon, I thought we all knew this was an apples vs oranges kinda thing. Those of us who wear mechanical watches generally wear them for pleasure, not function. They are expensive, require regular service, and they keep fairly awful time compared to even average quartz movements, yet I will wear nothing but mechanical watches&#8230;of the vintage kind, no less&#8230;even more expensive, inaccurate, and troublesome. I just like their character&#8230;history&#8230;look&#8230;whatever it is. Watches for people like me are not so much tools for telling time as they are extensions of who we are. They are not unlike classic cars, which are the least practical rides on the road, but they have personality and stories to tell, and many of us love them for it. If I wore a watch to know the time&#8230;.I probably wouldn't wear a watch at all. I'd look at my phone, and most people born after the 80s are doing just that. Watches are on the way out, so even those who wear quartz watches will be a rare breed within a decade or two.

I'm rambling now, but I do want to note that in my opinion, if you are going to buy a quartz to tell the time, buy one for less than $100. Buying an Omega or Tag quartz is, to me, a poor choice. They are poor investments. But there are so many factors in play here, it is nearly impossible to give a definitive answer. Your post even broached the Rolex discussion, which could require pages of writing. It suffices to say I wore an auto Rolex for many years, (Daytona) and would never do that again after wearing a Speedmaster. There is also the potential of an auto vs fully mech. discussion. I don't care for auto watches. My experience has been that they are not nearly as durable as a good wind-it-yourself watch. I hate the idea of keeping a watch on a winder. I could go on but won't. If anyone has made it this far in my post, I apologize for what has become a novella. I blame the guy who posted before me. He broached too many interesting topics. I'm a VICTIM!
The bottom line: Buy a vintage Speedmaster with a cal. 321&#8230;or 861 to save money&#8230;even an 1861. (unless you want to go diving&#8230;then get a Seiko)


----------



## ChromeFreeDisco

I've got 3 quartz Omegas. A newish Seamaster Aqua Terra, a 1974 Time Computer 2 and a 1976 Speedmaster Quartz. I also have about 30 vintage digital quartz watches from Seiko and Casio. I can tell you now that the Quartz Omegas are more accurate than the Seikos or Casios which all run fast compared to an atomic time source. The Speedmaster Quartz had a stated accuracy of +/-5sec per month which is better than what Seiko or Casio quote for their run of the mill quartz watches (I know Seiko have made some great high accuracy quartz watches).


----------



## El Gato

Kind of exhausting reading all this. To the OP, if you are on a budget but still want an Omega, and buying a Quartz is one way around your financial limits, then by the quartz. It's built with the same care as an Omega mechanical. It's just got an electronic movement instead of mechanical. 

Is mechanical better than quartz? You can find people to cover both sides of that argument and every combination in between. To me this is one of those circular debates, where we try and see which kind is "better" and we go back and forth with the discussion of accuracy and durability and maintenance costs versus all the reasons those who love mechanicals, love mechanicals. We try to put an objective measure on something that is loaded with subjective factors. 

Personally, I have had many quartz watches and used them most of my life. There is not much variation in quartz movements, the beauty of them is their simplicity. IMO you don't buy a quartz watch to admire its movement. 

When I got to the point where I could afford a few nice mechanicals, about 4 years ago, I bought them because of my personal preference for mechanical watches. I am fascinated with the design of mechanical movements. I could give you a page of reasons why, but it's only my personal view of it. I would never pay more than a couple hundred dollars for any quartz watch - but that does not mean I am "right" and someone else is wrong. It's just the way I look at it. 

At the end of the day, the decision what to buy is all yours, my advice is buy what you can afford, enjoy your quartz Omega, it will be a beauty I am sure, and whistle a happy tune. You don't ever have to care about mechanical watches at all, if you don't want to.


----------



## jayjay1986

You need to consider the running cost as well.

I personally find maintaining a quartz watch much more easier to that of automatic/mechanical. 

1. Any watch maker can replace and water test quartz

2. Don't need to worry about not wearing it daily to keep it going

3. Quartz appear more robust to bumps

There are counter argument and it's my opinion.

Sent from my SM-G900I using Tapatalk


----------



## HJR

omega2915 said:


> I'm rambling now, but I do want to note that in my opinion, if you are going to buy a quartz to tell the time, buy one for less than $100. Buying an Omega or Tag quartz is, to me, a poor choice. They are poor investments. But there are so many factors in play here, it is nearly impossible to give a definitive answer. Your post even broached the Rolex discussion, which could require pages of writing. It suffices to say I wore an auto Rolex for many years, (Daytona) and would never do that again after wearing a Speedmaster. There is also the potential of an auto vs fully mech. discussion. I don't care for auto watches. My experience has been that they are not nearly as durable as a good wind-it-yourself watch. I hate the idea of keeping a watch on a winder. I could go on but won't. If anyone has made it this far in my post, I apologize for what has become a novella. I blame the guy who posted before me. He broached too many interesting topics. I'm a VICTIM!
> The bottom line: Buy a vintage Speedmaster with a cal. 321&#8230;or 861 to save money&#8230;even an 1861. (unless you want to go diving&#8230;then get a Seiko)


I know this is a debate of opinions, which really is a pointless exercise, but I will throw in my $0.10. I disagree on an Omega Quartz being a poor choice.

Quick history, I came to the watch collecting thing from buying lower cost quartz, like Seiko and Victorinox. Those are great companies who make great watches. I then "graduated" to mechanicals/autos, mostly omegas but also some micro brands and Tag Heuers as well as others and recently acquired my first Rolex (GMT II), which pleased my dad as he has been a Rolex Guy for 35 years.

That said, there is nothing like a fabulous mech/auto. The passion and technical aspects of a great mech/auto are amazing. To think of all the gears and bridges happening in such a small, beautiful case is really amazing.

However, I have picked up an Omega AT Quartz and SMP Quartz as grab and go watches. And I have to admit that I love(d) them too (just sold to the AT to buy a Zenith). The quality is there equal to other Omegas, they are beautiful to look at and they have a nice feature I appreciate. The 1438 quartz movement has a hour jump feature, that works the same as my Omega and Rolex GMTs. It is a great feature if you travel a decent amount and as such I feel it adds something different than a typical analog quartz.

So, while I am most passionate about my mech/autos, I do think that the Omega Quartz offer a significant value, both in the high quality construction, and in that additional feature.

If it is worth the money, is a personal question, based on your finances and passions. Best of luck!


----------



## clarosec

omega2915 said:


> Wow! That has to be the best first post EVER. The writing alone was impressive, but the content was interesting as well.


Not likely! I'm sure there are plenty of people that had far more interesting things to say in their first post. I do try and be clear when posting, though. It helps people try and understand what I'm getting at and (hopefully) is less mind-numbing for the good folks lurking through the forums!



> I first wanted to congratulate you on changing your own batteries. One would hope everyone would try to do this, but many fear marring their watches, or they can't find batteries, so they pony up the 15 or 20 bucks at the mall or jeweler. I haven't worn a watch that uses a battery since the 80s, (vintage mechanical snob) but my wife has a few quartz watches&#8230;.that keep perfect time, look great, and never need wound, (or serviced) and I change those batteries. If you go on Ebay and search for batteries, you'll find those little cells of all sizes for next to nothing. Seriously. You can buy them 10 for a dollar with free shipping, but at the worst, maybe 10 for 5 bucks. I have a battery collection as large as the guy at the mall and only about 20 dollars for the entire inventory. (hyperbole) The moral: Buy watch cells on Ebay.[\quote]
> 
> It's really a lot less scary to start with an inexpensive dress watch where you don't need to worry too much about mangling a gasket or something like that. Besides, I've seen countless mangled case backs courtesy of mall jewelers. The final straw was sending my Citizen Aqualand Duplex back to the factory for servicing, gasket change, battery replacement and pressure test, only for Citizen to return my watch with a humongous gouge in the case back, and they charged me $90 for the privilege! Since I don't scuba dive with it anymore, I change that one myself and other Aqualand owners may be happy (or appalled) to know that their fancy dive watch takes a single CR2016 cell, same as the good old $20 Timex Ironman. I got those cells at Canadian Tire, 5/$7.99.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now&#8230;.quartz vs auto. Cmon, I thought we all knew this was an apples vs oranges kinda thing. Those of us who wear mechanical watches generally wear them for pleasure, not function. They are expensive, require regular service, and they keep fairly awful time compared to even average quartz movements, yet I will wear nothing but mechanical watches&#8230;of the vintage kind, no less&#8230;even more expensive, inaccurate, and troublesome. I just like their character&#8230;history&#8230;look&#8230;whatever it is. Watches for people like me are not so much tools for telling time as they are extensions of who we are. They are not unlike classic cars, which are the least practical rides on the road, but they have personality and stories to tell, and many of us love them for it. If I wore a watch to know the time&#8230;.I probably wouldn't wear a watch at all. I'd look at my phone, and most people born after the 80s are doing just that. Watches are on the way out, so even those who wear quartz watches will be a rare breed within a decade or two.
> 
> 
> 
> I can pretty much agree with all of this. I have quartz watches for function (like the Citizen and my Casio Yacht Timer), and a few for form when I was on a budget, but for dress watches I'd rather roll with a Seiko 5 or an Orient automatic because the moving bits make them more interesting. I mean, I'm wearing the Seamaster De Ville Quartz today, with its 1342 7 jewel quartz movement, and it ticks in a satisfying way, but it's a quartz movement and quartz is impersonal, to a degree. Same with cameras. DSLR's all rely on a limited number of sensor producers. Your ability to control input and output is probably greater in post-processing, but it's less visceral than shooting film. Heck, I still take my old crappy Praktica FX out every once in a while (Q: How do you double the value of a Praktica camera? A: put a roll of film in it!) specifically because it's a pain in the ass to use but it WORKS and getting great shots with it is FAR more satisfying than setting my DSLR to "green" mode and getting "perfect" exposures every time...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm rambling now, but I do want to note that in my opinion, if you are going to buy a quartz to tell the time, buy one for less than $100. Buying an Omega or Tag quartz is, to me, a poor choice. They are poor investments. But there are so many factors in play here, it is nearly impossible to give a definitive answer. Your post even broached the Rolex discussion, which could require pages of writing. It suffices to say I wore an auto Rolex for many years, (Daytona) and would never do that again after wearing a Speedmaster. There is also the potential of an auto vs fully mech. discussion. I don't care for auto watches. My experience has been that they are not nearly as durable as a good wind-it-yourself watch. I hate the idea of keeping a watch on a winder. I could go on but won't. If anyone has made it this far in my post, I apologize for what has become a novella. I blame the guy who posted before me. He broached too many interesting topics. I'm a VICTIM!
> The bottom line: Buy a vintage Speedmaster with a cal. 321&#8230;or 861 to save money&#8230;even an 1861. (unless you want to go diving&#8230;then get a Seiko)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What's wrong with long posts?
> 
> I don't think quartz is a bad choice over $100 and under $600 for certain functions. You want a dive watch or a chrono that's going to work when you need it to damn well work? Quartz is an obvious choice to me. If, on the other hand, you want a status symbol (the way people get BMW's etc. even though they love/hate/are indifferent about the way they drive), then at MSRP what's an extra $1,500 if you've decided to take the plunge?
> 
> I'd rather go vintage or previously enjoyed mechanical rather than get a new Seamaster. If you consider it a "dive" watch, would you actually go diving with it? It'd be a terrible thing to get caught on a piece of coral and have fall off and be lost forever. On the flip-side, I could get a Suunto or a new Citizen for a fraction of that and take the rest of the money I was going to spend on the Seamaster and fly my butt to Bonaire for some diving, you know?
Click to expand...


----------



## ogeek

I don't see the point of quartz vs automatic. Just get one that you like, fits your price tag and who cares about what others think?

If someone else will not pay over $100 for a quartz watch, then that's their choice. For me, I'm actually looking for a luxury and expensive quartz. Because I have a Rolex and its an automatic, and I don't wear it every day. For practical reasons, I didn't want my Omega to be an automatic because I don't want to have to set the time every other day. So I actually want an expensive watch, and I want a quartz. As for the rest of the world - well, frankly I don't care about the rest of the world.

I think we've missed the practical aspect and worry too much about what others think..


----------



## lcheowl

ogeek said:


> I don't see the point of quartz vs automatic. Just get one that you like, fits your price tag and who cares about what others think?
> 
> If someone else will not pay over $100 for a quartz watch, then that's their choice. For me, I'm actually looking for a luxury and expensive quartz. Because I have a Rolex and its an automatic, and I don't wear it every day. For practical reasons, I didn't want my Omega to be an automatic because I don't want to have to set the time every other day. So I actually want an expensive watch, and I want a quartz. As for the rest of the world - well, frankly I don't care about the rest of the world.
> 
> I think we've missed the practical aspect and worry too much about what others think..


furthermore, most of our friends or colleagues around us won't notice it unless

1. we told them we bought a new watch
2. they are from WUS 
3 they never saw us wearing a watch before.
4. the watch is too striking, like bright orange color.


----------



## OmegaPete

Bottom line: both Quartz and automatic have their place and purpose. I like both, but my Quartz SMP gets 99% of my wrist time.


----------



## alex79

It's funny like quartz is too cheap to be a high end watch, and that on the other hand most of the people won't spend much on a quartz watch. 
I love the SMP watch, had a great deal on a very mint piece, it's handy, and if I play golf I don't need to worry now with damaging my watch ^^ I already damaged twice my Rolex daytona. 
Long life to SMP quartz, awesome watch 

TGIF


----------

