/fa/ - Fashion

>>17539309

>>15405999
>>15406002
Another correction:
I looked at some of the pics you posted in the previous thread; the red-tipped second hand looks fine. Dismiss my concern about that.

The scratches and shit on the case and bracelet though are of note. While it's not impossible for someone to treat their watch this way, it really does require someone horsing about with their watch to accumulate that kind of damage in a year. Did you get any pics of the crown and H valve? Do they look new/recently replaced? It's Omega standard procedure to replace those, always.

>>15388896
I'm sure it's possible to do it with floss...but I've never tried so I guess look it up on YT...I'm sure someone has done it before. If you plan to change straps often, go with the Bergeon...I probably should buy one anyway now myself.
How's the PO running? (also...let's see it!)

>my Seamaster on Sharkskin

>>15090477
The Langes are an exception to the rule though; most integrated bracelets can simply be removed at the springbar point and you just put in leather bands of your choosing.

Go for Hersch if you're on the open market; word around the block is that they supply Omega, Panerai, and others, though us normies aren't supposed to know this.

>pic is my Semenmaster on a Hirsch Sharkskin Leonardo...they haven't made these in decades...

>>14531836
No prob...it's very quiet here for some reason. I've had to look up old Omegas before, and using Chrono24 or the Omega website has proven to be the easiest way to do it.

Enjoy the watch; Omegas from the 50s-70s are great for the prices you can get them today, many of which could hold to -4/+6 seconds a day if cleaned and properly serviced. So, comparable to modern COSC standards as long as you don't dunk it in water.

>>14508360
The quartz versions go for sub2k. You'll get the same look, but obviously it's not mechanical. The issue of 'not exactly the right model' is dead on; the other thing to take into consideration is that with this model they had different sizes as well, and I think there was a ladie's version if I'm not mistaken.

So, you have a few different sizes, and you have the difference between the mechanical or quartz. As I said, it was a very popular model.

Be advised for the future; the prices and value of watches are all tied to two basic things: the precise model, and the condition of that model with regards to original parts. It'll be expensive if it's all original, it'll be cheaper if it has replacement parts. It'll be expensive if it's in good condition, and it'll be cheaper if it's been abused.

As for the calibre, this is very important to consider. The Seamasters used in the Brosnan era relied on the ETA movement which at the time was supplied to just about everyone in that price point, but after that the coaxial was put inside instead, which lowered the beat rate, increased the cost of servicing while limiting the people who could service it properly, and for the first generation (25xx cal.) had serious problems.

Other details included in the switchover to the coaxial: rims surrounding the hour markers, eventually red text, different length minute hands plus different lume colours for minute and hour hands, and other things along the way.

The watch you want is the Omega Seamaster 2541.80.00. Anything else is not the watch you're looking for.

>>14170032
A throat clearing. I was a little direct in >>14170032 because I was running out of words.

If the Zenith oscillator is put into a series of watches that is affordable (i.e. 5000 or less), then the mid-level or entry-level watches have no reason to exist. Furthermore, the effectiveness of the oscillator in terms of overall accuracy means that there will no longer be an argument that higher-priced time-pieces will be better at holding temporal accuracy.

After the quartz crisis, mechanical watches could no longer compete from a practical standpoint, so they had to be marketed based on 'heritage', 'old-world manufacturing', etc. But today we've been seeing something of a resurgence once again in the existential need of men to perfect something further, and thus the increasing tolerances (Omega Master Chronometer, as an example).

The Zenith oscillator will once again destroy this need for further accuracy from a mechanical movement. So once again the system will face a crisis: either employ the oscillator in everything, or survive based on name, reputation, and aesthetics. Rolex could survive I think. But Tag Heuer, Omega, Breitling, Fortis, and all the others in this price-range would be gone. JLC, Vacheron Constantin, etc. would survive because they are artisan based. If you own a Reverso, you don't care if it's accurate because you're rotating daily between that, the Patek, the Lange, etc.

>>13954662
I got one once. I keep it, and wear it when the person who gave it to me is around. Your sister may be gone one day, and though that's a morbid thought, it's one that is a reminder to cherish the times you see her. She got you a watch, which is something rather personal as an effect. Anytime you wear it, you'll think of her. So, keep it in that frame of mind.

I would never expect a family member to get me a Rolex or something like that, even though if it were pure dollars and cents that's the kind of what I'd like. That's in many ways not the point. Your sister gifted you something she thought you could use or enjoy. So, wear it and think of her when you do.

>Still has all the watches he got from his Mama...

>>13880210
>>13880232

First, thank you for writing that all out. I have a few questions about your points.

1) Let's assume first that the balance is properly poised. Now, changes in pivot friction become the next problem to deal with. You state that the solution would be to have more precise arbors and perfectly machined jewels to counter the problem some. Is there any reason that companies simply don't or cannot do this? Is it solely cost? I find it unbelieveable in this day and age that the problem of machining a small part is a limitation, especially given the advances we've had over the past few decades. But then again, that might simply show my ignorance.

2) Okay, so free-sprung balances help. Is there any way to counter this issue? I don't know...use two free-sprung balances instead of one, and put them across perpendicularly so when one is out, the other is in, and vice-versa? Essentially, the double-axis tourbillion but stationary? Yes, the case would have to be wide.....but this is a thought experiment, to some degree.

3) The friction in the pivots of the geartrain. Is there any way that the balance could be powered directly from the mainspring instead of having it at the end of the chain? Or would that put too much pressure on the escapement system? I've always wondered about this actually...is the normal series of wheels we see the best combination, or just the one that has been perfected to the greatest degree with other options not having been experimented with?

The element that probably shows my ignorance the most (which I'll apologize for now) was the statement by Daniels in one of his speeches where he describes one of the first pocketwatches he made with the double geartrain escapement which kept to within a fraction of a second in a month. The positional variation was almost nonexistent for this one; so I guess I'm trying to understand how it's possible and why no one else can do it. cont