/fa/ - Fashion

>>17837770
No, I'm suggesting that a man buying a mechanical watch on aliexpress should expect their watch to perform unexpectedly, and that this can be remedied by taking it to a trusted watchmaker.

It's all about managing expectations. It's like those idiots who think that all mechanical watches should be easily serviceable, or that all mechanical watches should 'last a lifetime and more', or that mechanical 'toolwatches' should be able to take abuse that the previous generation of watch-owners would never subject those watches to.

I'm declaring what I know, and I'm offering a real solution to the problem of these watches. Isn't that useful to the Anon?

>not my pic, but nice to see on the 1963 anyway.

>>15445080
Sadly, even Speedys are overpriced. Given the technology (40 years old) and materials with a complete lack of R+D or anything else, the 861 and 1861 speedy should be roughly 1500-2000 (perhaps 2000 for the sapphire version on bracelet) with a base price of 1250 for the watch on leather. Obviously that would never happen, but that's what it should be given the actual specs. It's a non-hacking manual wind 40 year old cam operated chronograph.

Remember that the Seagull 1963 (and all the variants from China) use a slightly modified Venus 175 column-wheel chronograph, also manual wind. This you can get for 300$ approx, depending on the dealer.

300 for column wheel.....4500 for a cam. One is a shitty chinese brand, one is Swiss. Both have historical interest, but one went to the moon in the Cal. 321 version. Something is obviously wrong with the pricing here.

My Seagull is a wonderful watch, but the cost to service it by my independent watchmaker is more than the cost of the watch...so it's a one-and-done if anything happens to it. That's sad to me. But that's the way these things go.

>>15298556
Yes, horizontal clutch. Used by nearly every chronograph manufacturer before the 1960s. Try finding a vertical clutch for 250USD.

>>15298575
The difference is that the vertical clutch 'drops' the second counter onto the running seconds, which allows for a more precise start and arguably less power diminution on the gear train. The horizontal clutch simply pushes a wheel to mesh with the running seconds; this can result in a slight 'bump' to the start of the chronograph seconds as the teeth intermesh.

The only downside of the vertical clutch is that if engaged for long periods (i.e. years) or left engaged if the watch is sitting in a safe, the possibility exists that the wheels can stick together or may need to be unmounted. But it's not something that happens often at all, just another scare tactic by people who prefer one over the other.

The vertical clutch is superior, but since both work well, the issue comes down to how smoothly you want the chronograph to engage. I think the vomitanon is just trying to be edgy.