First Mechanical Watch

Choosing Your First (Watch Snob-Approved) Mechanical Watch

Page 1 of 2

A Durable Sports Watch

Dear Snob,

I'm looking for a "true" GMT watch (4 central hands, independently adjustable 12-hour hand) that is versatile enough to wear in a wide variety of situations and robust enough for use as a true sports watch. My first choice is a Rolex Explorer II. However, $3,000 US is the very top of my budget. I could certainly find a second hand Explorer II in this price range, but I'm concerned that any I could afford would be a "vintage" piece not truly suited for hard use. I've found very few other mechanical choices in or near that price range — including various used/discontinued Omegas, the Tudor Aeronaut, and the unfortunately named Alpina Alpiner 4 GMT — all of which have their own shortcomings when measured against the Rolex. Should I go for the Explorer II knowing I may be abusing it, or settle for a less interesting but more practical watch? Are there better options I have overlooked? Should I just accept that my meager budget is better spent on something other than a watch?

You really ought to try and make the Explorer II work if you possibly can; it's an extremely practical and very durable watch and it has the additional advantage of being virtually the only Rolex you can wear (other than the Cellini watches) which you will not feel as if you are seeing absolutely everywhere once you have it. I wouldn't expend one microjoule of effort on worrying about wearing it as you would expect to be able to wear a true sports watch. I do wonder, however, what you mean by "abuse" — no watch from the most humble to the most exalted should be abused, with the possible exception of the Casio G-Shock, wherein the joy of ownership is directly proportional to seeing how much abuse you can give it and have it emerge unscathed.

NOMOS Glashütte makes an interesting alternative, by the way: the Tangomat GMT, which although outside your budget may be worth a look. No one would ever accuse it of being a sports watch, however.



In-House Movements

A reader on Reddit.com's /r/watches subreddit asks

I'm curious about the origin of watch parts from various makers. I have recently purchased many micro brand watches and from interactions with their owners I see many mainstream watch companies have components made in the same factories. Besides movement assembly, who really makes watches in-house anymore besides the design? I know Nomos does a lot but who can do in-house in SS for under 10k?

To answer your first question (regular readers, please note: the Snob is trying to be as good as his word and treat this question as a new one when it turns up, as it always does) the whole notion of "in-house" movements is largely a distraction from the much more interesting question of what is done with a movement, irrespective of its original manufacturer. Movement making is a highly specialized form of manufacturing, and it is extremely expensive to set up a production line, which is why, for much of the history of watchmaking in Switzerland, a movement was often made by a supplier and finished, timed, and cased by the company whose name was on the dial. This practice has been followed by everyone from low to high (including Patek Philippe, I might add.)

This is why you will find, in general, two types of companies’ movements at a below-ten-thousand dollar price point — those using supplied movements (almost everybody) and those able to provide an in-house calibre, but with a large-scale capacity and ability to amortize costs over either a large production run, or a long time-scale, or both. In the latter category, we have both Rolex and Seiko (Grand Seiko has for some time been a quite interesting alternative in high quality industrial watchmaking to Rolex) and NOMOS Glashütte, which began with a movement derived from an existing design and which has over the years become progressively more independent.