Seiko

Watch Collecting On A Budget

Is Watch Collecting A Rich Man's Game Or A Hobby To Be Enjoyed By Everyone?

May 26, 2015

Flip

Page 1 of 2

Glashutte Original Observer vs Pequinet Royal Grand Sport

Dear Watch Snob®,

My fascination with wrist and pocket watches has stayed with me since I was a young boy. It's something I just can't shake off nor do I wish to as of late I have spent hours trawling that inter web thing reading about various manufacturers and trying to decipher what is a truly good timepiece for my hard earned pound notes. Yes it's an old question but I have some limited knowledge and hopefully my two final choices won't disappoint. My time has come and it has been a long wait! Now I require the superior knowledge of The Snob. The first is A. Glashutte Original Senator Observer; I know I may be pretty safe here as you have a fondness for the brand. For the second I need your Cold Hard Opinion: it's a Pequinet Royal Grand Sport. This is slightly edging ahead for me due to its complications, moonphase, power reserve, double date and small seconds, but I can't really get a valued unbiased opinion on this watch.

Is the Glashutte a superior watch? I would greatly appreciate a response as I am finally, ever so slightly dipping a toe into Haute Horology!

Please Please Reply

As far as I can tease out your actual query from your enthusiasm for capital letters, you’re asking if these two approximately equally priced watches — one from Glashütte Original, and one from Pequinet — are basically equal in merit; I suspect you know the answer is no. Pequinet is one of those many brands that don’t make a truly bad watch, they simply make many uninteresting ones; such brands are legion, and they have their adherents because conservative design, a relatively approachable price, and a desire for something a little different can keep a brand going for years, as long as you have a following wind.

But that doesn’t make them worth spending money on. I hate to seem to take the side of a (relative) Goliath over a (comparative) David, and I have nothing but admiration for scrappy underdogs, but in general they give the impression of making watches where the whole is less than the sum of the parts. I give credit to them for having managed to produce a movement in-house (though as always, to what extent it is actually in-house is something that would bear looking into; as we all know “in-house” nowadays could mean almost anything) but the Glashütte Original in this instance is the more convincing timepiece.

Large Balance Wheels

Dear Watch Snob,

I write to you this week regarding a horological dilemma of mine. My question is directed at movements with larger balance wheels. Are larger balance wheels with lower beats per hour more accurate and stable when telling time than smaller balance wheels with higher beat rates? Some watchmakers, like Omega with the 30T2 movement, seemed to preach this belief but then soon abandoned it. This was followed by ébauche makers ETA with their 2750 movement with hacking/"stop seconds" (beautifully and aptly named by A. Lange & Söhne) complication. Please provide some horological enlightenment for our plebeian minds and hopefully lay this dilemma to rest.

There are many different approaches to achieving stability of rate — but we should address some terminology first. Most of us use the term “accurate” to describe a precise watch, but of course accuracy is merely the agreement of a watch with some external reference, be it an Internet time signal or the transit of a star or a quartz watch or what have you. As you correctly state it, rate stability is actually what makes a clock or watch precise — if a marine chronometer loses five seconds a day it will not be accurate, but if it loses exactly five seconds a day, it is precise and can be used to determine longitude.

For a balance to have a stable rate it needs to have a certain combination of mass and frequency; generally speaking, watchmakers have either gone for larger mass and slower beat, or faster beat and less mass, in an attempt to find the optimum solution; modern watches usually run faster and use lighter and smaller balances. My impression is that, practically speaking, a smaller balance beating at a higher frequency (within reason) is better for a wristwatch; a balance beating at 18,000 vph is more likely to be thrown off by external shocks as such disturbances, and likelier to be close to the natural frequency of a slower moving, than a faster moving, oscillator.

However, the logical outcome of following this train of reasoning to its natural conclusion is to opt for a quartz watch, which has a very low mass oscillator but such a high frequency that it offers much better accuracy than a balance wheel. Anyhow, I simply prefer the aesthetics of a large balance and a slower beat. The heart has its reasons, whereof reason knows nothing.

Men's Watches

Watch Snob