 |
PM |  | |
Quote | | |
Reply | | |
Full Topic | |
| Joined: | Thu Jun 18th, 2009 |
| Location: | Rochester, New York USA |
| Posts: | 73 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
For me my working definition of a tool watch:
1. The design is economical - it passes the "hit it with a hammer test" - meaning you can afford to utterly destroy the watch periodically and buy another one and not set yourself back significantly financially, or even be particularly concerned about its value. (This would limit me to about $50-300, and of course, it doesn't mean you would, but you could)
2. It keeps accurate time first and foremost, but not necessarily ridiculously accurate (i.e. atomic). (for me, this means quartz, but I would not rigidly adhere to this notion - mechanicals could qualify as well as atomic - but keeping good enough time for intended purposes).
3. You don't need to fuss with it to keep it going - either maintenance or day-to-day adjustments. Meaning you can let it sit unused while you don't use its function, and don't have to have it serviced very much. (For me this would mean quartz, but it depends upon people's tolerance)
4. Is rugged enough for the use you actually put it through, and not much more. (Meaning, if you have one that you can swim in and you swim, then it is a tool to you for swimming. If you never swim or never go more than 20' under water, and have a watch rated for 5000m, it isn't a tool watch for you, well the last 4900m is superfluous).
5. Other functionality is for the purposes you use it only and no more, and has enough functions for you to use it properly. (i.e. a GMT watch, you actually use the GMT function because you are an avid HAM radio operator and participate in or run contests, or you are a world traveler and need a universal time to offset. If you only tell the time of day during the particular thing you do, then that is all you need. If you have a Tachometer and it does not have speed markings on the dial, it isn't complete, for example and would not be a tool therefore. Or a poor one anyway ... )
6. No decorations - this means no gold, diamonds, or other precious markings. Dial clear and plain, easy to read hands, etc - I'd even question crystal backs to see the mechanism (like on a mechanical watch)
For me, there are no "pure" tool watches, but the more superfluous capability, and decoration there is, and romance built in to the watch, the less of a tool and the more a piece of jewelry it is. (For me, a Rolex is a piece of Jewelry because it utterly fails the "hit it with a hammer test" - most people who own one could not demolish it with a hammer without much thought)
So ... what are your thoughts?