Winders?

[Steph Deux 0]

Gentlemen (assumes that you each glance back over your shoulder),

 

Does anyone have any thoughts on winders general, or in particular for the A7753 and the Swiss ETA 2824-2?

 

I don't see much discussion of them here. My thoughts, in no particular order:

 

~They have followed in the footsteps of the mechanical bits that require them: brutally expensive for no good reason. Barring materials such as lion pelts, ivory, and unobtainium, of course.

 

~The standard advice for setting them seems to be "Meh, just cram yer watch on there overnight and see how the winding worked and adjust it from there". Orbita notwithstanding.

 

~A7753 winds clockwise, about 800 turns per day (TPD), the 2824 winds bi-directionally about 800 TPD.

 

I'm going to wind up with 4-6 automatics, rotating on a daily or near daily basis, so I'm leaning towards some sort of winder.

 

Say I have five automatics, and I wear one per day. I set the winder to do the turns above each day with a 12 hour break, and they get worn in the same order. Is the theory that the next watch in line would always be ready to go? Meaning that each time I take a watch off of the winder, it has been wound 800 TPD for the previous four days and I never have worry about winding it by hand, resetting it, et cetera? Part of me thinks that nearly continuous running would be worse in the long run, vs. just starting/resetting one every fifth day.

 

Any thoughts or links, greatly appreciated.

[PhillyRock 0]

I think you're starting down a lonely rabbit hole.

 

If you owned 5 premium Genuine watches I could see how a winder would make sense.

However, If I owned 5 premium gens I would treat them exactly as I do my Reps.

Each day, whilst finishing my coffee I take 30 seconds to set my watch.

Slap it against my thigh twice, and strap it on my wrist. I believe the vast majority

of people here, whether gen or rep do exactly as I do.

 

Asian movements do not perform well under constant stress.

Winders are noisy and expensive.

It is a wrist watch.

If you are a rocket scientist type perfectionist, buy a Quartz and move on.

[BadPickle 2,749]

The best ones alter the date too, you know when there's only 30 days

[Steph Deux 0]

Thanks, PhillyRock. I appreciate your thoughts.

 

I'm still looking around, may not end up with that many watches, lots of variables. I am not adverse to a bitchslap or two in the morning, either. It isn't the accuracy that concerns me, I just don't want to be damaging whatever I end up with.

 

These rep makers should start replicating high-quality winders. Sheesh.

 

Frankly, I'm amazed that the type of wear I've seen in looking around hasn't long since been dispensed to the rubbish bin of history. The "I wound my watch carefully each day for five years and damaged it in the process of doing to it what it was designed to do" idea of watch maintenance is lunacy.

 

The best ones alter the date too, you know when there's only 30 days

 

Oh MAN, I gotta gets me one!!

[RichardMiami 4]

I own more than 5 premium Gen watches. Winders are a total waste of time and money.

 

1. Should I have a winder for each of my watches? I wear them in rotation, so that would mean having about 2 dozen winders going each night. Have you ever seen the pictures of guys who collect cuckoo clocks?

 

2. They are noisy - except for the premium (expensive) winders, the mid and low range winders are fucking LOUD. I would rather spend my money on watches (and hookers and blow)

 

3. When I pick up a watch to wear each day, I actually enjoy setting it.... including my Day/Date watches... it is fun and part of the hobby. I have a few quartzes in my collection that I can pick up and put on............ and I don't like it. I check them anyway!

 

I actually had a large winder in the house. It wound 6 watches I think. I gave it away for free. It was either give it away, or use it for kindling in my fireplace - but since I live in So. Florida, I don't have a fireplace.

 

 

FYI - pic of guy who collects cuckoo clocks:

 

[Left Coast Guy 24]

My argument against watch winders is very simple:

 

A mechanical watch is a machine. Just like any machine, its enemy is friction....which results in wear......which results in malfunction of said machine.

 

If you want to ensure a machine last a long as possible, you run the machine only when you need it. For a mechanical watch, that means you let it run out instead of keeping it running constantly like you would on a winder.

 

So gen or rep the decision is simple -- what is more important to you, the longevity of the watch and infrequency of necessary service or the convenience of not having to set the time/date?

[Steph Deux 0]

2. They are noisy - except for the premium (expensive) winders, the mid and low range winders are fucking LOUD. I would rather spend my money on watches (and hookers and blow

 

Well done, Sir.

[dalboy 2]

Winders ... Unnecessary bits of kit ............... Simple !!

 

Are you a jet setter and every seconds counts ?? If you cant be bothered to wind a watch , Buy a Quartz .

 

 

Dal.

[Steph Deux 0]

My argument against watch winders is very simple:

 

A mechanical watch is a machine. Just like any machine, its enemy is friction....which results in wear......which results in malfunction of said machine.

 

If you want to ensure a machine last a long as possible, you run the machine only when you need it. For a mechanical watch, that means you let it run out instead of keeping it running constantly like you would on a winder.

 

So gen or rep the decision is simple -- what is more important to you, the longevity of the watch and infrequency of necessary service or the convenience of not having to set the time/date?

 

I feel like this is where I am ending up. Friction is friction.

 

How much credence is there to the idea that whatever lubricant is in there degrades into something or other and gums up the mechanism?

 

1) Why the hell is anyone still using that lubricant?

 

2) If that is the case, I would think it would still degrade and gum up the mechanism. Five years sitting, or five years on the arm/winder is still going to end up with degraded goo, yes?

[Steph Deux 0]

As an aside because I'm curious, say two identical movements. One is worn every day and thus kept wound. The other is on a winder and, through some sort of sorcery, is wound the exact same number of times as the first one.

 

At the end of five years, both watches are sent for service. Would there be any noticeable differences in wear on the movements? Obviously the one that is manually set from time to time would have wear in different places. But in winding? Any differences?

 

Thank you all for your help. As always.

[Piloten 332]

Well, yes, watch lubricants do thicken/degrade. Supposed to get your analog watch serviced every now and then, problem solved

 

There is a certain amount of logic in that running a watch constantly shortens its life. However, there is also truth in that letting it sit moves lube away from wear/friction points and --over time-- moves bearing surfaces out of true. Truth also in that starting an engine involves a lot of wear.

 

Many watch people rotate through their collection within a few days/weeks, which is in plenty of time to keep things lubed and running smoothly. The only thing I have ever noticed is that auto watches seem --and maybe it's only perception-- that it takes a day or so for the timing to settle in

[Gazzla 23]

Winders = Doing unnecessary mileage in a car. Simple.

[Piloten 332]

Well, *THAT* certainly brought the discussion to a screeching halt . . .

[Left Coast Guy 24]

As an aside because I'm curious, say two identical movements. One is worn every day and thus kept wound. The other is on a winder and, through some sort of sorcery, is wound the exact same number of times as the first one.

 

At the end of five years, both watches are sent for service. Would there be any noticeable differences in wear on the movements? Obviously the one that is manually set from time to time would have wear in different places. But in winding? Any differences?

 

Thank you all for your help. As always.

 

To your prior post, friction and wear caused by use will always be worse than the potential that gravity may, some day just maybe, move around a tiny amount of lubricant. I mean for the "lubricant gravity" scenario to happen we're talking about leaving your watch in the exact same position for years. Not starting it at all, not moving it ever, not wearing it on a wrist. Can you see how outlandish that is? So no, zero credence to that argument whatsoever....unless you plan to leave your watch for years.

 

On to your next point, I'll ignore the dumb hypothetical and just explain the basic mechanics of a watch movement -- Beyond wear and friction, the other negative impact of a winder is that it keeps the watch constantly charged.....and remember a watch is powered by a spring. If you keep a spring fully wound over time it will lose its shape and hence lose its ability to store potential energy.....meaning the mainspring won't be able to power the watch as well. If you wear a watch all day, then set it on your dresser for the night, it will discharge the spring; there will likely still be some pressure on the spring in the morning (i.e. the watch will still be running) but it will have used some of that stored potential energy. When you wear a watch all day and put it on a winder, it goes on the winder fully wound, then comes off fully wound; the spring is kept under full tension all the times and never gets to regain its shape at all. Over time this will wear out the mainspring.

 

Again, the point is simple -- do you want convenience or do you want less maintenance? Its no more difficult than that.

[Steph Deux 0]

On to your next point, I'll ignore the dumb hypothetical and just explain the basic mechanics of a watch movement

Well, to be clear, it's not a "dumb hypothetical" because you happened to state that it was. Given your reply, it seems that you understand reasoning. You gave the reasons for your position. You gave none to support your comment on the hypothetical.

 

It was a simple question, because I don't know enough about the wear characteristics within movements. It may be that winders would cause less wear for x amount of cycles as compared to real world use because the movement is uniform and exact. It may also be that it has a negligent effect. Hence the question to people who have significantly more experience than I.

 

Not, of course, that I don't appreciate your answer, I do. Thank you.

[Left Coast Guy 24]

On to your next point, I'll ignore the dumb hypothetical and just explain the basic mechanics of a watch movement

Well, to be clear, it's not a "dumb hypothetical" because you happened to state that it was. Given your reply, it seems that you understand reasoning. You gave the reasons for your position. You gave none to support your comment on the hypothetical.

 

It was a simple question, because I don't know enough about the wear characteristics within movements. It may be that winders would cause less wear for x amount of cycles as compared to real world use because the movement is uniform and exact. It may also be that it has a negligent effect. Hence the question to people who have significantly more experience than I.

 

Not, of course, that I don't appreciate your answer, I do. Thank you.

 

Settle down. There are real impacts from normal 'use cases' that are applicable, so its nonsense to start making up fantasy 'use cases' until you understand the basics. Make sense?

[Abe Fromen 1,623]

A winder is only really useful if you have a true perpetual calendar watch. And if you can afford one of those, you can afford the best winder money can buy.

 

That is all.

[Piloten 332]

I thought winders wuz wut yew had on yer compooter

[Steph Deux 0]

On to your next point, I'll ignore the dumb hypothetical and just explain the basic mechanics of a watch movement

Well, to be clear, it's not a "dumb hypothetical" because you happened to state that it was. Given your reply, it seems that you understand reasoning. You gave the reasons for your position. You gave none to support your comment on the hypothetical.

 

It was a simple question, because I don't know enough about the wear characteristics within movements. It may be that winders would cause less wear for x amount of cycles as compared to real world use because the movement is uniform and exact. It may also be that it has a negligent effect. Hence the question to people who have significantly more experience than I.

 

Not, of course, that I don't appreciate your answer, I do. Thank you.

Settle down. There are real impacts from normal 'use cases' that are applicable, so its nonsense to start making up fantasy 'use cases' until you understand the basics. Make sense?

 

The question is quite simple, even if you dislike the hypothetical used to present it: does the exacting nature of a high-end winder result in significantly less wear in a movement compared to the same amount of winding on a wrist? I don't know the effects of torque on the automatic movements, nor their tolerance to shear-like stress as they wind in real life. Given the (in my mind) ludicrously flimsy nature of some of these movements ("I chernged muh dert at the wrong time anit broke muh watch") the question is valid.

 

Can you understand the question this time?

[RUSH2112 11]

On to your next point, I'll ignore the dumb hypothetical and just explain the basic mechanics of a watch movement

Well, to be clear, it's not a "dumb hypothetical" because you happened to state that it was. Given your reply, it seems that you understand reasoning. You gave the reasons for your position. You gave none to support your comment on the hypothetical.

 

It was a simple question, because I don't know enough about the wear characteristics within movements. It may be that winders would cause less wear for x amount of cycles as compared to real world use because the movement is uniform and exact. It may also be that it has a negligent effect. Hence the question to people who have significantly more experience than I.

 

Not, of course, that I don't appreciate your answer, I do. Thank you.

Settle down. There are real impacts from normal 'use cases' that are applicable, so its nonsense to start making up fantasy 'use cases' until you understand the basics. Make sense?

 

The question is quite simple, even if you dislike the hypothetical used to present it: does the exacting nature of a high-end winder result in significantly less wear in a movement compared to the same amount of winding on a wrist? I don't know the effects of torque on the automatic movements, nor their tolerance to shear-like stress as they wind in real life. Given the (in my mind) ludicrously flimsy nature of some of these movements ("I chernged muh dert at the wrong time anit broke muh watch") the question is valid.

 

Can you understand the question this time?

I don't see how the same amount of winding can be worse because it was on a machine or a wrist. As I understand a winder is designed to duplicate the movement of the wrist to keep the watch wound. I'm definitely in the no winder camp. I only set and wind my watches when I wear them.

[Steph Deux 0]

I don't see how the same amount of winding can be worse because it was on a machine or a wrist. As I understand a winder is designed to duplicate the movement of the wrist to keep the watch wound. I'm definitely in the no winder camp. I only set and wind my watches when I wear them.

 

The question is based on the idea that a winder moves in a very uniform way, slowly and gently along the axis of the winding mechanism. Conversely, your arm is all over the place, jumping around. Rarely would the watch on your arm wind along the axis, and it would always be subject to g-forces corresponding to the movement of the arm that do not exist on a winder.

 

Given how fra-gee-lay these things are, I am curious.

[ag69 0]

I have a couple of 8 watch winders. One is a wolf design the other is a cheepie. On the wolf design, I only have 1 watch winding out of the 8 slots. It's a gen Baum et Mercier. The other watches on the winders are all reps and I stopped setting the winder ages ago.

 

The cheepie winder has 8 reps and they all wind. Haven't had any issues yet with the reps. For some reason I keep my gen automatic watches in a box. Long story short, I need another box and was thinking of getting another watch winder. I said fuck the winder and now I'm looking for either a 24 or 30 slot box because I don't want to buy any more watch boxes!!

[Steph Deux 0]

If you buy a twenty-four or thirty slot watch box, soon you will be saying that you want a forty-eight or sixty slot box because you don't want to buy anymore watch boxes.

[gavmeister 1]

Sadly and based on the comments, I think I need to be turning my watch winder into nothing more than a display cabinet....gulp!

[ag69 0]

If you buy a twenty-four or thirty slot watch box, soon you will be saying that you want a forty-eight or sixty slot box because you don't want to buy anymore watch boxes.

 

 

Hopefully not!! I have a 20 watch box full, an 8 watch winder full, and another 8 winder with 12 slots full. Then I have watches I never wear in my gen boxes. I'm hoping if I buy a 24 or 30 slot box I never have to buy another box again!!