Torn on oysterquartz

[lappy4711]

Would be nice with some input. I'm very, very tempted by the oysterquartz, I love the design and also the overengineered movement. And this is actually the problem...for me, the "nicer" a watch is the more reason that is should be around for a long long time, functioning. I would say there is a significant possibility that most oysterquartz watches are beautiful dead bricks in 40-50 years due to failed circuits and lack of parts and/or support...and that puts me off. And yet, I love them...any input would be welcome.

[Old Expat Beast]

Originally Posted by lappy4711

Would be nice with some input. I'm very, very tempted by the oysterquartz, I love the design and also the overengineered movement. And this is actually the problem...for me, the "nicer" a watch is the more reason that is should be around for a long long time, functioning. I would say there is a significant possibility that most oysterquartz watches are beautiful dead bricks in 40-50 years due to failed circuits and lack of parts and/or support...and that puts me off. And yet, I love them...any input would be welcome.

Half a century is a long time to be planning ahead for watch functionality.

[Andad]

I’ll also be a dead brick by then but I will be wearing my OQ.

[Acidstain]

In 40-50 years they’d be 80-90 years old.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Andad]

Another pix to enable you lappy.

[lappy4711]

Originally Posted by Andad

Another pix to enable you lappy.

Haha, yes I am probably looking to be enabled. An AD here in stockholm has a 1997 two tone, full set, serviced in great condition for appr $4800.

[zapokee]

They're beautiful. Get one.

If we all planned for what might happen decades ahead, we'd never do or achieve anything.

[1William]

Cool watch and I would buy the example you are considering if I wanted the watch. I do not think in 40-50 years it will be an issue as way too many factors figure in. Go for it.

[wisguy]

Originally Posted by lappy4711

Would be nice with some input. I'm very, very tempted by the oysterquartz, I love the design and also the overengineered movement. And this is actually the problem...for me, the "nicer" a watch is the more reason that is should be around for a long long time, functioning. I would say there is a significant possibility that most oysterquartz watches are beautiful dead bricks in 40-50 years due to failed circuits and lack of parts and/or support...and that puts me off. And yet, I love them...any input would be welcome.

I owned one for a while and it's great, but I could never get a comfortable fit for some reason (happens to me often).

The only thing that I didn't like was the loud tic...

I would not worry about the future, Rolex will probably find a way to keep them working, could be expensive though. The movement is one of the most robust quartz movements out there.

Not sure how old you are, but if you use it for 50 years and then it doesn't work I'd say you got you're money's worth. How many things you have that last 50 years?

[wisguy]

It’s a great watch!

[dbhak22]

It's a great watch; cool design (integrated bracelet!) and depending on the reference/era, has one of the simplest dial designs Rolex has ever made (only 3 lines/words!):



While I owned this, the issue I had was what wisguy mentions above...how "loud" it is. Of course it's relative, but for a watch the Oysterquartz is loud. At night, it sounds like a dripping faucet, :)

[lappy4711]

Originally Posted by wisguy

I owned one for a while and it's great, but I could never get a comfortable fit for some reason (happens to me often).

The only thing that I didn't like was the loud tic...

I would not worry about the future, Rolex will probably find a way to keep them working, could be expensive though. The movement is one of the most robust quartz movements out there.

Not sure how old you are, but if you use it for 50 years and then it doesn't work I'd say you got you're money's worth. How many things you have that last 50 years?

It's more of a principal objection against well crafted watches with exotic "stuff" in them, making them impossible to understand and maintain far into the future. Like Roger Smith puts it: "You can buy a mechanical watch that is 300-400 years old and it will still keep time very well with a little service. What’s wrong with continuing to use these materials? I know these materials are tried and tested and I know that by using these traditional materials and methods, I can build watches that will be around for hundreds of years. We can still replace components if need be. I don’t really know how anyone is benefiting from these new materials."

[Vlad]

I can somewhat relate to OP, as I had a number of dead oysterquartz (and a dead Beta21 as well). They are not easy to fix and parts are impossible to source. OK, that does not mean that I do not own any, I do. However, given a choice, I would go with either 1530 or 1630

[L.K Johnson]

I love mine! It’s really a robust bastard compared to the flimsiness of a 1601/16014 on jubilee, that’s fa sho!

[ronricks]

I have pondered getting a beat up 17000 or 17013 and sending it in to Rolex to be completely overhauled. I wouldn’t worry about parts as they didn’t make too many of the OQ so it isn’t like they are having to service these a lot it should leave lots of parts available. It’s a great unique over engineered watch.

[lhendrickson]

Originally Posted by wisguy

It’s a great watch!

What a choice example! Hell yeah

[Wcdhtwn]

Originally Posted by Old Expat Beast

Half a century is a long time to be planning ahead for watch functionality.

Granted I’m not Oyster quartz expert but it’s been 20 years (more,less?) since they made them. So if you get 40 years total that’s not a great outlook given the expenditure, and what automatic watches you could buy instead...

[zapokee]

Originally Posted by Wcdhtwn

So if you get 40 years total that’s not a great outlook given the expenditure, and what automatic watches you could buy instead...

It will last you a lifetime. Rolex provides full service for them - the view that they're difficult to service is a silly myth.

I had a complete RSC overhaul on mine a couple of years ago. I'm wearing it right now.

[mineral]

I love the OQ and RSC will change the battery free of charge for lifetime too.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[214270Explorer]

OQ is a classic. Get one. Get it serviced now so it lasts more decades. And perhaps Rolex will not be able to service these much longer? Someone needs to preserve these!

[zapokee]

Originally Posted by mineral

I love the OQ and RSC will change the battery free of charge for lifetime too.

Yes and no. My RSC insisted on a full service @700 USD to accompany the "free" battery change. That's how they get you.

Fair enough, it did need the service. It ended up effectively being a $700 battery and a beautifully purring OQ. I'm happy with that.

[Old Expat Beast]

Originally Posted by mineral

I love the OQ and RSC will change the battery free of charge for lifetime too.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Some will, some won't.

[L.K Johnson]

I love those YouTube clips were someone puts a mic next to an OQ just to hear that wonderful ticking sound. Couldn’t find the exact one I was looking for but a similar:

https://youtu.be/lW8Egris78o

Here is another cool video when they compare an AP and an OQ. Pretty interesting to see how the bracelet finish isn’t that far off AP:

https://youtu.be/zUzVqeYJv9k

[lhendrickson]

Originally Posted by L.K Johnson

I love those YouTube clips were someone puts a mic next to an OQ just to hear that wonderful ticking sound. Couldn’t find the exact one I was looking for but a similar:

https://youtu.be/lW8Egris78o

Here is another cool video when they compare an AP and an OQ. Pretty interesting to see how the bracelet finish isn’t that far off AP:

https://youtu.be/zUzVqeYJv9k

The bracelet is what led me to buy my 1601 and is the reason I love the OQ so very much. It's just ... wonderful. I helped my father source a 17000 from 1980 with a black dial and an Oyster bracelet. Damn it's clean and I love the matte finish. So boss.

Also, thanks for the vids! I didn't quite realize how loud the OQ was (I don't see my father all that much rn due to COVID) and appreciate the close-up with the AP.

[214270Explorer]

Tried one on in 1987 when getting an OP Date.
I could not believe how loud that OQ was.
It was so loud I was wondering why I could not feel it.
Of course today with deteriorating hearing (I am now 70), I can hardly hear the neighbor's barking dogs.
A blessing, in a weird sort of way.

[Swearengen]

I think you may be over thinking this my friend. Buy and enjoy.

Even the Omega 2.4 Megaquartz can be serviced by a specialist and there was a fraction of the number of those produced

[L.K Johnson]

Originally Posted by lhendrickson

The bracelet is what led me to buy my 1601 and is the reason I love the OQ so very much. It's just ... wonderful. I helped my father source a 17000 from 1980 with a black dial and an Oyster bracelet. Damn it's clean and I love the matte finish. So boss.

Also, thanks for the vids! I didn't quite realize how loud the OQ was (I don't see my father all that much rn due to COVID) and appreciate the close-up with the AP.

Cool that you like the videos! 17000 is just a great solid watch! It’s def on my list for the future!

[zapokee]

Originally Posted by L.K Johnson

17000 is just a great solid watch! It’s def on my list for the future!

Why for the future? Buyer's market right now!

[Alcan]

For anyone who likes the OQ style but is skittish about the movement, the 1630 is an option.

[Andad]

A very nice sharp example AL.