So, the short of it is that my grandmother had a stroke at the weekend, and died peacefully in hospital yesterday. I stand to receive a bit of inheritance, and have been told that if there's anything I would like to have from her estate to remember her by, it's OK to ask. I don't really have any need for old ladies dresses, and there's nothing really that I'd be comfortable taking from her home.

As such, I thought why not finally get "THE watch". One that unless I ever ended up receiving a large chunk of money, I'd never otherwise buy. That way I'll have something that's always with me that I'll be able to remember her by.

So, I'm curious what people would get in the price range of £500-£1200. I'm limiting myself from going mad as:

It'd be an everyday watch, worn wherever (except fieldwork)
My dad has an Omega and it costs £500 to service, and it NEEDS the service. Can't justify having an expensive watch that costs the same as a decent watch every couple of years to maintain it.

My current watch is this, but with a leather strap:


Ideally I'd like something in the same vein as the above. I'd like a date function, and preferably alarm. I rarely ever use the stopwatch, but sometimes will use my alarm on the watch if I don't have anything else around. I'm not too keen on plain watchfaces where it's a watch that costs £1000 and it's just got an hour and minute hand and maybe the date. But at the same time, I'm not keen on over-designed watches either where fake bolts and gears are attached to add to the style.

I had thought of getting a "Ball" watch, I've seen some in jewelers windows which looked nice, prbably a bit out of my price range. I often struggle as they look awesome in the windows and then on the internet they look hideous in the photos!

Thoughts?

£500 service on watch indicates more money than sense. There isn't enough goodies in a watch to warrant any servicing beyond a battery change.

Unless it has something special like a solid gold case I wouldn't spend more than £50 on a watch, although I understand why you want this. Try putting her picture up on the wall to remember her.

My dads service was something to do with the watch having fancy super-duper O-ring seals that are excellent, but perish after a few years. End result was that he didn't know about the recommended annual servicing until the seals went and he got condensation in his £2500 watch...

Picture would be great, we just don't have (m)any that are recent and good as she was so ill for the last 10 years. Also we're going to be doing a fair bit of travelling and likely to emigrate so it'd be nice to not have to carry things like that around.

If I had the money I'd have an Omega Seamaster Planet Ocean, it's the only watch I've ever truly desired and I always have to stop and look when I see them in a shop window. I think unless you have your heart set on something very special then it isn't worth the investment, but if you do then go for it. I'd never accept a substitute, and if I was going to go cheaper I'd probably buy a Christopher Ward. However, despite the talk of servicing costs (I'm pretty sure most aren't as bad as that) you'll find a well looked after watch like an Omega will hold it's value well (or for limited lines might noticably appreciate in value) and still look the business in 20 years time. Small price to pay for a cherished and sentimental item I personally feel.

Quote from: zpyder on January 23, 2013, 11:18:18 AM
My dads service was something to do with the watch having fancy super-duper O-ring seals that are excellent, but perish after a few years. End result was that he didn't know about the recommended annual servicing until the seals went and he got condensation in his £2500 watch...

Few years back when I was short I bought a £1 watch, surprisingly it didn't leak in the year I had that although eventually the battery ran out. Neither have any of the Casio watches, even though I wore one for over ten years.

If a company can't manufacture seals out of material that will last and still be waterproof then that company doesn't deserve surviving in business.

I got this coming any day now:

Quote from: Serious on January 24, 2013, 11:16:53 AM
Few years back when I was short I bought a £1 watch

Have you grown since then?

I'm sure the likes of Omega, Tag, Breitling, Rolex, etc are all struggling to keep up with the rampant technological pace of Casio, they must be paying them to fit their scratch resistant sapphire crystal and helium escape valves.

I had a casio watch, the calculator one, that lasted forever, despite me wishing it would die.

My old adidas watch ate its 3rd battery and is showing some scars after around 7 years use so its being retired.

Just ordered a Tissot (http://www.watchshop.com/mens-tissot-pr100-chronograph-watch-t0494171105700-p99939936.html) on special offer, hope it lasts as long.

I am right handed and wear my watch mainly on my right hand. I am told this is odd

Quote from: Serious on January 23, 2013, 10:32:31 AM
£500 service on watch indicates more money than sense. There isn't enough goodies in a watch to warrant any servicing beyond a battery change.

The sort of watches that require servicing don't have batteries... in fact the lack of a battery is the reason they require servicing in the first place.

Still, I agree, it is a lot of money... I don't think I'd be buying anything requiring that sort of fee for servicing any time soon.

Quote from: neXus on January 24, 2013, 23:14:11 PM
I am right handed and wear my watch mainly on my right hand. I am told this is odd

Same as me then..

This thread is just plain wrong without paying homage to the legendary http://www.skywatches.com.sg/  alas their website is 'slightly less sh*t' now

Quote from: Dave on January 24, 2013, 23:21:29 PM

Quote from: Serious on January 23, 2013, 10:32:31 AM
£500 service on watch indicates more money than sense. There isn't enough goodies in a watch to warrant any servicing beyond a battery change.

The sort of watches that require servicing don't have batteries... in fact the lack of a battery is the reason they require servicing in the first place.

Still, I agree, it is a lot of money... I don't think I'd be buying anything requiring that sort of fee for servicing any time soon.

There is very little reason not to go for a battery watch, mine generally last several years without any problems or needing a replacement battery. The longest went seven years before the battery ran out, the strap broke before a second replacement was needed. Environmental cost is minimal. I have one which uses a radio time signal to keep accurate to a fraction of a second, although it isn't the one I normally use. Still it means that accuracy is no longer a reason to buy an expensive watch, the only reason to do that is having too much money and wanting to show off. Then they attract thieves too.

My every day watch is one that speaks the time or date when I press the button. Waking up in the middle of the night no longer requires a light on to find out the time.

Quote from: Binary Shadow on January 25, 2013, 12:01:09 PM

Quote from: neXus on January 24, 2013, 23:14:11 PM
I am right handed and wear my watch mainly on my right hand. I am told this is odd

Same as me then..

Me too, though it varies now on what I'm doing and which watch I'm wearing.

Quote from: Serious on January 25, 2013, 13:32:59 PM

Quote from: Dave on January 24, 2013, 23:21:29 PM

Quote from: Serious on January 23, 2013, 10:32:31 AM
£500 service on watch indicates more money than sense. There isn't enough goodies in a watch to warrant any servicing beyond a battery change.

The sort of watches that require servicing don't have batteries... in fact the lack of a battery is the reason they require servicing in the first place.

Still, I agree, it is a lot of money... I don't think I'd be buying anything requiring that sort of fee for servicing any time soon.

There is very little reason not to go for a battery watch, mine generally last several years without any problems or needing a replacement battery. The longest went seven years before the battery ran out, the strap broke before a second replacement was needed. Environmental cost is minimal. I have one which uses a radio time signal to keep accurate to a fraction of a second, although it isn't the one I normally use. Still it means that accuracy is no longer a reason to buy an expensive watch, the only reason to do that is having too much money and wanting to show off. Then they attract thieves too.

My every day watch is one that speaks the time or date when I press the button. Waking up in the middle of the night no longer requires a light on to find out the time.

Or because they like to look good.

Rocking up to a black tie dinner with the terrorists fave Casio vs rocking up to a black tie dinner with a Rolex.

Not showing off its just fashion.

As for needing a light on, since the invention of glow in the dark materials, this hasn't been an issue.

Zpyder if you like quirky watches, check out kisai watches http://www.tokyoflash.com/en/watches/1/