WatchUSeek Watch Forums banner

1 - 20 of 59 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
35 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I tend to be minimalistic and prefer simple clean watches. So normally I would say lose the useless seconds hand. But then I would not be comfortable without it merely because it is my only instant indicator that the watch is working. So if I'm in a meeting and I glance at my watch, I don't have to wonder if he time is correct or if the watch is dead.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,529 Posts
I neither like nor hate seconds hands. I am happy either way. I guess I've never really worried if the watch was working - if it seems about right then I'll go with it...
 

·
Moderator Public Forum
Joined
·
22,343 Posts
I find the seconds hand useful as an indi ator the movement is running. Can't say I love or hate it though.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
209 Posts
|> Except on quartz.
This. I like seeing a how accurate my automatic can be and the sweeping of the second hand is pleasing to the eye. On most quartz watches, the second hand doesn't like up with the markers and I just can't get used to that for some reason.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,845 Posts
I like the central sweeping hand on mechanicals. I'm not a fan of the small seconds hand unless its on a chrono. Finally I hate the ticking hand of a quartz. Those watches are better off with no seconds hand IMO.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
351 Posts
I like the central sweeping hand on mechanicals. I'm not a fan of the small seconds hand unless its on a chrono. Finally I hate the ticking hand of a quartz. Those watches are better off with no seconds hand IMO.
Agreed even more so if the hand doesn't line up with the markers
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,802 Posts
I prefer my watches to have seconds hands, except on very dressy quartz styles, where I prefer the simple two-hand look.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,060 Posts
I like the central sweeping hand on mechanicals. I'm not a fan of the small seconds hand unless its on a chrono. Finally I hate the ticking hand of a quartz. Those watches are better off with no seconds hand IMO.
Perfect answer for me.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
39,270 Posts
I like the central sweeping hand on mechanicals. I'm not a fan of the small seconds hand unless its on a chrono. Finally I hate the ticking hand of a quartz. Those watches are better off with no seconds hand IMO.
Similar to this, but without the quartz hate (as long as it hits the markers perfectly)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,023 Posts
Prefer a seconds hand, either central or sub dial but not a deal breaker if I like the overall look without . . . . .
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,189 Posts
The only watch I have without a second hand is a one-handed watch I wear only rarely. If nothing else, it's very useful in judging accuracy--and I sometimes use it to time things like puffs on my cigar!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,138 Posts
The beauty of a smooth rotating second hand is 1 of the beauties of an automatic that I'm not about ready to lose.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,125 Posts
I like the seconds hand. Not only does it show me my watch is running at a glance, but lets me time things that are less than a minute.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,533 Posts
Love it, and prefer a watch to have a central one, but in a sub-dial will do if not.
One of my biggest gripes about the T-Touch is that it doesn't have one and I have to use the secondary display to show the time - with seconds.
Most of my analogue watches are chronographs, and I will run the chrono so that I can get a moving hand on occasions.
Probably something to do with my OCD fascination with timing everything...
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
7,695 Posts
I require it. It's comforting. Not having one I find to be a turn off. For me, part of setting a watch is zero-ing the seconds hand so I can check to see how well it is running.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tigerpac

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,061 Posts
Me too. Love seconds hands on a watch. Any watch, quartz or mechanical. The thought of purchasing a beautiful mechanical and not being able to watch the smooth sweep of a seconds hand seems like a waste. Plus, I do use the seconds hand. To time things, and to set my watches as closely to actual time as I can. My JLC Reverso, does not have a seconds hand. I wish it did, but it is a quartz piece, so the hand wouldn't be smooth anyway. I bet it would be on the mark for every click if it did have a seconds hand.

I just don't see myself buying a watch without a seconds hand. With one of my more recent purchases, my Frederique Constant FC-710, I could have saved some $$ and gotten the predecessor to that watch, with virtually the same movement, but it doesn't have a seconds hand, so I spent more and got the 710, with a seconds hand.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
609 Posts
Like the sweep on autos, offset small subs too and "full" size seconds are OK as well. I'd rather have one than not. hard to hate a hard working component, thatlildude is working 24/7.
 
1 - 20 of 59 Posts
Top