At this time of year, the variations in temperature brought about by changeable spring weather make my wrist size expand and contract a fair amount. As a result, on my current favorite watch-on-bracelet that has no option for on-the-fly tool-less adjustment, I can never find the best combination of links and/or micro-adjust holes to make it through a day without feeling like it is too loose or too tight. It is a constant niggle that detracts from my enjoyment of the watch. Similarly, the holes on leather straps and their associated deployants often don’t provide sufficient micro adjustability. If companies like Christopher Ward, Citizen and even AliExpress brands can produce watch bracelets with perfectly reasonable on-the-fly tool-less adjustable clasps, don’t you think it should be a minimum expectation to have it on all watches that come with a bracelet or deployant?
Does not having an on-the-fly tool-less adjustable clasp for your bracelet or deployant drive you bananas?
1 - 20 of 110 Posts
I think it's one of the strangest gaps for watches in general. To your point, implementation is all over the place and not at all tied to cost or "luxury level" of a given watch. I'm sure there are plenty of factors, including subjectivity of comfort and patent controls, but it definitely feels like every watch above a certain price point, at least, should have a tool-less micro-adjustable clasp. In general I also think luxury watches that use straps should come with deployants which would help prevent degradation of the strap over time just from regular use.
Could not agree more!
Joined
·
5,612 Posts
Most add considerable bulk which I'd rather not have.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Very similar to my experience. I have always loved perlon, NATO, Marine Nacionale-style and even velcro straps, but, over the last year, I have been, like you, "trying real hard to like bracelets." However, the lack of easy adjustability has been trying!!
I can definitely see with somewhat more formal watches the bulk, sometimes associated with adjustability, could present a challenge. Perhaps adjustability is better suited to sports watches or the type of watch that one might wear for activities indoor and out; situations where you might expect your wrist to expand and contract more frequently?
Couldnt agree more
I wear my most expensive and loved watch a lot less because of it (BB58)
If zelos can make it standard on their sub 500usd watches it should be standard on any serious watch
Let's face it; its not some crazy engineering feat..
Sent from my SM-G986B using Tapatalk
I wear my most expensive and loved watch a lot less because of it (BB58)
If zelos can make it standard on their sub 500usd watches it should be standard on any serious watch
Let's face it; its not some crazy engineering feat..
Sent from my SM-G986B using Tapatalk
Joined
·
4,973 Posts
Nah, I usually just have the bracelet sized to fit perfectly when the wrist is the most swollen. Sometimes that means it’s a bit loose but it’s all good. A little movement to readjust its position if needed is good.
but I will say that it’s always a nice feature to have and I would choose it over not having it, unless it made the clasp of a certain watch too bulky given the design of the watch.
but I will say that it’s always a nice feature to have and I would choose it over not having it, unless it made the clasp of a certain watch too bulky given the design of the watch.
Perhaps I have to learn to loosen up!
Joined
·
4,973 Posts
Oh, but while we’re on bracelets I will say that there is no reason not to have at least 3 micro adjust holes AND at least one half link that is a different size than those holes. There is, in my mind, no reason at all this solution can’t or shouldn’t be implemented regardless of the watch design.
butterfly clasps are the devils playground.
butterfly clasps are the devils playground.
I have had a similar experience. I want "my most expensive and loved watch" to be perfect! I don't want to wear it less or to feel like I want to make some after-market adjustment to it when it easily could have come perfect from the watchmaker's bench.
This!!!! 3 micro adjusts minimum! And, why would you go to the trouble of providing a half link or links and then just make them the same size as the micro-adjusts... now that is bananas! But, it is what I'm dealing with. Oh well; watch aficionado problems!
Joined
·
869 Posts
Count me in also! Only caveat is that on the Citizen of mine that has this, I need to use this almost like a microadjust to get a good fit anyway, and it’s at the most extreme tightness for the mechanism. If I add a link, I need to set it to the loosest. I’d love if my perfect daily fit was in the middle position if that makes sense.
Joined
·
146 Posts
I see no use for quick-adjustment, and I see it as a negative, as it adds bulk to the clasp, which I really don't like.
I had a watch once with a quick-adjust clasp, which I never used. I typically remove a SS bracelet for a strap. And I always use the same hole (there's a joke here).
My theory, I have a thin bony wrists. Those with (how can I put this delicately) "thicker" wrists have "non-bony stuff" in their wrists which (I hear) expands and contract with differences in temperature. I guess what I'm suggesting is that for some people this is a huge problem. But for others (like me) it's actually NOT wanted because it adds bulk to the clasp (which I really dislike).
Anyway, what I'm suggesting is that there's two groups of people. Those who require quick-adjust clasps and don't mind bulky clasps, and those who prefer thin light-weight clasps and don't need quick-adjustment.
I had a watch once with a quick-adjust clasp, which I never used. I typically remove a SS bracelet for a strap. And I always use the same hole (there's a joke here).
My theory, I have a thin bony wrists. Those with (how can I put this delicately) "thicker" wrists have "non-bony stuff" in their wrists which (I hear) expands and contract with differences in temperature. I guess what I'm suggesting is that for some people this is a huge problem. But for others (like me) it's actually NOT wanted because it adds bulk to the clasp (which I really dislike).
Anyway, what I'm suggesting is that there's two groups of people. Those who require quick-adjust clasps and don't mind bulky clasps, and those who prefer thin light-weight clasps and don't need quick-adjustment.
It does! I've seen some on-the-fly adjustable clasps with only two positions. Seems to me they need three - if not more. And, the adjustments (or total adjustment) of the on-the-fly adjustable clasp need to be of different length to that provided by the bracelet's normal or half links.
I'd also add quick swap to the list. There's absolutely no reason I shouldn't be able to easily swap my bracelet or strap.
Re: Bracelets
You don't need a bulky clasp for micro adjustment. There are plenty of implementations that are as easy as opening the clasp and moving it slightly.
Re: Bracelets
You don't need a bulky clasp for micro adjustment. There are plenty of implementations that are as easy as opening the clasp and moving it slightly.
Joined
·
7 Posts
Once you tried on the fly clasp I think you can't go back.
1 - 20 of 110 Posts
