Current Events > Is Timex a decent watch brand?

(+) Yeah! (+)

Was looking at this

https://www.timex.com/expedition-scout-chronograph-42mm-leather-strap-watch/TW4B157009J.html

65 ducks ain't bad imo and it looks nice. Not too flashy. I usually go with skeleton watches but it'll be nice to have one where I don't have to manually wind each time lol


---

Decent is Omega or Rolex. If you have a bit more cash go for Patek Philippe, Vacheron or Audermars Piguet.

---

@No_U_L7

---

It worked for Ryo in Shenmue

---

For what it's worth, I'm not tryna spend over 100 lol

---

no, but if 100 is your budget yes
---

They're fine

No_U_L7 posted...

no, but if 100 is your budget yes

Sweet. Got the PUA seal of approval!!!!

treewojima posted...

They're fine

Unsugarized_Foo posted...

It worked for Ryo in Shenmue

I'll take these too!!!!!!

---

its 2020

get a smart watch

---

MixedRaceBaby posted...

its 2020

get a smart watch

ur face is a smart watch


---

My dad wears Timexs and Im always buying him new ones. Ive noticed the metal will start to turn and deteriorate. The part that touches your skin the most is stainless steel but the top part of the case may be cheaper material. Where the top part of the case meets the bottom stainless steel part usually starts to deteriorate.

---

BeyondWalls posted...

My dad wears Timexs and Im always buying him new ones. Ive noticed the metal will start to turn and deteriorate. The part that touches your skin the most is stainless steel but the top part of the case may be cheaper material. Where the top part of the case meets the bottom stainless steel part usually starts to deteriorate.

Hm. How long usually until the top part starts deteriorating would you say about? @BeyondWalls

---

If you're under the age of 12 sure lol.

I'm not a big watch snob and wont pay over $300 but honestly anything over that you're just paying for the name/materials. A watch is a watch, period.
But if you want something nice, functional and wont break the bank check out Invicta (I like their Speedways), their really nice pieces start at about $100 and just go up from there.

---

Touch posted...

ur face is a smart watch

Smart watches are getting discounted black Friday outside of Apple watches.

---

PoundGarden posted...

I'm not a big watch snob and wont pay over $300 but honestly anything over that you're just paying for the name/materials. A watch is a watch, period.

that's not true at all. that's like saying "a car is a car". what's inside it and craftsmanship is important. i can absolutely 100% tell the difference between a watch at all the different price points
---

timex is definitely a decent brand for sure. for under 100 i would definitely recommend a seiko though, specifically a seiko 5 it is a very solid automatic watch for an amazing price

---

Get Kisai watches instead.

---

No_U_L7 posted...

that's not true at all. that's like saying "a car is a car". what's inside it and craftsmanship is important. i can absolutely 100% tell the difference between a watch at all the different price points

Do they both tell time accurately? The cr analogy doesnt work imo, everything about a Lambo compared to say a Ford Fiesta is different and they perform night and day differently. Regardless of how many fancy parts a $5k Rolex has it still tells time the same as a $49 off the shelf from Target watch. Albeit with better materials. That's like saying a gold plated diamond encrusted fork work better than a plastic one. It does the same thing but with more style.

---

PoundGarden posted...

Do they both tell time accurately? The cr analogy doesnt work imo, everything about a Lambo compared to say a Ford Fiesta is different and they perform night and day differently. Regardless of how many fancy parts a $5k Rolex has it still tells time the same as a $49 off the shelf from Target watch. Albeit with better materials. That's like saying a gold plated diamond encrusted fork work better than a plastic one. It does the same thing but with more style.

Do they both get you where you need to be? The watch analogy doesnt work imo, everything about a rolex compared to say a timex is different and they perform night and day differently. Regardless of how many fancy parts a $100k lambo has it still gets you to your destination the same as a $14499 off the shelf ford car. Albeit with better materials. That's like saying a gold plated diamond encrusted fork work better than a plastic one. It does the same thing but with more style.
---

PoundGarden posted...

If you're under the age of 12 sure lol.

I'm not a big watch snob and wont pay over $300 but honestly anything over that you're just paying for the name/materials. A watch is a watch, period.
But if you want something nice, functional and wont break the bank check out Invicta (I like their Speedways), their really nice pieces start at about $100 and just go up from there.

I'm confused. You said a watch is a watch but you said Timex watches are for people under 12? Huh?

---

andel posted...

for under 100 i would definitely recommend a seiko though, specifically a seiko 5 it is a very solid automatic watch for an amazing price

Second this, you can find a Seiko SNK in the same range as that Timex sometimes. Great automatic field watch for the price

---

InYourWalls1 posted...

Second this, you can find a Seiko SNK in the same range as that Timex sometimes. Great automatic field watch for the price

he doesnt care about automatic vs quartz, it sounds like he just wants the way a chronograph looks on his wrist
---

Touch posted...

I'm confused. You said a watch is a watch but you said Timex watches are for people under 12? Huh?

I got the impression you were looking for something beyond a basic watch. For me and everyone I know Timex is usually associated with younger people or people who dont care at all about anything beyond telling time. Which is fine,but you asked. So yeah a Timex will work just fine, I just thought you wanted something with a lil more pizzazz that is a "man's watch".
Marc Anthony would be another great choice for value and style

---

No_U_L7 posted...

he doesnt care about automatic vs quartz, it sounds like he just wants the way a chronograph looks on his wrist

Honestly I wouldn't really say the chronograph. But the font on the numbers and the three inner circles just look...appealing to me in a way I can't really elaborate on lol. Plus I'm a big fan of brown leather bands and while I tend to get silver and silver or white face watches, the black and off white appeals to me too

---

Touch posted...

Honestly I wouldn't really say the chronograph. But the font on the numbers and the three inner circles just look...appealing to me in a way I can't really elaborate on lol. Plus I'm a big fan of brown leather bands and while I tend to get silver and silver or white face watches, the black and off white appeals to me too

bands are easy to swap on your own

most watches with the three inner circles are chronos, sometimes you'll see seconds/month/day organized in the same fashion
---

PoundGarden posted...

I got the impression you were looking for something beyond a basic watch. For me and everyone I know Timex is usually associated with younger people or people who dont care at all about anything beyond telling time. Which is fine,but you asked. So yeah a Timex will work just fine, I just thought you wanted something with a lil more pizzazz that is a "man's watch".
Marc Anthony would be another great choice for value and style

Ah okay. Thanks for elaborating. The Timex watch I posted isn't too basic and not too flashy either. Whereas the seikos I looked up, I would say are leaning on the too basic side for me.

Looked up marc anthony watches and this


Would usually be the kind I would get with the part skeleton face. I saw a few with the three inner circles like the one I posted too.


---

No_U_L7 posted...

Do they both get you where you need to be? The watch analogy doesnt work imo, everything about a rolex compared to say a timex is different and they perform night and day differently. Regardless of how many fancy parts a $100k lambo has it still gets you to your destination the same as a $14499 off the shelf ford car. Albeit with better materials. That's like saying a gold plated diamond encrusted fork work better than a plastic one. It does the same thing but with more style.

Cute. Wrong, but cute. A Lambo will do literally everything better than a Fiesta, primarily how fast it goes it's insane you're trying to deny that lol.

If you feel like having an actual discussion, feel free to educate me on how a several thousand dollar watch tells time "better" or "faster" than a $50-$300 one.

---

Touch posted...

Ah okay. Thanks for elaborating. The Timex watch I posted isn't too basic and not too flashy either. Whereas the seikos I looked up, I would say are leaning on the too basic side for me.

Looked up marc anthony watches and this


Would usually be the kind I would get with the part skeleton face. I saw a few with the three inner circles like the one I posted too.

If you see a Timex you like go for it, I would too. I just wouldn't seek that brand out, if that makes sense. Here's an Invicta I just picked up:

https://imgflip.com/i/4ld267

And my Marc Anthony

https://imgflip.com/i/4ld2o4

---

PoundGarden posted...

Cute. Wrong, but cute. If you feel like having an actual discussion, feel free to educate me on how a several thousand dollar watch tells time better than a $50-$300 one.

like a car, there's many factors of a watch besides "looks" and "functionality"

let's use my omega as an example (the same watch james bond uses)
-the movement is automatic, so there's no battery...it's powered by the movement of your wrists
-within the automatic movement range, it is in the top tier, developed to tell time withing 5 seconds/day (15-20 seconds is the industry standard)
-it also stores enough energy to tell time for 55 hours off the wrist (40 is the industry standard)
-the movement has also been tested under extreme conditions, ie temperature etc
-the movement has an extremely high rating for anti magnetism
-the lume used is near the top quality, you'd be surprised how much low quality lume watches are out there
-design: the hands and dial are extremely developed, with great polishing to make it look aesthetically pleasing and extremely easy to read
-the bracelet is more well designed and comfortable than standard
-Anti reflective coating on BOTH sides of the crystal...cheaper watches don't have any, expensive ones only have it one side
-sapphire crystal (mineral crystal is on cheaper watches)

in a work meeting atm so typed that up quickly
---

Oh I wasn't really seeking exclusively timexs. I kinda just Googled good watches around $70 and that was one of the ones that popped up lol

---

No_U_L7 posted...

like a car, there's many factors of a watch besides "looks" and "functionality"

let's use my omega as an example (the same watch james bond uses)
-the movement is automatic, so there's no battery...it's powered by the movement of your wrists
-within the automatic movement range, it is in the top tier, developed to tell time withing 5 seconds/day (15-20 seconds is the industry standard)
-it also stores enough energy to tell time for 55 hours off the wrist (40 is the industry standard)
-the movement has also been tested under extreme conditions, ie temperature etc
-the movement has an extremely high rating for anti magnetism
-the lume used is near the top quality, you'd be surprised how much low quality lume watches are out there
-design: the hands and dial are extremely developed, with great polishing to make it look aesthetically pleasing and extremely easy to read
-the bracelet is more well designed and comfortable than standard
-Anti reflective coating on BOTH sides of the crystal...cheaper watches don't have any, expensive ones only have it one side
-sapphire crystal (mineral crystal is on cheaper watches)

in a work meeting atm so typed that up quickly

90% of what you cited was aesthetics/cosmetic. Automatic movement is great, and you can easily get that in a watch for under $100.

So....I'm still not sold on how a several thousand dollar watch tells time "better" than a cheap one.

---

PoundGarden posted...

90% of what you cited was aesthetics/cosmetic. Automatic movement is great, and you can easily get that in a watch for under $100.

So....I'm still not sold on how a several thousand dollar watch tells time "better" than a cheap one.

Literally 10% of what I listed is cosmetic...do you know what cosmetic means?

And is it that difficult to understand there are different tiers of automatic movements lol
---

If you're OK with Chinese watches that copied Rolex designs (or homages as it's often spun by proponents) these Pagani Design Daytona watches are generally liked by the budget watch communities. They're not anywhere near the quality of a Rolex, but they use a reliable Seiko chronograph quartz movement and are a great value for the price. I linked to Amazon, but you can find them cheaper on ebay or aliexpress. ~$60 is a good price for them.

https://www.amazon.com/Japanese-Chronograph-Stainless-Multi-Function-Waterproof/dp/B08838HMBN?th=1&psc=1




---

No_U_L7 posted...

Literally 10% of what I listed is cosmetic...do you know what cosmetic means?

And is it that difficult to understand there are different tiers of automatic movements lol

So you must not know what cosmetic means, because other than movement, literally everything you cited was cosmetic (band design, hands, coating etc).

You still have not demonstrated how a high end watch tells time "better". Do...do you know what "telling time" means? I don't think you do, because it has fuck all to do with the band/bracelet, hand/face materials or anything else you listed beyond automatic movement. Which, again, can be found in watches as cheap as $20-$30.

---

PoundGarden posted...

So you must not know what cosmetic means, because other than movement, literally everything you cited was cosmetic (band design, hands, coating etc).

You still have not demonstrated how a high end watch tells time "better". Do...do you know what "telling time" means? I don't think you do, because it has fuck all to do with the band/bracelet, hand/face materials or anything else you listed beyond automatic movement. Which, again, can be found in watches as cheap as $20-$30.

No_U_L7 posted...

like a car, there's many factors of a watch besides "looks" and "functionality"

let's use my omega as an example (the same watch james bond uses)
-the movement is automatic, so there's no battery...it's powered by the movement of your wrists
-within the automatic movement range, it is in the top tier, developed to tell time withing 5 seconds/day (15-20 seconds is the industry standard)
-it also stores enough energy to tell time for 55 hours off the wrist (40 is the industry standard)
-the movement has also been tested under extreme conditions, ie temperature etc
-the movement has an extremely high rating for anti magnetism
-the lume used is near the top quality, you'd be surprised how much low quality lume watches are out there
-design: the hands and dial are extremely developed, with great polishing to make it look aesthetically pleasing and extremely easy to read
-the bracelet is more well designed and comfortable than standard
-Anti reflective coating on BOTH sides of the crystal...cheaper watches don't have any, expensive ones only have it one side
-sapphire crystal (mineral crystal is on cheaper watches)

in a work meeting atm so typed that up quickly

i bolded for you, the only part that is purely cosmetic...and even that is debatable as "being more legible" increases functionality. a more comfortable bracelet is not aesthetic...

and let's be clear: i have NEVER said more expensive watches "tell time better", just like more expensive cars "don't get you to your destination better"

it does it with more comfort and functionality

whether or not that is worth the additional price is up to you...but my point is that you are definitely getting "more" for what you are paying for when buying an expensive watch vs a cheaper watch
---

PoundGarden posted...

90% of what you cited was aesthetics/cosmetic. Automatic movement is great, and you can easily get that in a watch for under $100.

So....I'm still not sold on how a several thousand dollar watch tells time "better" than a cheap one.

take a look at grand seiko for instance. they make watches +/- under half a second a day. just like with anything else you get what you pay for in quality with watches. my black bay 58's with an in house, certified movement tells much better time and is much more accurate than something like a $100 seiko 5 (even though the seiko is of excellent quality and has a great movement for the price)

---

also if you buy a very high quality automatic that is something that can reliably last generations as long as you take care of them and have them serviced occasionally

---

Touch posted...

Hm. How long usually until the top part starts deteriorating would you say about? @BeyondWalls

I dont know exactly. My dad wears them everyday till someone gets him a new one. I just see the after effects. I think his start turning in a year? I guess. He likes those Timex Expedition. Maybe a more expensive one would be made of better materials.

And to be clear, its where the top part touches the bottom stainless steel part. That part of the cheaper material still touches the skin and it starts to deteriorate right there. I see it on cheaper watches all the time.

---

BeyondWalls posted...

I dont know exactly. My dad wears them everyday till someone gets him a new one. I just see the after effects. I think his start turning in a year? I guess. He likes those Timex Expedition. Maybe a more expensive one would be made of better materials.

And to be clear, its where the top part touches the bottom stainless steel part. That part of the cheaper material still touches the skin and it starts to deteriorate right there. I see it on cheaper watches all the time.

its a $65 watch, you're gonna get what you pay for
---

No_U_L7 posted...

its a $65 watch, you're gonna get what you pay for

I got him a mechanical $300 watch one year and he hated it. Next year I got him the Timex and it was like somebody bought him a Rolex. Just easier for me to replace the Timex every Christmas.

---

It cracks me up that @PoundGarden had to leave because of how badly I proved him wrong
---

No_U_L7 posted...

It cracks me up that @PoundGarden had to leave because of how badly I proved him wrong

It cracks me up that a day later you actually care about that. Sad.
You didnt prove anything, and believe it or not I have waaaaay better things to do than sit here arguing with someone who doesn't understand what a cosmetic feature is. Hand and band material and sapphire coating has fuck all to do with keeping time, my God lol

Clearly, you don't. Imagine thinking strangers on a message board actually care that much, wow lol

---

I love their social club

---

PoundGarden posted...

It cracks me up that a day later you actually care about that. Sad.
You didnt prove anything, and believe it or not I have waaaaay better things to do than sit here arguing with someone who doesn't understand what a cosmetic feature is. Hand and band material and sapphire coating has fuck all to do with keeping time, my God lol

Clearly, you don't. Imagine thinking strangers on a message board actually care that much, wow lol

lmao, attacking me personally instead of the argument and doubling down instead of just admitting you're wrong

not that hard to just admit it bud. just repeat after me "there is a difference between a $300 watch and a $5000 watch"

you'll feel much better after

i also suggest going to dictionary.com and looking up the definition of "cosmetic"
---

even by your dumb "definition" a $5,000 watch tells time better because it's calibrated to be within +5 sec/day wheras your $300 watch is allowed to lose or gain up to 20 seconds a day while still being within spec
---

Cool man. Nobody "attacked you personally" lmao. Seeing as how you're clearly frail and I've lost all interest in this discussion, again, I'm not going to argue with someone who thinks cosmetic features make a watch keep better time. You want to keep screaming at a brick wall, be my guest. I have better things to do than engage in a circular argument, but again you obviously don't so knock yourself out bud.

---

No_U_L7 posted...

Do they both get you where you need to be? The watch analogy doesnt work imo, everything about a rolex compared to say a timex is different and they perform night and day differently. Regardless of how many fancy parts a $100k lambo has it still gets you to your destination the same as a $14499 off the shelf ford car. Albeit with better materials. That's like saying a gold plated diamond encrusted fork work better than a plastic one. It does the same thing but with more style.

This is a good analogy because I don't give af about expensive cars, but I do like pricey watches (but can't afford them).

---

@PoundGarden posted...

Cool man. Nobody "attacked you personally" lmao. Seeing as how you're clearly frail and I've lost all interest in this discussion, again, I'm not going to argue with someone who thinks cosmetic features make a watch keep better time. You want to keep screaming at a brick wall, be my guest. I have better things to do than engage in a circular argument, but again you obviously don't so knock yourself out bud.

Alright, im gonna let this go but ill re state 2 things first, ignore them if you want:
1. More expensive watches objectively keep better time than cheaper watches because its regulated to not lose time as much
2. Comfort, legibility, etc are not cosmetic by any definition (even though it can improve aesthetics), as it makes time keeping more efficient

Its like how cars can cost more because they have nicer leather seating thats more comfortable (a better bracelet), the engine allows for faster acceleration (larger power reserve) etc

Either way a functional watch tells time and a functional car gets you there no matter the price. The idea is to do it with comfort, efficiency and luxury

It seems like CE can tell how asinine your thought process is so im not gonna bother any more when you keep spewing the same rhetoric when I've already refuted it multiple times

Best of luck in your future endeavors
---