which is worse?

[ikkoku]

From a movement's point of view, which is worse?
a watch worn everyday for 10 years or a watch that was in a safe for 10 years - both without any service

[cali kid]

If i had to pick one the watch being worn everyday! Parts are slowly wearing out while the safe queen just isnt getting oil to parts but once you start it up things would lube up quickly!

[apnk]

If i had to pick one the watch being worn everyday! Parts are slowly wearing out while the safe queen just isnt getting oil to parts but once you start it up things would lube up quickly!

Yeah I agree Trevor, but then there's no point of owning a watch and not wearing it imo. (which reminds me, I should get rid of all my g-shocks I don't wear lol.)

[DMB]

My Heuer sat in a desk drawer for over 30 years. When I fired it up, it ran fine but eventually started losing about a minute and a half a day. I sent it for a service and basically they said the movement was practically new. THe problem was that the oils had dried up. THey replaced some cosmetic stuff (crystal, pushers), and a few internal parts but not many. Now, it runs like a scalded dog.

[merichar]

If its new watches we are talking about, I would say the safe queen would be in better shape after ten years. With the advanced lubricants used today, I don't think the drying up or congealing of lube would be as much of a problem now as it was for the vintage pieces.

[deepcdvr]

I'd take either one if the deal was right...

Sorry, just being ME..