The Eliminator – Five from Huckberry
Here’s how this works: Each day we’ll eliminate one item until only one is left standing at the end of the week. Vote for the item you’d LEAST like to own in the poll at the bottom of the page. The item with the most votes gets ejected at the end of the day. The item that remains at the end of this battle royal will be won by one of you, via an enter to win post firing off on Friday.
About Huckberry: It’s not easy to stand out in the world of flash sale websites, but Huckberry does it. With an emphasis on the outdoors and active lifestyle gear, they nail the upscale-rugged thing. Also, their sales are often filled with made in the USA goods. All of these items are currently available, or have been available through Huckberry at some point. May the best item win!
.
Filson Tin Cloth Original Briefcase – $325.00
“Might as well have the best”… sure thing. But this is the updated, tin-cloth, water resistant version of the Filson Original Brief. So, if the original is “the best” than the tin-cloth is the best…est? 16″ wide and very much made in the USA.
ELIMINATED Two Breyburn Shirts – $85.00 per
The two most important colors for dress shirts to own. Labeled a “brand for the 21st century“, Breyburn is web based, transparent, and looking to provide the highest quality at an attainable for most cost. Their shirts are made in Portugal from Italian fabrics, are cut in a slim fit, and feature Mother of Pearl buttons. Full spread/almost cutaway collar. See their fit chart here.
ELIMINATED Joshu+Vela Saddle Wax Duffel – $199.99
Made in San Francisco from durable waxed canvas, leather handles that have been tanned here in the USA, sturdy cotton webbing, solid copper rivets, and a big ol’ #10 brass zipper. This brand is headed up by a guy who has experience working for Levi’s and The North Face, and with Joshu+Vela, he’s now committed to cranking out incredibly handsome goods using the best materials possible. Even the canvas on this bag comes from an organic co-op in Texas. Dimensions are 21″ long, 8″ tall, and 10.25″ wide
Tsovet SVT-DW44 – $400.00
A dive watch that can handle 200m of water… and just about anything thrown at it on dry land. 4mm case. No nonsense dial. Threaded screw-down crown, rubber strap, and matte case. 44mm in diameter and 22mm lugs. Swiss Rhonda Quartz movement with a lifetime warranty for the battery and a 5-year warranty on the rest. Swiss made. The kind of watch you’d want on your wrist when the Zombie apocalypse hits.
Broken Homme Davis Boot – $265.00
Pretty much encompasses just the kind of thing Huckberry specializes in carrying. Extremely well made, great looking, and Made-in-the-USA. New to the scene but with a heritage feel, Broken Homme boots are made in Los Angeles and designed to last. Full grain leather uppers with a vibram sole. These guys have a bright future. Plenty of styles to pick from too.
Here comes the tough part. Pick the item that you’d LEAST like to win and vote below to have it eliminated. One item gets cut every day. The item that’s left at the end of the week will be up for grabs and you’ll be able to enter to win on Friday. Make your case for what needs to stay in the comments, but let’s keep any mudslinging to a minimum. These are all terrific items, and many thanks to Huckberry and the brands for being on board with The Eliminator. Voting closes at 11:59pm ET.
Which Huckberry item should be ELIMINATED?
- The Filson Tin Cloth Briefcase (26%, 767 Votes)
- The Tsovet Watch (50%, 1,492 Votes)
- The Broken Homme Boots (24%, 701 Votes)
Total Voters: 2,960
Loading ...
Farewell Tsovet. If you were an automatic / manual wind then this would be a different story, but quartz? Goodbye.
Could have called this from round 1!
That bond peacoat…none of these would stand a chance against it.
And maybe some items from killspencer !
Okay, most things in style I totally get, but can someone explain to me why people hate quartz, despite the fact that it’s objectively better? If you can have the same style with an automatic *or* a quartz, why would you choose an automatic? Do you just hate batteries with the fiery passion of a thousand hells?
Agreed. Also, it’s a killer looking watch. I can understand wanting mechanical movement, but don’t knock a solid watch because it has a quartz movement.
The automatic vs quartz thing is like sailing vs motoring. Sure, one just works better, but has none of the romance and nostalgia of bygone eras.
That said, I’m currently wearing a quartz and I’d really like to see the watch win.
And, you know, I *get* the romance, but… wearing a watch isn’t really a hobby, is it? I guess collecting is. So that kind of makes sense. I don’t think sailing vs. motoring is quite an apt analogy, though, for a variety of reasons.
I’ve got a friend who prefers mechanical because he understands how quartz works, and mechanical seems like black magic to him. I think that’s as good as any justification I’ve heard.
This. I’m wearing a mechanical watch, but I would love to have this quartz one as well.
I bought a mechanical automatic watch specifically to get away from batteries. Just a personal choice on my part, as I was tired of changing them.
I think this comes down to if your interest is in that it tells time, or if you wear it because it’s an intricate mechanical machine that can tell time. For those that just want to know the time and want to wear an accessory, a quartz watch is certainly a better option.
That aside, almost everyone has a cellphone these days so there’s a fair number of people who will simply argue against wearing a watch all together.
Tougher choice today. I *want* all three remaining products!
Don’t forget to get them serviced every five years…
dont need briefcase
There are pretty discernible differences between a quartz and mechanical watch. Sure, a quartz watch keeps time more accurately overall but it doesn’t have any of the workmanship inside that is painstakingly put together. The high cost of automatic watches is because there is a shortage of swiss master watchmakers, people who have been doing things the same way since our great great grandparents. Would you rather spend 400 dollars on a watch that essentially has a 35 dollar movement or save that money and put it towards a watch that will pass down to your children. Something will be a relic and that you can look at and still be amazed by every day.
To each their own, for me as an amateur chef it’s the difference between a Victorinox stamped knife vs. a Wusthof or Shun carbon knife. They will both get the job done but you pay for something you are going to keep around forever.
I don’t really understand the appeal of the tin cloth briefcase. The black one is the only one that looks right to me. The others just look way too outdoorsy and casual for a briefcase.
I won’t enter if the briefcase wins. I hope someone who really wants it wins it. However, I don’t NEED another pair of moc-toe boots, but I’d happily throw them in my rotation.
You say that now, but come the zombie apocalypse, your quartz watch won’t let you reliably clock your speed when running from the horde.
It’s similar to the way people look at cars. For some people, a car is a tool that only serves one function: getting you where you need to go in less time than it would otherwise take with a different mode of transportation. In other words, a car is a car.
And they couldn’t be more wrong.
I want to clarify one thing: it’s highly unlikely that you are going to find a lifetime-companion in a $400 watch. To get to that level, you’re talking like $2,000 and up. Also worth noting is the maintenance that automatics will need every 5 years or so. A $400 watch is likely going to be disposable – who wants to pay $150 to $200 (half the price of the watch) to have it serviced?
Because of the color of the watch/photo, it looks like the watch got eliminated before the contest even started. I had to do a double take and look at the product name to see it not crossed out before I knew the watch was still in the running. That said, I don’t really see anything special about the watch to make me excited to even get it for free. There are a lot of watches under $100 that are better looking and made just as well.
I guess I must be very wrong.
Aside from that spent on gains in economy and safety features, I consider money above the minimum spent on a car to be among the most useless wastes of assets that is acceptable to our culture. I find little noteworthy difference between a $20k car and a $80k car, other than the latter making classless status-climbing women more willing to sleep with the owner.
I just dont think it looks that good, the alternating numeral/baton markers especially
I am a watch collector. I did vote for the Tsovet because I have no need for a briefcase and I have plenty of shoes. That said, I would much rather have a manual or automatic movement in a watch.In fact my entire collection of watches only contains maybe 6 quartz watches out of the 200+ timepieces I have dating back to 1908
As someone who has recently had a major failure on a Tag Heuer quartz that would have cost more to repair than the watch is worth, it’s a maintenance thing. Quartz failures are permanent, automatic movements can be serviced. It’s like glued soles and welted soles on shoes.
…it’s really not the same, though. If you have two watches that look identical and perform the same, one quartz, one mechanical, there are people who will always pay a premium for the mechanical. It’s like if you had, say, an RX7 with a rotary engine and an RX7 with an in-line four, and both had identical power/torque curves, both had identical weight distribution, and both were really identical in every way except the fact that one’s got a Wankel engine… except you pay a significant premium for the Wankel engine. I kind of get it, because I spend money in an utterly irrational fashion, too, but that doesn’t mean there’s any sense to it.
My issue with the Tsovet has more to do with the quartz-price combination than just the fact its a quartz. Even though this is a giveaway situation, I can’t see spending $400 for a quartz when there are companies like Orient that make mechanical movements for half that price. What is that $400 paying for? Sharp looks? Sturdier casing? I have no idea. Most any feature I can think of doesn’t seem worth the extra cost. To me, at that price, it’s just not a good value.
With mechanicals, I understand what I’m paying for when I shell out more money—the complexity of the movement, the craftsmanship under the hood, etc. But I simply have a harder time paying that price for style or (in some cases) branding alone. There are a lot of similar looking quartz watches for a lot less than the Tsovet.
You are talking more about a difference in general quality than in movement type. There are junky, throw-away, $20 mechanical watches and junky, throw-away, $20 quartz watches. There are also meticulously engineered, beautifully crafted quartz watches that keep time to within a couple seconds per year (compared to chronometer grade mechanical watches that boast keeping to within a couple seconds per day). There is no reason a high-end quartz movement won’t last just as long as a high-end mechanical movement.
The reason (Swiss and German) mechanical watches cost so much is because they one of the so-called “Veblen” or luxury goods whose demand is proportional to their price, rather than inversely proportional. Ordinary rules of supply and demand do not apply to luxury goods of this type. People buy luxury watches as status symbols, therefore, the more exclusive the watch price, the greater the status that it confers.
Since you own an Omega, that would make a good point of reference. Omega watches are actually becoming more desirable because Omega has been steadily hiking up its prices in an attempt to move up-market and position itself as a more direct competitor to Rolex. This is a marketing tactic, not a result of Omega experiencing a labor shortage. The only labor shortage in the watchmaking world is among independent watchmakers, who are increasingly being pushed out of business by major manufacturers’ decisions not to supply spare parts and to monopolize aftermarket service within their own in-house service centers.
“I want to clarify one thing: it’s highly unlikely that you are going to find a lifetime-companion in a $400 watch.”
You should say that to all the vintage Seiko rolling around out there.
Also worth noting is the maintenance that quartz watches need every 2 years or so.
“I don’t really understand the appeal of the tin cloth briefcase. The black one is the only one that looks right to me. The others just look way too outdoorsy and casual for a briefcase.”
Same. I have a Filson 257 (that I love) but I just can’t get behind the Tin Cloth thing they’re pushing lately. Not a very good material, imo. And the thickness is down to 8.5-12.5oz., which can’t be good for durability. Give me the standard 22oz Twill every time.
Including the vintage Seiko quartzes, like the ’70s number I found at a thrift shop and is keeping perfect time with a new battery.
The “maintenance” a quartz watch needs is more like every 3-5 years (depending on the movement type and battery size, of course) and is exponentially cheaper, faster, and easier than the regular service recommended for mechanical watch movements. I change my own batteries and re-lubricate gaskets on my quartz watches at a cost of about $2 and five minutes. Mechanical watch service will generally run you well upward of a hundred bucks and your watch might be in the shop for weeks or even months.
No, I am talking about quality of movement type specifically. Rhonda movements cost about 45 dollars online. ETA movements, which ETA is no longer allowing customization of are in the order or 100-150 dollars and cheaper in bulk. The reason automatic watches are more expensive and more desirable to me are the amount of time and craftsmanship it takes to build one. It is not expensive for companies to make their own quartz movements, but it’s even cheaper for them to farm it out to ETA. When you purchase an expensive good, you want to see time and craftsmanship put into the piece like a pair of Alden’s or AE’s. No matter what quartz you buy from Shinola or anyone else, there is just not that level of sophistication involved because there aren’t that many parts involved.
Automatic movements are extremely expensive because in house made companies like Vacheron or Patek, each piece is meticulously crafted and assembled by hand together. They aren’t put together in a factory and then plopped into the watch. Other companies like Omega, Rolex, and Hublot have companies that custom make the movements for them. Swatch group, which owns Omega, for one I think actually owns ETA and produces custom movements for them. When you purchase an expensive automatic you aren’t purchasing it just because it’s a “veblen” where the economic sense behind it is bizarre or abherrant. I purchased an Omega product because of the time and craftmanship but moreover at the time it was purchased, quartz made better financial sense.
If I were to purchase an automatic today, I wouldn’t just go buy a Tag or Raymond Weil–I would purchase a product that has heritage, and a high level of care and craftsmanship like an IWC. You are lumping all automatic watch buyers into this elitist group of individuals, when it’s really much more of a personal decision, akin to buying Allen Edmonds over Florsheims.
As far as Omega pricing goes, I don’t see how you can say they are trying to compete with Rolex. Omega has been around since the 1920s and they have never had models or tried to copy Rolex designs. If anything Omega always tried to create their own niche, with elegant sports watches that were always more affordable than Rolex. Prices have gone up because of inflation and demand because their newer product designs have been received so warmly. I really don’t think you know what you are talking about if you say that Omega has been steadily hiking up it’s prices, because an entry level automatic Seamaster is now about about $3000. When I bought my quartz Seamaster 10 years ago, the automatic was $2200. Their hallmark watch the Speedmaster chrono is about $6-7000 dollars. Comparably an entry level Rolex datejust is about $7-8000. There is no way Omega is going to bridge that gap anytime soon, nor do they want to. Omega has their group of followers and they are earning more every day because they don’t have the stigma or sort of antiquated history that follows Rolex. Rolex is a great company, no other watch in the world, will hold value like it, but Omega is not trying to usurp their crown.
As far as the labor shortage, I think you need to read some horological magazines. Their have been numerous articles in the past 5 years about the extreme shortage of skilled craft and servicemen both in Switzerland and abroad. It’s no longer financially viable for people to spend 10-15 years as a watch apprentice so they aren’t doing it. The greatest number of watch apprentices are now coming out of Phillipines. As a result, master watchmakers are harder to find and they are more expensive to hire–resulting in increased watch costs. This can be seen easily with the cost of Tourbillon movements now starting at around $25k regardless of brand, when about 5-8 years ago they were around $15k.
There are always novelties that subvert what we think are rigid rules of the watch game. The 70s-80s Seikos and japanese Miyota movements are among the best ever made. Seiko is still a company with an impressive history of quality. However, think about how many quartz manufacturers there are and how many great companies there are like Seiko……can’t think of a whole lot. Compare that to genuine automatic makers, the big dogs are plentiful (JLC, IWC, Patek, Vacheron, Ulysses, Breguet, etc.)
Sorry for the book, just pick what you want and what you like and don’t let other peoples views sway you. My experience is my own and I am going automatic here on out!
What Ben said.
You forgot this gif –> http://media1.giphy.com/media/kS1aph1nPE1lm/giphy.gif
“I change my own batteries and re-lubricate gaskets on my quartz watches at a cost of about $2 and five minutes.”
“Mechanical watch service will generally run you well upward of a hundred bucks and your watch might be in the shop for weeks or even months.”
So your comparing doing your own work vs sending a watch in for service? That’s “fair and balanced” like Fox News, bro.
You don’t have to tilt the table that hard. Quartz watches are more accurate for less money, and often so inexpensive you just throw them out when you’re done. No real argument to be made there. Mechanicals cost more.
A mechanical watch is art in motion. A quartz watch is an appliance for keeping time. And about as exciting as my refrigerator.
Since you think my comparison is so “unfair,” let me simplify it for you.
Changing the battery of a quartz watch is a task so simple, any idiot could do it. I am proof of that – I am not remotely mechanically inclined. It requires no skill whatsoever, and no specialized equipment. The reason I used changing batteries yourself as a basis of comparison is to demonstrate just how little care and maintenance is required for a quartz watch. You don’t need any special skill or equipment to do it, just the willingness to crack open the caseback yourself, and a battery.
Of course, even if you don’t want to do it yourself, you can take it to a jeweler or watchmaker. Then, instead of $2 and 5 minutes, it will cost you more like $10-15, and maybe an afternoon at most, assuming the watchmaker/jeweler is busy and can’t do it right away.
Servicing a mechanical watch, on the other hand, requires years of training and experience and all kinds of specialized equipment. This is not something a lay person can simply poke around under the hood and figure out for himself. A full service of a mechanical watch requires a complete disassembly, cleaning, identification of broken or worn parts, replacement of said parts, reassembly, and lubrication. Making even the slightest error at any stage in this process can completely throw off the entire functioning of the movement. It is a hugely complex and time-consuming process. As I wrote above, it will cost you hundreds of dollars, and it will take your watchmaker weeks or months to get the watch back to you, due to the huge work backlog most watchmakers face.
The reason the comparison seems unfair is because it’s an unfair fight. In terms of service cost – cost calculated not only by price but by the required level of skilled labor and time – quartz beats mechanical, hands down, every day of the week and twice on Sundays.
Also, saying “mechanical is art” and “quartz is an appliance” is simply an ignorant recitation of 40 years’ worth of Swiss marketing bunk. Both are heartless, mass-produced machines designed for one function. One of the machines just gets the job done a lot better than the other.
Don’t get me wrong. I appreciate mechanical watches. About half the watches I’ve owned have been mechanical. I’m wearing an Omega Speedmaster right now, a watch that represents all the things worth disliking about mechanical watches. Overly complicated, expensive, and difficult to service chronograph movement – check. Swiss marketing behemoth – check. Completely overblown reliance on the watch’s supposed historical pedigree – check. But reason be damned, none of that stops me from thinking this is the most beautiful thing I could possibly strap to my wrist.
There’s nothing wrong with liking or even preferring mechanical watches. But if you try to justify your preference with anything resembling logic or reason, you will fail. Owning a mechanical watch is sort of like having a pet. They are needy and dependent, and frequently unruly. They are both robust and incredibly fragile. They will end up costing you a lot more than you may have ever imagined, and they may leave you far sooner than you would have anticipated or hoped for. But despite all the hassle, many people find the intangible benefits of ownership more than justify the costs.
Yeah. Learning to service your own mechanical watches isn’t that expensive or time consuming. But I’m not going to sit here and argue with you all day. Especially when we don’t really disagree so much as you like to argue, and apparently buy text by the gallon.
If you want to keep people interested, strive for brevity, dude.
In my experience, gallons of text has always been a more effective method of communication than dude-ing and bro-ing strangers online. But to each his own.