Homage Forum

Tanukjaju wrote: ↑February 21st, 2020, 10:27 pm

Rotorua wrote: ↑August 11th, 2018, 11:59 am

foxint@foxint.com.au wrote:I am guilty. I have over 2,000 watches and several hundred clocks. (Not including OWC).

All really interesting watches from great houses. I am a little weird, as there are NO Omega, NO Brietling, NO Rolex and nothing you would consider mainstream. My collection suits me.

If I can pull my finger out I will sell some on eBay. Seriously I am sick and need people to buy some of my watches (at least what I paid - the wife will kill me if I lose the family fortune)....try me out I may just have what you want....

DUDE! That is incredible! Congratulations, that’s the true madness of a collector! Did I say madness? I meant spirit.

I did some fun math to honor your outstanding commitment, and because the logistics of that collection are interesting:

2000 watches x 100g average each = 200 kg of watches (440lb)

To wind every single one of them and set their time if they all stopped: 2000 watches x 45 seconds, assuming you need to rest and eat for 7 hours = 1.3 days

Interesting factoid: it takes about 1.4 calories to click the mouse with your index finger once (http://journals.plos.org/plosone/articl ... ne.0019657) assuming that turning the crown one time takes 2 fingers (2.8cal) and an average of 40 turns to wind a watch, on Winding Day you would lose 2240 kcal. You can let you wife know that, scientifically speaking, winding watches is an effective workout and therefore a health benefit!

The amount of energy your watches use per year: 1.75Wh x 2000 = 3500 Wh, or 3100kcal

Weight of watch bands alone, roughly assuming you had only one strap per watch and one spare per 3 watches, and 1/4 of them were bracelets: 2000 + (2000x0.33) = 2660/4 = 665 bracelets x 70g + 1995 Straps x 15g = 46.5 kg + 30 kg = 76.5kg, or almost 1 average woman’s weight in the US (166 lb)

Combined length, assuming they’re an average 44mm north lug tip to south tip, and the strap is 200mm, completely laid flat and back to back: 2000 x (44+200) = a staggering 488m long, or 1470ft.
(Coincidentally, it would take it’s place as the 12th highest building in the world, being 4m taller than the International Commerce Centre in Hong Kong. It WOULD be a very odd tower, but at least you would not have to pull a building permit for it).

It gets really interesting if you were to build a tower of watches reaching 488m into the sky, that gets my science sensors tingling. The gradual change in barometric pressure would speed up the watches the further up you go, so you would have a gradual reading every 200mm on how altitude changes the watches behavior. Of course, we’d have to account for the gravitational pull too, and the watches would need to be 0.00s/d accurate. Solar input may mess things up a little since temperature change higher up would screw with the movements.

Time scale: if you started collecting 20 years ago, you have acquired 100 watched a year, or roughly one watch every three days.
Assuming that your watches are on average 20 years old (that’s a bit of a stretch, I know), the cumulative time of your watches being in existence is 40,000 years. 40,000 years ago, the Sahara was wet and fertile.
Time it would take you to photograph every one, upload the photos, and write a description on eBay: probably 5 min each x 2000 = 21 days at 8hrs a day.

And a final one.
Beatings that I would get from my wife if I told her about wanting to own 2000 watches, because my new found idol in Australia does too: 2 per hour for every hour I talk about it.

She would burn a lot of calories though.





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I just read this! Lol. You need some award for this.