Watches-Let;'s talk about accuracy

OK, what we need the accuracy:

I do two things that NEED such accuracy:
I take part in rallying, where the whole event is run under the same time. All competitors synchronize their watches to the official time of the rally, so that they know their exact time in entering and exiting Time Controls and starting Special Stages. For a two-day event, I don't want a mechanical "superlative chronometer" watch that will be off by six seconds at the start of the second day!!

I also do Formula 1 commentary for the greek TV, where I also need the same level of accuracy during a race weekend. Live television works with split-second accuracy following the "red clock", a digital clock that is synchronized to the universal time. The qualifying session starts exactly on the hour, and it ends also exactly on the hour, and everybody tries to squeeze past the line at the latest possible time to get just one more timed lap. At such cases, I need to look at my watch and be sure that "he made it" or "he didn't", I don't have the time to guess. And, I don't want to set my watch everytime just before.


As for military operations, I suppose that if you send two teams to travel for a two-day mission to travel somewhere and blow up something on the exact prearranged hour, if one "superlative chronometer" is six seconds slow/day and the other is five seconds fast, then the two teams will strike with a 20-second difference-too much I think.
 
One thing to keep in mind here. To qualify under COSC standards requires that a mechanical movement's accuracy fall within a certain predetermined range (something like +6, -4 secs/day). Though this probably isn't too bad out-of-the-box for the average user, it doesn't take into account the fact that these watches can be fine tuned if you find that yours is consistently running fast or slow. People wear their watches different ways and while doing different activities. Something as simple as taking your watch off at night can have a significant impact on whether yours runs a little fast or a little slow. If you keep track of this, in many cases you can then have your individual watch adjusted to keep time much better than the outer limits of the COSC standards (and enjoy a more durable mechanical movement to boot).

------------------
Semper Fi

-Bill
 
This is an interesting thread to me. I'm somewhat of a watch "freak". I also have a Rolex Submariner, (that I purchased at a PX when I was in the Marines), a couple of Casio G-Shocks, a Citizen Chronograph, and a bunch of others. By FAR the most accurate timepiece I own is a simple Timex "Atlantis 100" that probably cost around $30.00 new. I actually FOUND this watch excavating some land during a rainstorm. It had somehow been buried underground and was dug up by my friend's backhoe. It looked like a total mess, (no band and was dented and scratched), and I almost tossed it. I decided to take a chance and later put a battery in it and it started right up.It keeps such incredible time, (gains about 3-4 seconds a month), that I find myself wearing it more than any of the others because it's so reliable and accurate. I'm not going to give up my others, (my old Rolex is also highly accurate by the way), but this thing is SO accurate, I actually set my other watches by this thing. Kinda' gives meaning to that old Timex slogan; "Takes a licking and keeps on ticking".
 
I've worn the same Rolex Submariner since January of 1983.
I bought it for 300 bucks used.
I've spent 800 dollars on a re-build and 5 tune-ups, and that totals out to the same as buying one watch a year at a cost of 61.11 bucks each.
Keeps pretty good time for 60 bucks a year.
wink.gif

Oh, btw
unlike a pile of dead 61 dollar watches, this one's now worth 10 times what I paid for it.
How much is that year old G-Shock gonna net you?

------------------
Tráceme no sin la razón, envoltura mi no sin honor
 
OK, so, could we have some real-life data? Can someone set his Rolex (or whatever mechanical Superlative Chronometer one has) today and tell us the accuracy after two or three days?
I promise, I will not make fun of you, I am just curious.
 
Costas, it appears that you are missing the point of a mechanical watch. This link to the <a href="http://www.timezone.com/~mdisher/TZMainFAQ/RevisedFAQ11_7.htm">Wristwatch FAQ</a> at TimeZone should help. It's pretty long, so I'll summarize the relevant points.

[List deleted, due to incorrect content. Just read the FAQ.]

Costas, the onus of "missing the point" lies on me, and for that I apologize. However, I do not believe that it is necessary to belabor the quartz/mechanical difference. My posts rarely ever contribute new material to a thread; I prefer to summarize and clarify previous posts. The entirety of the list above has been mentioned before, though perhaps not organized together as I did.

[Edit to respond to Costas's post below, without the BTT effect, 02-03-2001]

The list above was just a list of impressions (obviously incorrect and refuted below) that I thought would be helpful in this discussion.

[Edit to clarify/delete list above, 02-06-2001]

[This message has been edited by Flatscan (edited 02-06-2001).]
 
I am not MISSING the point, on the contrary, I am just making it for the benefit of everybody else that might not be aware of the facts as you stated them above.
I rest my case.
 
Ewok,
It's my understanding that if your "atomic" watch is out of range of the transmitter in Colorado it will continue to run as normal, within the accuracy limits of its quartz movement; it just won't automatically make accuracy adjustments until such time as it's back within range of the transmitter.

Costas,
I don't believe anyone here is trying to knock quartz watches. Omega makes a quartz version of their venerable Seamaster that I would love to own. And you are correct in pointing out that, on average, quartz movements are going to be more accurate than their mechanical counterparts. I'm only trying to point out that mechanical watch owners don't necessarily have to accept the accuracy of their watch as it comes out-of-the-box. These movements can be adjusted.

And as long as we're having a frank discussion of the pros and cons of various movements, we should probably mention that a quartz watch can stop altogether when subjected to sub-zero temperatures. If your watch is worn next to your skin in these conditions, you probably won't have a problem. But if you take the watch off, or if you wear the watch with layers of clothing between your skin and the watch, then the battery can shut down. In most cases it will start again once the battery warms up. This is most likely not a major consideration for a majority of watch wearers, but it's obviously important if your watch is subjected to these conditions.

FWIW, I did a non-scientific 48 hour test comparing my Rolex Sub with my Oregon Scientific "atomic" clock. During that period my Sub gained 4 seconds.



------------------
Semper Fi

-Bill
 
A mechanical watch is internally very different from a quartz watch. (The key word being different. Not better or worse.)

It is inferior (generally speaking) in terms of accuracy. (Until your battery runs out.)

It is far more complex in construction and craftsmanship. (There are those of us who appreciate craftsmanship over the assembly line stamps and dies.)

Mechanical watches are thus luxury items and often status symbols. (Look at the math. My Rolex costs me an average of 61.11 dollars a year to wear.* Luxury? Just sounds like smart money to me.)

*See previous post in this thread.



------------------
Tráceme no sin la razón, envoltura mi no sin honor
 
Wow. I have a $25 Casio that I bought at WalMart. It has survived SCUBA diving down to 80 feet, even though it is rated to 10 meters. Once a month I call the Atomic clock in Boulder, CO (303) 499 - 7111, and it's usually within 4 - 5 secs per month.
 
My experience is that you generally get what you pay for. This holds true for watches as well. The way one uses a watch should determine what movement is selected. For the most part automatics can not hold a candle to quartz simply due to the nature of the movement. Even within a particular brand there are many differences. The bottom line is that like any mechanical device, the margin for error is based on the level of tolerance of the components as well as the makers expertise and a bit of luck. Like anyone who has experience with engines, two alike may run very different and horsepower can vary by quite a bit depending on how well all the parts fit together. I purchased a high dollar Breitling automatic a few years ago and after having it adjusted twice by Breitling I replaced it with the Aerospace model because I wanted the accuracy more than the craftsmanship of the automatic. Another factor which certainly will affect the accuracy of a watch is the temperature fluctuations incurred while wearing or storing. Taking a watch indoors then out in the cold will cause parts to contract and expand slightly which will cause slightly higher fluctuations in the time. Currently my Raymond Weil quartz dress watch keeps the best time.

------------------
 
Thanks for posting the number for the atomic clock Swede!
biggrin.gif

(Putting it on the cell phone speed dial right now!)

------------------
Tráceme no sin la razón, envoltura mi no sin honor
 
I have a Timex Ironman (one of the first versions to feature IndiGlo; the backlight is uneven, and doesn't have an automatic timer like the new ones.)

I basically only need to set it on daylight savings time, but I've never taken any formal measurements of it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top