WatchUSeek Watch Forums banner
1 - 20 of 27 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
309 Posts
I think that HAQ needs IndependentlyAdjustableHourHand.
9F61 does not have IAHH !
 
  • Like
Reactions: watchcrank_tx

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,175 Posts
I agree with the above... For the money I would need a date and IAHH. And 10atm. Nothing wrong with the rest (except for the gigantic crown) ;P
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
221 Posts
Crown ridiculously oversized. Seiko had better movements than the 9F way back in 1979. Next, please.
Dumb question, but what makes a 99xx or similar late 70's Twin Quartz better than the 9F? On paper at least, the sealed movement of the 9F seems like a nice improvement. Theoretical accuracy is similar, though I'm not sure how accurate the Twin Quartz movements are are 40+ years versus the oldest 9Fs.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,509 Posts
I think that HAQ needs IndependentlyAdjustableHourHand.
9F61 does not have IAHH !
yeah, the GS fanboys will drool all over themselves over how great the GS quartz movements are, blah blah, and most of them don't include this useful feature that's been around for decades on other brands.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,175 Posts
yeah, the GS fanboys will drool all over themselves over how great the GS quartz movements are, blah blah, and most of them don't include this useful feature that's been around for decades on other brands.
Not to take side in that statement, but just having more features/complications than another caliber does not make it better. And not all complications are useful to everyone. I for one prefer perpetual calendar over IAHH. But in this specific case I think the price calls for the latest caliber...
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
309 Posts
Just having more features/complications than another caliber does not make it better. And not all complications are useful to everyone. I for one prefer perpetual calendar
HAQ so I focus on Accuracy.
If I am buying an HAQ watch these are my 2 required complications :-
a) IAHH. Why bother with HAQ if I need to calibrate several times a year.
b) Second-hand zero to allow easy and precise calibration.
I do not need a date mechanism, but if fitted the date must be perpetual.
How can a watch be HAQ if its read-out goes wrong about 5 times a year ?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
113 Posts
Dumb question, but what makes a 99xx or similar late 70's Twin Quartz better than the 9F? On paper at least, the sealed movement of the 9F seems like a nice improvement. Theoretical accuracy is similar, though I'm not sure how accurate the Twin Quartz movements are are 40+ years versus the oldest 9Fs.
I recently obtained a Seiko 9923-8050 that's in decent shape. It was way fast when I got it. I've been tweaking the two trimming screws based on some old posts here on the forum and have it down to about +15 spy right now. That's not bad for a movement that is originally marketed for +/-20 spy. But it is a pain to adjust compared to the 9F movement. The 9F has one trimming nut with discrete steps when turned. The screws for the 9923 have no discrete steps, so it's difficult to judge how much to turn them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,509 Posts
Not to take side in that statement, but just having more features/complications than another caliber does not make it better. And not all complications are useful to everyone. I for one prefer perpetual calendar over IAHH. But in this specific case I think the price calls for the latest caliber...
A good (read expensive like the GS) quartz watch keeps accurate enough time that you're not going to need to reset the time very often, so usually you're just changing the hour setting for DST or for time zone changes while traveling. Being able to do that without affecting the minutes/seconds setting is a very useful convenience, and in my opinion does make it better, much better, than a watch without it.

On a HAQ its particularly advantageous because you know the minutes/seconds are going to be very accurate, and don't want to have to hack the seconds hand, spin the time ahead/behind to the new setting, and then find an accurate time source to resync the seconds hand again once you're done.

And since we're all perfectionists on this forum, you know you're going to have to re-align that minute hand so its exactly aligned with the minute marker when the seconds hand hits the top, so an IAHH avoids having to do that as well.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
9,615 Posts
Another aspect: IAHH doesn't require a date window to be meaningful. Granted: I've seen very, very few quartz dials where I thought a date window mangled them, but I'm just fine without them.

Doesn't help that I have a hard time reading a tiny date at a glance. I have to bring it reasonably close and peer, and well, that kinda defeats any convenience factor for me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,175 Posts
A good (read expensive like the GS) quartz watch keeps accurate enough time that you're not going to need to reset the time very often, so usually you're just changing the hour setting for DST or for time zone changes while traveling. Being able to do that without affecting the minutes/seconds setting is a very useful convenience, and in my opinion does make it better, much better, than a watch without it.

On a HAQ its particularly advantageous because you know the minutes/seconds are going to be very accurate, and don't want to have to hack the seconds hand, spin the time ahead/behind to the new setting, and then find an accurate time source to resync the seconds hand again once you're done.

And since we're all perfectionists on this forum, you know you're going to have to re-align that minute hand so its exactly aligned with the minute marker when the seconds hand hits the top, so an IAHH avoids having to do that as well.
Well, it´s still just a complication that you hold high. It does not make the caliber a better caliber, just one with that feature.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,175 Posts
HAQ so I focus on Accuracy.
If I am buying an HAQ watch these are my 2 required complications :-
a) IAHH. Why bother with HAQ if I need to calibrate several times a year.
b) Second-hand zero to allow easy and precise calibration.
I do not need a date mechanism, but if fitted the date must be perpetual.
How can a watch be HAQ if its read-out goes wrong about 5 times a year ?
ok
 

·
HAQ and AW moderator
Joined
·
7,863 Posts
Discussion Starter · #15 ·
Probably another thread elsewhere, but why do people use complications instead of functions for a quartz watch?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,175 Posts
Probably another thread elsewhere, but why do people use complications instead of functions for a quartz watch?
I am not sure what you mean, but to me a complication is a feature that is made/built in the caliber. Like central seconds hand, GMT hand, date, moonphase and so on. A function is when you can do things with the complication. Like quickset for the date or stop the secondshand. Did that make sence?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,509 Posts
Well, it´s still just a complication that you hold high. It does not make the caliber a better caliber, just one with that feature.
yep, I stated my opinion that I think a quartz caliber is much better with IAHH. We just have different opinions on the value of that feature and what makes one caliber 'better' than another.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
9,615 Posts
Probably another thread elsewhere, but why do people use complications instead of functions for a quartz watch?
Probably to maintain consistency with mechanicals. I suspect that "complication" is used for analog; "function" is used for digital. Digital watches feel more similar to calculators, ergo the "functions" terminology.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,943 Posts
Another aspect: IAHH doesn't require a date window to be meaningful. Granted: I've seen very, very few quartz dials where I thought a date window mangled them, but I'm just fine without them.
Indeed, the IAHH of the date-free AQ6021-51E remains useful at time changes and zone crossings event though it doesn't have a date (and I don't want one).

Though I don't need it, I find the "anti-magnetic" SBGX341 attractive in form, yet I decline to buy it at GS prices with its current movement. Very disappointed GS continue to release quartz models without IAHH year after year.
Doesn't help that I have a hard time reading a tiny date at a glance. I have to bring it reasonably close and peer, and well, that kinda defeats any convenience factor for me.
Much as I dislike the looks of a cyclops, my eyes are aging to the point I could use one on many watches, except that I prefer no date watches anyway!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,175 Posts
yep, I stated my opinion that I think a quartz caliber is much better with IAHH. We just have different opinions on the value of that feature and what makes one caliber 'better' than another.
No, you think the value of a feature you like makes the caliber better than another. What makes a caliber better than another in my book is more than a feature, like materials used, technology, longlivity and so on. It´s not really clear what caliber you prefer, just that you think "GS fanboys will drool all over themselves over how great the GS quartz movements are, blah blah,". I´m sorry for going OT @ronalddheld , I guess I should just learn how to ignore ;)
 
1 - 20 of 27 Posts
Top