WatchUSeek Watch Forums banner

1 - 20 of 78 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
77 Posts
I just published a short article on this, based on my own experience. Here's a tidbit:

View attachment 15928721


Watch Accuracy: Rolex vs. Casio - The Truth About Watches
Racer88,

I am in no way an expert or even semi-versed on your post and I am in no way challenging your findings. I give great credence to all that you share with us.

That said, I did find that most new Yachtmasters are adjustable. Do you think that perhaps a bit of fine tuning can improve your YM's accuracy?


BTW, my 18 year old G7000D has kept me on time within 3 seconds per month from day one and it still demonstrates that accuracy today.
--------------

Written by
Martina Richter
July 26, 2019

"The watch is powered by a seasoned caliber, the Rolex 3135, used in the very first Yacht-Master in 1992. The 3135 debuted in 1988 in the Submariner. The blue Parachrom balancespring was added to the movement in 2005, five years after it was first introduced in the Cosmograph Daytona. Its paramagnetic alloy resists changes caused by temperature variations and magnetic fields.
The Parachrom balance spring is thinner than a human hair and up to 10 times more resistant to shocks than a conventional balance spring. Provided with an overcoil, it is attached to a large balance wheel with a variable moment of inertia. Fine adjustments are made using four gold Microstella regulating screws. The balance wheel is supported by a height-adjustable bridge. The entire construction ensures rate results that bring the Yacht-Master (as well as the other watches in the Oyster collection) to the rank of “Superlative Chronometer Officially Certified.”

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,081 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 · (Edited)
That said, I did find that most new Yachtmasters are adjustable. Do you think that perhaps a bit of fine tuning can improve your YM's accuracy?
Improve on -0.35 s/d?? Haha... 1/3 second per day is AMAZING for a mechanical watch. I'm quite happy with that. I wouldn't touch it!

My YM was overhauled late last year. It had stopped completely. Wouldn't take a wind. They did an amazing job of polishing the case and bracelet and servicing the movement.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,255 Posts
Not just any quartz will be better than a high end mechanical. Some cheap quartz lose seconds per day too.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cheveuxroux

·
Registered
Joined
·
77 Posts
The other interesting finding in my "research" was that within my Casio collection, the least expensive are the most accurate.
I have an AWGM100B-1A inbound, due here around mid-June that I researched and bought to fulfill a specific resistance purpose. I am hoping that it will fulfill its mission and its timekeeping will stay true given the use it will be subjected to.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,081 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
I have an AWGM100B-1A inbound, due here around mid-June that I researched and bought to fulfill a specific resistance purpose. I am hoping that it will fulfill its mission and its timekeeping will stay true given the use it will be subjected to.
The AWGM100 is a great watch. With atomic sync, timekeeping shouldn't be an issue.
Mine:
15928845
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
948 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
211 Posts
Quartz is more precise. That accuracy will not vary as much as automatic.

On the other hand, that Rolex accuracy is only temporary. After a year or so, or based on temperature variation across seasons, or based on orientation, there will be variation.

My Omega watch was within COSC when new. Then it slowed down to more than -15 seconds per day after 10 years. After service earlier this year, it is now running around -1 second every 2 weeks. The local watchmaker did a great job adjusting the timing. However, this is only temporary and will change over time. Enjoy while it lasts.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
716 Posts
My Casio's are also quite accurate.

G-Shock GD-350: +7 seconds per month

Casio G-Shock GD-100: +10 seconds per month

Pro Trek PRG-100: +15 seconds per month

Casio AE-1200: + 9 seconds per month

Casio AE-2100: +10 seconds per month

Casio DW-290: +5 seconds per month

Casio W-736H: +2 seconds per month

Casio TRT-110: -10 seconds per month

I noticed that the watches generally run more accurately when I wear them frequently.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,081 Posts
Discussion Starter · #12 ·
On the other hand, that Rolex accuracy is only temporary. After a year or so, or based on temperature variation across seasons, or based on orientation, there will be variation.
I'm sure it's temporary. And, I know it depends on orientation. I've got it on a winder, so the resting positions change and are random.

My Omega watch was within COSC when new. Then it slowed down to more than -15 seconds per day after 10 years. After service earlier this year, it is now running around -1 second every 2 weeks. The local watchmaker did a great job adjusting the timing. However, this is only temporary and will change over time. Enjoy while it lasts.
-1 second every 2 weeks is amazing.

I noticed that the watches generally run more accurately when I wear them frequently.
I see that with my automatics. As for quartz, I haven't worn any one of them for long / continuously enough to make that determination.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
62 Posts
It's null and void as multiband 6, bluetooth sync and GPS synced watches can now all be had for relatively small amounts of money..in comparison to a rawleks anyway.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,081 Posts
Discussion Starter · #15 ·
Oh no the incessant Rolex apologists have now infiltrated F17. Noone is safe. Rolex is king, Rolex is best. All hail Rolex!
Thus acknowledged, please return to your echo chamber, eminently satisfied.
LOL! Hardly. While I own one Rolex (since 2004), I'm actually quite disgusted with Rolex as a company lately. But, I still think my YM is a very nice watch. Imma gonna keep it. 😁

The purpose of my article was hardly to lift up Rolex (like they need it). The point was simply to refute a long-held and oft-repeated aphorism, which is "Any quartz / Casio will keep better time than a Rolex."

As I tracked my various watches in the accuracy app, I was simply astonished to find that, indeed, my Rolex happens to keep better time than SOME of my Casios.

It was a "fun" article. Not to be taken seriously.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,081 Posts
Discussion Starter · #16 ·
It's null and void as multiband 6, bluetooth sync and GPS synced watches can now all be had for relatively small amounts of money..in comparison to a rawleks anyway.
I've got plenty of those (MB6 and BT), too. But, they're "cheating." My focus was on the inherent accuracy of the various movements / watches. I could manually sync any of my watches with the atomic clock on a nightly basis and achieve the same accuracy as the MB6 watches that do it automatically. But, that would be cheatin'! 🤪
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
62 Posts
I've got plenty of those (MB6 and BT), too. But, they're "cheating." My focus was on the inherent accuracy of the various movements / watches. I could manually sync any of my watches with the atomic clock on a nightly basis and achieve the same accuracy as the MB6 watches that do it automatically. But, that would be cheatin'! 🤪
Fair enough, your a purist. Interesting to see I guess like you say. The syncing is part of the movement though no? Fw91 is about ten quid and I imagine in 10 or 15 years it would run more accuratly than an automatic would with no service.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
7,384 Posts
I don't find a whole lot of correlation between Casio quartz and accuracy, but I don't expect it either. They're not HAQ. They don't age or select their quartz for higher end models as far as I know. What I expect from Casio is cool, rugged, bada$$ery at a reasonable price. Also, the tech they rely on (MB6, GPS, Bkuetooth) doesn't require the movememt itself to be innately accurate, so a fairly average quartz will generally do.

That being said, I do appreciate HAQ and prefer it to quartz watches that have to be tethered to another time source for accuracy. Yeah, I am a fan of "dumb" HAQ and as much as I aplreciate the Citizen Chronomasters for what they are, I'll always probably prefer the 9f and all its iterations. I think if you exclude HAQ, when it comes to price you are right, there isn't a discernible correlation between price and accuracy, but HAQ and the significant amounts of money they command (most of which are cheaper than MRGs when it cimes to most Citizens and GSs at least) do actually show some differentiation (whether or not that is of any value to you is another story). My GSs, which are spec'ed at +10spy are below +5, and my even cheaper Longines spec'ed at +5spy is floating around +3. Either way at the end of the day they're just inconsequential numbers for the most part (as long as I am within 30 seconds a day I'm pretty good) and far too often accuracy gets used as a bulwark for brand loyalists or a post hoc purchase justification.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
443 Posts
Sure, now take the Rolex and G-Shocks and drop them a dozen times or so from, say, 6' onto a concrete sidewalk. Now which is telling more accurate time? Rolex too precious for this test? How about that Omega? How about the GS?
Next let's calculate the cost per accuracy for quartz vs. automatic.
Finally, let's test a random selection of quartz vs. a random selection of automatics across a wide cost spectrum for accuracy.
Yeah.
I imagine there are a lot of watch fans similar to me who went down the mechanical road only to discover poor accuracy, poor durability, and daily hassle all for much higher costs. Returning to quartz watches certainly limits selection, but with many, many, many other benefits.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
62 Posts
Sure, now take the Rolex and G-Shocks and drop them a dozen times or so from, say, 6' onto a concrete sidewalk. Now which is telling more accurate time? Rolex too precious for this test? How about that Omega? How about the GS?
Next let's calculate the cost per accuracy for quartz vs. automatic.
Finally, let's test a random selection of quartz vs. a random selection of automatics across a wide cost spectrum for accuracy.
Yeah.
I imagine there are a lot of watch fans similar to me who went down the mechanical road only to discover poor accuracy, poor durability, and daily hassle all for much higher costs. Returning to quartz watches certainly limits selection, but with many, many, many other benefits.
Yeah totally agree with all this. / thread
 
1 - 20 of 78 Posts
Top