No, wrong! Your statement is not oversimplified, it is incorrect. Please do some research to understand the technology befote spouting off an explanation.the spring drive movement is essentially just a quartz watch with the battery replaced by a electricity generator. the accuracy of a spring drive is controlled by
a quartz crystal and an integrated circuit. while a mechanical movement accuracy is controlled by movement of many small parts designed, installed and regulated
by skilled master technicans. i dont think accuracy of spring drive ruin mechanical watches.
i know how the spring drive works, i've read document about it. a brake is applied 8 times in a second to slow down the second hand. i didnt say no mechanical parts are involved but the accuracy of the spring drive is largely depends on the quartz crystal and the integrated circuit, which do calculations on speeds of some moving wheels and then apply the brake accordingly. while in a mechanical movement, the control of accuracy is all mechanical, master technicans need to do all calibration mechanically.No, wrong! Your statement is not oversimplified, it is incorrect. Please do some research to understand the technology befote spouting off an explanation.
What you have described is more like a Kinetic movement, a quartz movement with power provided by mechanical energy, in many cases a rotor.
Spring Drive is different, the movement is mechanical. The quartz crystal is used as a reference that an integrated circuit checks as a reference for the correct time. The integrated circuit then utilizes an electromagnetic brake to slow down, or speed up, to regulate the speed of the mechanical movement. To be clear, the brake does not physically touch the movement, not with gears. This replaces the tradirional mechanical movement escapement. One of the brilliant parts regarding Spring Drive is that the regulation is essentially a feedback loop.
There are no batteries nor capaictors, (to my knowledge on the capacitors), in a Spring Drive movement. The electrical power is provided in real time by the mechanical movement. Again, the movement is mechanical, it has a mainspring, etc.
I have heard others say that Spring Drive is a kluge, a hacked together system. For me, it is the opposite, an extremely well designed and elegant system and movement. It is a hybrid, but that's the beauty. The currently existing mechanical movement has been around for hundreds of years, even if the rotor is a bit of a more recent invention, it is a very good thing to have Seiko update it.
The advancements made by the LMVH Group with the Zenith Defy Lab technology is very impressive as well.
I wonder if there is a way for Seiko to marry the two technologies.
This is not what you stated in your previous post.i know how the spring drive works, i've read document about it. a brake is applied 8 times in a second to slow down the second hand. i didnt say no mechanical parts are involved but the accuracy of the spring drive is largely depends on the quartz crystal and the integrated circuit, which do calculations on speeds of some moving wheels and then apply the brake accordingly. while in a mechanical movement, the control of accuracy is all mechanical, master technicans need to do all calibration mechanically.
Save your breath, Sparrowhawk, you aren't going to convince rambo99.This is not what you stated in your previous post.
George Daniels' watch could actually hit 0.5s a day, and in his lifetime he insisted that 1s/d watches could be produced reliably (...if you had god-level watchmaking skills like him).I would pose a hypothetical to people who fall into that third camp. Suppose that Timeless were to develop a new movement, we'll call it the TLW1. The TLW1 is totally, 100% mechanical, but it's crazy advanced. You've never seen anything like the TLW1, and it's accurate to an amazing 0.5 seconds per day. It's totally immune to the effects of position on timekeeping, and the amount of energy left in the mainspring doesn't affect the accuracy either. That is to say, it's exactly as stable as a spring drive.
Now ask yourself, if it's the organic qualities of a mechanical that you like, do you prefer the TLW1 or the spring drive in this instance? They behave identically, it's just one is totally mechanical. If your answer is that yes, you'd still prefer the TLW1, that suggests to me that there must be another factor in your preference for mechanical movements.
whisky fan yes, identify with it, no. It doesn't matter to me what turns the hands, as long as they turn accurately. Similarly, don't really care how my whisky got its taste, just that it has a taste I like.Any other fine whisky/whiskey fans identify with this?
A slightly different view would be that the essential difference between a typical mechanical movement and a typical quartz movement is not how it is powered, but rather in how the time is kept. There is a certain fascination to be found in the fact that a sprung mechanical oscillator can provide good-enough timekeeping. The geartrain is by contrast the least interesting part of a mechanical movement. To that mindset, a Springdrive is neither fish nor foul, and the brief flurry of electric watches with mechanical oscillators the apex of interesting.They haven't ruined mechanicals for me, but I have to admit, the ease of a spring drive is very nice to have. A three day power reserve and extreme accuracy gives my SBGE249 a grab and go factor unlike any of my mechanicals. I can keep it running for extended periods easily, even without a winder, and trust that it's still going to be right. 9R66s are especially easy to live with because you don't interrupt the accuracy for different time zones or DST.
As per the broader, seemingly immortal, debate between whether spring drives are "real" mechanicals or not, or at least, should they be treated more like a quartz or a mechanical for purposes of comparison, in my opinion, we're starting too far along in the thought process. Our initial question should be something akin to "why do I like this watch and not that one?" If you love mechanical watches but aren't into quartz watches, figure out why that is. When you identify what it is about mechanical movements that you like so much more than quartz, then you can start to see if the spring drive has what you're looking for.
For instance, some people like mechanical movements because the movements are far more intricate and visually interesting than quartz movements. If that's you, then good news, the spring drive's going to be a good fit. Others like mechanical movements because they find it very interesting to have this complex machine churning away on their wrist all day (I'm one of those people, by the way). Again, good news, you've got an incredibly complex machine on your wrist with a spring drive too.
Now, now, don't be coy and pretend this is hypothetical, go ahead and spill some more details about this advanced movement you're working on. :-! Who's the OEM? Zenith, Omega, Grand Seiko, some other player? :-d b-)I would pose a hypothetical to people who fall into that third camp. Suppose that Timeless were to develop a new movement, we'll call it the TLW1. The TLW1 is totally, 100% mechanical, but it's crazy advanced. You've never seen anything like the TLW1, and it's accurate to an amazing 0.5 seconds per day. It's totally immune to the effects of position on timekeeping, and the amount of energy left in the mainspring doesn't affect the accuracy either. That is to say, it's exactly as stable as a spring drive.
I can certainly identify with the attraction of a traditional product being made the hard way. That's one of the reasons I generally prefer low-beat mechanical movements to high-beat movements (though I do also have a thing for 5Hz and faster). It's harder to keep time well with a slower oscillator, ergo the achievement by the maker is higher.Any other fine whisky/whiskey fans identify with this?
I certainly agree with this. The innovation and engineering that went into the development of the first quartz clocks was monumental, as was that required to miniaturize the concept to fit in a wristwatch, and the engineering going into high-end quartz movements - including HAQ, solar, auto-resetting "tough" movements, time-signal/GPS/Bluetooth control, today's ABC and smart watches, etc., and of course even Springdrive - is phenomenal. There's not any cheating going on to my mind, but the goals are obviously quite different from those of mechanical movements.And, I don't consider any technology improvement, be it quartz watches, or EFI in automobiles/motorcycles to be cheating just because its electronic and not mechanical.
Don't know what you're on about cheating so So turbo cars are cheating as well spring drives and other new innovations are brilliantI can certainly identify with the attraction of a traditional product being made the hard way. That's one of the reasons I generally prefer low-beat mechanical movements to high-beat movements (though I do also have a thing for 5Hz and faster). It's harder to keep time well with a slower oscillator, ergo the achievement by the maker is higher.
But . . .
I certainly agree with this. The innovation and engineering that went into the development of the first quartz clocks was monumental, as was that required to miniaturize the concept to fit in a wristwatch, and the engineering going into high-end quartz movements - including HAQ, solar, auto-resetting "tough" movements, time-signal/GPS/Bluetooth control, today's ABC and smart watches, etc., and of course even Springdrive - is phenomenal. There's not any cheating going on to my mind, but the goals are obviously quite different from those of mechanical movements.
I think he's acknowledging he doesn't see it as cheating. I'm not sure about the 'different goals' idea though. The goal for any watch movement design/methodology it to keep accurate time.Don't know what you're on about cheating so So turbo cars are cheating as well spring drives and other new innovations are brilliant
Sent from my SM-N975F using Tapatalk
Maybe you quoted the wrong person? ;-)Don't know what you're on about cheating so So turbo cars are cheating as well spring drives and other new innovations are brilliantThere's not any cheating going on to my mind, but the goals are obviously quite different from those of mechanical movements.
This is true in the era when a given technology is developed, but it doesn't remain true in the face of newer technologies.II'm not sure about the 'different goals' idea though. The goal for any watch movement design/methodology it to keep accurate time.
Most of the next generation do not seem to have an interest in watches.No, because Spring Drive does not have the "heirloomability" of a fine mechanical watch. No watch with electrical components has it. When you spend that kind of money on a watch, and lets face it, these SD prices are well within Rolex range, you at least consider about passing it down to the next few generations. Even if you assume Spring Drive will be around that long, your great great grand child will not be able to find the electrical parts for your model. Perhaps a full movement change may be possible. You can always turn another gear, but wind another coil or print another mini ancient electrical board, not so much.
But then again, there is something to be said about enjoying an item for the moment. Let your progeny worry about their own watches.
heb