I'm curious: how do watch designers compensate for the additional power demand when occasionally used functions like the chronograph are activated? There must surely be some impact on time keeping due to the incremental inertia and friction of the chronograph gear train?
Watchnik
I asked similar question recently https://www.watchuseek.com/f2/when-chronograph-started-714083.html . As usual, CitizenM gave a deep explanation. He also reffered to the WatchTime magazine which tests watches with chronograph on and off. I checked articles like the one he mentioned ( http://www.watchtime.at/archive/wt_2010_02/WT_2010_02_118.pdf ) for several years and the results are different for different watches - some go faster when chrono is on, some - slower...
Thanks for the link VRT. It seems the question is not so simple after all.
Perseus thanks for your great suggestion of using the search function. Very helpful. For the record, and in case you care to remind me again in future, I post nothing on this website without searching first. I may be guilty of not always picking the right search terms, but I always search.
Perseus thanks for your great suggestion of using the search function. Very helpful. For the record, and in case you care to remind me again in future, I post nothing on this website without searching first. I may be guilty of not always picking the right search terms, but I always search.
It usually speeds it up a tad...but I doubt you'll notice is the chronometer mechanism is tweaked properly.
FWIW, my dealer told me not to keep the chrono running as it will need servicing twice as fast vs having it off. Makes sense to me.
Yes that seems good advice as some chronos lack jewels in some of the moving parts. OK if used occasionally and for short durations; not ok if left running continuously.
My Tudor Heritage Chrono goes from +2 seconds per day without the chrono running to +4 seconds per day WITH the chrono running.....
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
