WatchUSeek Watch Forums banner

1 - 20 of 104 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,146 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Just a bit of a rant,

First like all the members here I am interested in high precision quartz. But I’m also interested in high accuracy and cutting edge quartz and mechanical horological pieces. I think this forum (being tightly focused) has always been a place for high precision quartz, but we use to embrace new and novel quartz technology much more, but I suspect those days are gone.

No doubt achieving quartz COSC precision of a quartz watch is quite a technical achievement, but is the precision of a vibrating rock the only the measure of cutting edge technology? Is it more advanced than RC, RX, or Bluetooth? The production of the thinnest quartz watch? Just to name a few things that are questioned here.

We discuss TC a lot because that’s what’s offered but is the TC employed by these watches even the most practical or advanced approach?

Compensation is an inelegant approach to the problem of temperature or anything for that matter. The ideal approach is thermal insensitivity. To put it in easily understandable terms here, not much respect for a watch that requires constant hacking to be accurate is there, TC employs the same approach.

There are various quartz cuts at specific angles that show great stability at pretty broad temp ranges, but there seems little incentive shown by watch companies to push the envelope with new technologies.

Heck we don’t talk about it or seem to care.

I think this forum is all in on high precision but disregards the importance of accuracy. Without a good reference clock and great reflexes you might as well have a pendulum, hour glass or egg timer. They can display incredible levels of precision.

The thing is the question all time pieces are meant to answer is “do you have the time?” not how many seconds your watch has varied this year. The fact that a connected watch can do this exceptionally well should be embraced and discussed on this forum, not just merely “tolerated.”

In addition to time the jewelry aspect and fine craftsmanship technical complexity of a Campanola is excluded here. It’s a shame that we ignore that since there is no, and never has been, a practical use for a HAQ watch, but there is always place for a intricate well made watch in a collection.

Like I said at the outset, I don’t expect this rant to change anything here.

Most of the long term members here are happy to graph their watches for years waiting for something to happen, post the next tweak to a dial or case using the same old movement, discuss for a bunch of pages when a new movement is introduced by Citizen or Seiko till it comes out, and call out any watch that isn’t HAQ.

That’s all good, just a little food for thought, for the 15 or 16 people who routinely contribute here.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
9,463 Posts
I think the major concern has been power consumption. The XY cut is very good at low frequencies and can be cut small.

And let's look at the 0100. $7000. Fine, some of this is intro pricing and limited, first editions and that sort. A lot of it is probably amortizing the R&D expenses. Still...do any of us anticipate the price on anything with a 0100 to drop below, say, $4000 (new street) in the next 10 years?

How many companies would be willing to consider the R&D to develop a quartz watch at this price point? Citizen is aiming for a top, top position in quartz...the Chronomasters for accurate AND with high-end looks, the ED One and 0100 for technical superiority. Swatch won't do this; risks undercutting the mechanical side. Ronda probably won't do this any time soon, as they've not even tried to go into the TC marketplace. Seiko might, I suppose, but they're pulled in 20 different directions at once, or so it seems. New Spring Drive Presages...Presages at baby GS price points...more pressure to evolve their movements. They MIGHT decide they need a higher-freq quartz, but it seems unlikely.

There isn't a push for a better HAQ when there's no push for the *current* ones...or we'd see vastly more OF them. It's not price, either, except at the very lowest end of the market...the Certinas show you can do an F-series PreciDrive model for no serious price premium.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tikim

·
Registered
Joined
·
923 Posts
I'm not sure I get the point OP. Do you want to change the defining terms of this subform?

There is no accuracy to speak of herein. What time is it anyway? Nobody knows. Precision is the point.

Is not the Citizen 0100 a massive recent advance?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
179 Posts
I cannot agree that there is no accuracy.

There is the local time we all agree upon. Deviation from this time means late meeting and planes flying off without you.

The purpose of a watch is to bring you to places in at the same time as the time of local events.
The purpose is not to run at a predictable speed, but be way off compared to the rest of the crowd.

Hence I argue we care about accuracy. And we do not care about precision.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
923 Posts
I cannot agree that there is no accuracy.

There is the local time we all agree upon. Deviation from this time means late meeting and planes flying off without you.

The purpose of a watch is to bring you to places in at the same time as the time of local events.
The purpose is not to run at a predictable speed, but be way off compared to the rest of the crowd.

Hence I argue we care about accuracy. And we do not care about precision.
You fundamentally don't understand the difference. Anyway, +/- 1spy, which is now the standard in independent time keeping is sufficient. I want someone to better it anyway in a practical design.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,146 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
I'm not sure I get the point OP. Do you want to change the defining terms of this subform?

There is no accuracy to speak of herein. What time is it anyway? Nobody knows. Precision is the point.

Is not the Citizen 0100 a massive recent advance?
I can't find the defining terms of this subforum, I seem to recall that when they use to be available that we were also interested in all advances in quartz technology. Perhaps Ron could post them and make them a sticky. That would be of value to folks visiting here.

Absent that, sure why not rethink the defining terms here. We did it before, this use to be the "High End Quartz Forum" not the HAQ forum.

As far as time we do know what time it is, on Wall Street the difference in milliseconds can equate to differences in stock price and millions of dollars in the execution of a trade. So accurate time is critical, the trade be it a "short" or a "long" needs to be executed exactly at the opening of the offering.

Which leads me to the cal 0100s, yes its quite an advancement, but the time it displays is only as good as whoever sets it. Set poorly (inaccurately) it will precisely display the same wrong time.

By the way, Citizen doesn't refer to this watch as the most accurate watch in the world, they refer to it as "The most accurate solar watch." Apple on the other hand says they are the most accurate watch in the world.

Should also say the use of the way the word accurate as used with watches is historical dating back to mechanical watches. Since there was no such thing as a connected watch the words precision and accurate were used interchangebly, and definately not from a scientific definition for these terms.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
886 Posts
When this subforum was labeled "HEQ" (Hig End Quartz) it was aimed to high accuracy but also to costly quartz. But as years go by it focused more on accuracy and I was among those people who suggested the change of the name in High Accuracy Quartz. While a simple name doesn't necessarily state everything, in my opinion nowadays the F9 is too tightly focused on accuracy. Alas, the technical advancements have not been so great so we are still discussing about TC that is here since a lot of time and honestly there is not so much to talk about. This also because the manufacturers don't say anything about their methods and new watches are hard to find. Seiko and Citizen (the most important manufacturers) don't show new movements, 0100 set apart which is anyway too expensive and rare. ETA with its Precidrive line is actually selling the HAQ for everyone but technically speaking is a step back. CSAC as for now too big and energy consuming. RC/GPS/BT are fine but they are inelegant and require and external time source not always available.

About the definition of accurate and precise, these 2 words are scientifically defined and it has been debated a lot about them here on WUS. Unfortunately the commercial communication uses "accurate" in many ways and so it happens when we talk about HAQ.

Since not so many news are coming, in my opinion I would be a lot inclusive becausewe risk to have nothing interesting to talk and we also risk to be so focused about technical aspects that alot of us (especially me) will be cut off.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
137 Posts
What I've always found interesting about this movement is the "trimming" screw... Ive never seen anything posted about whether this is something that can actually be DIY'd.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,729 Posts
What I've always found interesting about this movement is the "trimming" screw... Ive never seen anything posted about whether this is something that can actually be DIY'd.
Are you talking about GS 9F movements? I used the trimmer to adjust the rate of mine. I have also used trimmers to adjust the rate of vintage HAQs from Crystron 4 Megas to Seiko Twin Quartz and an old Omega. With the old ones you have to have a very steady hand but with the GS movement the trimmer is digital and each notch equates to an adjustment of about 6 SPY.

I often despair of the 9F, with its woefully outmoded feature set, but the presence of the trimmer alone (to say nothing of the finishing of the watch externally) always makes a GS my preferred choice over the equivalent Chronomaster. I just cannot stand the fact that an expensive HAQ either has to go back to the factory or else cannot be adjusted at all if it is off-spec.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,654 Posts
Are you talking about GS 9F movements? I used the trimmer to adjust the rate of mine. I have also used trimmers to adjust the rate of vintage HAQs from Crystron 4 Megas to Seiko Twin Quartz and an old Omega. With the old ones you have to have a very steady hand but with the GS movement the trimmer is digital and each notch equates to an adjustment of about 6 SPY.

I often despair of the 9F, with its woefully outmoded feature set, but the presence of the trimmer alone (to say nothing of the finishing of the watch externally) always makes a GS my preferred choice over the equivalent Chronomaster. I just cannot stand the fact that an expensive HAQ either has to go back to the factory or else cannot be adjusted at all if it is off-spec.
I agree but might add that not even the excellent Seiko 9F calibration option comes close to the classic ETA digital calibration terminals! ETA made it kind of "unlimited" in reach while the Seiko 9F has its limits towards both the minus and the plus direction. Also the fine adjustment steps of 4 seconds/year by ETA is better than the Seiko 9F 6 seconds/year. Unfortunately, the latest ETA offerings lack the all important calibration terminals...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,729 Posts
I agree but might add that not even the excellent Seiko 9F calibration option comes close to the classic ETA digital calibration terminals! ETA made it kind of "unlimited" in reach while the Seiko 9F has its limits towards both the minus and the plus direction. Also the fine adjustment steps of 4 seconds/year by ETA is better than the Seiko 9F 6 seconds/year. Unfortunately, the latest ETA offerings lack the all important calibration terminals...
True. There's no finer HAQ in my collection than my old VHP. And it's not just the convenient calibration terminals but also the perpetual calendar, an independently adjustable hour hand and a 200m WR rating.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,464 Posts
. . .

Should also say the use of the way the word accurate as used with watches is historical dating back to mechanical watches. Since there was no such thing as a connected watch the words precision and accurate were used interchangebly, and definately not from a scientific definition for these terms.
I'm not a long time follower of this subforum (or WUS for that matter), but it seems to me that this is the main issue. Chasy & jandrese (possibly) aside, I think most of us are interested in both accuracy & precision, but IMHO the emphasis should be on the watch as an autonomous device. I do find the technology behind connected watches to be interesting, and would agree that discussion of that technology & those watches shouldn't be prohibited in this subforum, but at some point the emphasis shifts from the watch itself to the combined accuracy & precision of the networks that the watch is connected to (& ultimately to TAI/UTC).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
886 Posts
True. There's no finer HAQ in my collection than my old VHP. And it's not just the convenient calibration terminals but also the perpetual calendar, an independently adjustable hour hand and a 200m WR rating.
I don't have any old VHP and unfortunately for me I don't like any of their design, otherwise I would have look for one. As for the Seiko ,the new 9F86 (I have the SBGN005) comes very close since it has IAHH and a screw down crown which is very close to the 200m specification. It just lacks the perpetual calendar which is not such a great problem anyway. And of course we can discuss about the style but for me the SBGN005 wins hands down against any old VHP...
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,654 Posts
True. There's no finer HAQ in my collection than my old VHP. And it's not just the convenient calibration terminals but also the perpetual calendar, an independently adjustable hour hand and a 200m WR rating.
Add to the above the 10 years lasting 3V lithium battery and the screw down backcover!
I have 2 flavors of the Longines Conquest VHP Perpetual Calendar (10m WR and 200m WR):
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,636 Posts
I think the moderators have stated numerous times that the emphasys here is on internal regulation movements. I believe they have also stated that does not bar discussion of radio, GPS, bluetooth and any similar tech. As a watch enthusiast fascinated by precision and accuracy I thoroughly enjoy the discussions on the finer technical points, I must admit sometimes its beyond my technical comprehension but I enjoy learning about the basic aspects that makes HAQ possible. To me this is no less interesting when it comes to internal plus external regulation.

Every time I look at my radio G-Shock it is accurate to the second, boring as hell, but I like and enjoy any tech discussion about it. This is a case of be careful what you wish for, how interesting, and to how many will it still be of interest, when these internally regulated watches reliably achieve sub sec per/year performance.

Something that I have found somewhat odd, perhaps due to the non HAQ status, but I would think no less technically interesting, is discussion of non regulated quartz.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
886 Posts
I know that comparing the ETA in the VHP and the Seiko 9F is pointless but they're both rated at 10 spy so a digital trimmer with 4spy step is the same as a 6 spy. Moreover the intrinsic inaccuracy comes from the thermal sensitivity of the quartz crystal, not by the step of the digital trimmer. And also the definition of accuracy stated by the manufacturers in the user manuals or advertising is related to the wearing pattern. To have a meaningful measurement of which movement is the best would need 1) measuring the performances with different wearing patterns 2) measuring a good number of different specimen of each model 3) measuring the performances over a wide time period. If we don't do that, every reported accuracy will be only meaningful for the particular specimen but not extended to the model of the watch.

Therefore I think we are just talking about great watches with very good performances. BUT saying that one is better than the other is simply not motivated. Now we can appreciate more the characteristics of the VHP vs the GS or vice versa, but this has nothing to do with accuracy. As for me, the look and finish of my 2 GS is simply stunning while the VHPs never appealed me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,146 Posts
Discussion Starter · #19 ·
Move to the southern hemisphere and it won't be boring anymore!;-)
I don't understand, or maybe you forgot that an app has been available for years to address this issue. Otherwise I don't find using a signal from an app on a phone, instead of from a tower, to set the Casio and maintain that 1 second accuracy exciting?
 
1 - 20 of 104 Posts
Top