WatchUSeek Watch Forums banner

1 - 20 of 26 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,191 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I just received an email from MW with the title "The world's most accurate wristwatch.", and I assumed that they had produced something new.

The email linked to here:
MORGENWERK
where they are still promoting exactly the same collection as before.

Perhaps the hysteria about the new Citizen has awoken them from their Dornröschenschlaf ***, but there didn't appear to be anything to keep the rest of us awake at night.


*** The sleep of Sleeping Beauty
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,657 Posts
Welcome back, Chris. I got the e-mail, too, and I got the impression that they were trying to emphasise the fact (/interpretation?) that Morgenwerk watches are spec'd to achieve better than 1 SPY via their self-learning thermocompensation gubbins alone, and not, as some people have been saying, achieving 1 SPY in the same manner as other GPS watches, simply by resetting the time. A counterpoint, no doubt, to the hubbub created by Citizen's 0100, but also, perhaps to some confusion or misinformation.

When watch journalists originally claimed the 0100 as the world's first 1 SPY quartz watch, I mentioned the Morgenwerk (and Hoptroff) offerings and whilst I acknowledge that they exist within something of a grey area (the self-learning mechanism relying on periodic syncs with accurate external sources) none of the commentators ganging up to shoot my comments down seemed able to grasp that both companies were claiming 1 SPY by means of thermocompensation and not as a simple byproduct of regular syncs.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,604 Posts
I remember an early Morgenwerk advertisement.
They themselves seem to be befuddled by all this technology.

Unfortunately it ends up as just a loose collection of buzzwords.

snapshot_MW.jpg
 

·
HAQ and AW moderator
Joined
·
7,357 Posts
With Hoptroff out of the watch business,and no data on his 1 s/y watches that I have seen, I cannot say either way.
Has anyone recently let their Morgenwerk watch sit for a year without resets, and checked the offset?
 

·
HAQ and AW moderator
Joined
·
7,357 Posts
With Hoptroff out of the watch business,and no data on his 1 s/y watches that I have seen, I cannot say either way.
Has anyone recently let their Morgenwerk watch sit for a year without resets, and checked the offset?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,604 Posts
With Hoptroff out of the watch business,and no data on his 1 s/y watches that I have seen, I cannot say either way.
Has anyone recently let their Morgenwerk watch sit for a year without resets, and checked the offset?
I remember reading that self calibration was happening.
How well that worked, I don't remember.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,654 Posts
I remember reading that self calibration was happening.
How well that worked, I don't remember.
It works perfectly (according to specifications) and my observation based upon that three versions:
- my own M1-3 (analog titanium) - it has a factory rate of +0.06 sec/day that gets corrected by the self-correction
- my own M3-1 (analog/digital) - it has a factory rate of +0.02 sec/day that gets corrected by the self-correction
- my Brother's M1-1 (analog stainless steel) - it has a factory rate of -0.14 sec/day that gets corrected by the self-correction
The beauty of the Morgenwerk watches that they are destined for within 1 sec/year accuracy due to the nature of the applied technologies!
My only critical observation and that is very subjective: I do prefer slimline watches and the Morgenwerk watches are bulky.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
226 Posts
It works perfectly (according to specifications) and my observation based upon that three versions:
- my own M1-3 (analog titanium) - it has a factory rate of +0.06 sec/day that gets corrected by the self-correction
- my own M3-1 (analog/digital) - it has a factory rate of +0.02 sec/day that gets corrected by the self-correction
- my Brother's M1-1 (analog stainless steel) - it has a factory rate of -0.14 sec/day that gets corrected by the self-correction
The beauty of the Morgenwerk watches that they are destined for within 1 sec/year accuracy due to the nature of the applied technologies!
My only critical observation and that is very subjective: I do prefer slimline watches and the Morgenwerk watches are bulky.
My understanding is that at the 'start of life' they use GPS information to 'regulate' a thermocompensated quartz movement.
Sounds like a good idea. They regulate-rate, a normal 'atomic' watch just adjusts-indicated-time
I am not interested in initial-rate.
I am interested in
a) Deviation from correct time just after last auto-regulation (presumably zero)
b) Maximum deviation from correct time during the next 1 year of independent running (the interesting one).
I accept that an auto-regulation every year might be needed to compensate for ageing.
If it NEEDS auto-regulation more often than once per year in order to meet 10-seconds maximum deviation over 1 year I do not consider it HAQ.
 

·
HAQ and AW moderator
Joined
·
7,357 Posts
My understanding is that at the 'start of life' they use GPS information to 'regulate' a thermocompensated quartz movement.
Sounds like a good idea. They regulate-rate, a normal 'atomic' watch just adjusts-indicated-time
I am not interested in initial-rate.
I am interested in
a) Deviation from correct time just after last auto-regulation (presumably zero)
b) Maximum deviation from correct time during the next 1 year of independent running (the interesting one).
I accept that an auto-regulation every year might be needed to compensate for ageing.
If it NEEDS auto-regulation more often than once per year in order to meet 10-seconds maximum deviation over 1 year I do not consider it HAQ.
Have you searched the main Morgenwerk thread? Some of that information might be in there.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,654 Posts
My understanding is that at the 'start of life' they use GPS information to 'regulate' a thermocompensated quartz movement.
Sounds like a good idea. They regulate-rate, a normal 'atomic' watch just adjusts-indicated-time
I am not interested in initial-rate.
I am interested in
a) Deviation from correct time just after last auto-regulation (presumably zero)
b) Maximum deviation from correct time during the next 1 year of independent running (the interesting one).
I accept that an auto-regulation every year might be needed to compensate for ageing.
If it NEEDS auto-regulation more often than once per year in order to meet 10-seconds maximum deviation over 1 year I do not consider it HAQ.
Batteries are recharged 3-4 times per year and right after that just by habit I manually force (that is the only way as there is no auto method) the watch to get GPS time (an altogether approximately 30 seconds activity that requires a press of a button for 2 seconds and being outdoor or next to a window that faces the sky). I can tell you that the accuracy deviation between these GPS receptions is less than 1 second (in other words less than 1 second/3-4 months - that does not translate necessarily to 3-4 seconds/year!!!). That is much better than the 10 seconds/year you mentioned in your post. Of course, the correct time is spot on after each GPS reception. That is the method my Brother and I use our Morgenwerk watches and we are very pleased with them. Had we forced GPS reception only once per year the accuracy deviation between GPS receptions might be different but certainly not by a huge margin. It is practical from our point of view that when the watch needs attention due to re-charging the battery we carry out the forced GPS reception procedure as well at the same time and then we can forget watch maintenance for another 3-4 months.
As I mentioned earlier, the applied technologies themselves won't allow out of specs performance. That is why I put in my post the out of factory running of that 3 watches. It does not matter how they run out of factory as they will perform similarly. The one with the "worst" out of factory running will self-calibrate itself more often than the "better" running ones. It is a very smart and very logical scheme and most importantly it excludes human error in the process.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
226 Posts
Batteries are recharged 3-4 times per year and right after that just by habit I manually force (that is the only way as there is no auto method) the watch to get GPS time (an altogether approximately 30 seconds activity that requires a press of a button for 2 seconds and being outdoor or next to a window that faces the sky). I can tell you that the accuracy deviation between these GPS receptions is less than 1 second (in other words less than 1 second/3-4 months - that does not translate necessarily to 3-4 seconds/year!!!). That is much better than the 10 seconds/year you mentioned in your post. Of course, the correct time is spot on after each GPS reception. That is the method my Brother and I use our Morgenwerk watches and we are very pleased with them. Had we forced GPS reception only once per year the accuracy deviation between GPS receptions might be different but certainly not by a huge margin. It is practical from our point of view that when the watch needs attention due to re-charging the battery we carry out the forced GPS reception procedure as well at the same time and then we can forget watch maintenance for another 3-4 months.
As I mentioned earlier, the applied technologies themselves won't allow out of specs performance. That is why I put in my post the out of factory running of that 3 watches. It does not matter how they run out of factory as they will perform similarly. The one with the "worst" out of factory running will self-calibrate itself more often than the "better" running ones. It is a very smart and very logical scheme and most importantly it excludes human error in the process.
Yes, I agree.
10 years ago I bought Seiko Spirit SBPG001
It is solar-powered and adjusts time several time a day using radio (for me MSF) signal.
From a practical point of view you cannot beat it, I have never had to adjust/service/change battery.
But is it HAQ ?
I thought that by our definition HAQ demanded autonomous accuracy.
Your experience of Morgenwerk (better than 1s every 3-4 months over several cycles) is the best evidence that I have seen that it is .
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,654 Posts
...I thought that by our definition HAQ demanded autonomous accuracy.
Your experience of Morgenwerk (better than 1s every 3-4 months over several cycles) is the best evidence that I have seen that it is .
Even without feedback from end-users like me, the combination of applied technologies (accuracy-wise) necessitate a HAQ movement:
- 32kHz thermocompensated quartz movement
- self-calibration
- GPS reception capability (excludes human error for setting the correct time)
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,654 Posts
Batteries are recharged 3-4 times per year and right after that just by habit I manually force (that is the only way as there is no auto method) the watch to get GPS time (an altogether approximately 30 seconds activity that requires a press of a button for 2 seconds and being outdoor or next to a window that faces the sky). I can tell you that the accuracy deviation between these GPS receptions is less than 1 second (in other words less than 1 second/3-4 months - that does not translate necessarily to 3-4 seconds/year!!!). That is much better than the 10 seconds/year you mentioned in your post. Of course, the correct time is spot on after each GPS reception. That is the method my Brother and I use our Morgenwerk watches and we are very pleased with them. Had we forced GPS reception only once per year the accuracy deviation between GPS receptions might be different but certainly not by a huge margin. It is practical from our point of view that when the watch needs attention due to re-charging the battery we carry out the forced GPS reception procedure as well at the same time and then we can forget watch maintenance for another 3-4 months.
As I mentioned earlier, the applied technologies themselves won't allow out of specs performance. That is why I put in my post the out of factory running of that 3 watches. It does not matter how they run out of factory as they will perform similarly. The one with the "worst" out of factory running will self-calibrate itself more often than the "better" running ones. It is a very smart and very logical scheme and most importantly it excludes human error in the process.
Just to avoid any confusion: the above is correct after the initial run-in period.
The initial run-in period (in case of a brand new Morgenwerk watch or a factory reset Morgenwerk watch) according to the manufacturer's advice and my own experience:
- set the watch to the correct time (by receiving GPS satellites signal)
- repeat the above 24 hours later
- set the watch to the correct time 6 weeks later
- again set the watch to the correct time another 6 weeks later
- this might not be necessary but just be on the safe side: again set the watch to the correct time another 6 weeks later
That's it, by now the watch has passed the initial 3-4 months run-in period for establishing a practical timebase for the particular watch!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,127 Posts
Should note that Mogenwerk doesn't claim to be the most accurate watch in the world, neither does the Citizen with the cal 0100s.

Morgenwerk simply said in that email, the most accurate watch in the world. Just an open ended statement. Their website clearly states that they tried to build the most accrate watch in the world, not that they achieved it. As far as accuracy what they state and achieved is, with just 8 syncs per year you could achieve +/- 0.75 s/y accuracy. That reads as not just the first year but every year.

Citizen states, when you add the footnote, that it is the most accurate light powered quartz watch in the world at 1 s/y.

Apple simply says it will be accurate to 50ms at all times.

All these watches are thermocompensated, but clearly based on specs Apple is far more accurate of the three.
 

·
HAQ and AW moderator
Joined
·
7,357 Posts
AW achieves its 50 ms by syncs, perhaps 4 times over a day. When I did my test over a month in
airplane mode, I estimated a yearly offset of 2-3 s/y.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,191 Posts
Discussion Starter #20
Should note that Mogenwerk doesn't claim to be the most accurate watch in the world, neither does the Citizen with the cal 0100s.

Morgenwerk simply said in that email, the most accurate watch in the world. Just an open ended statement. Their website clearly states that they tried to build the most accrate watch in the world, not that they achieved it. As far as accuracy what they state and achieved is, with just 8 syncs per year you could achieve +/- 0.75 s/y accuracy. That reads as not just the first year but every year.
What rational person could open an email, with the subject "The world's most accurate wristwatch.", showing a picture of a MW watch and with links to MW web pages, and not believe that MW were claiming that THEIR watch is the most accurate. Whether their claim is true or not, the claim is indisputably being made. The respective claims, implications and inferences from two other manufacturers are completely irrelevant, again whether true or not. Also the fact of comparing three very different technologies makes relative accuracy almost meaningless.
 
1 - 20 of 26 Posts
Top