Beautiful watch--congratulations. And the timing...wow! The ultimate test is whether a watch consistently performs at the same level over time, and after each servicing. Nevertheless, it's obvious the 9S85 movement is no slouch, and Seiko has done a phenomenal job of adjusting the movement. I have found GS to be very, very good when it comes to minimizing positional variance. There's a lot of talk about the advantages of free-sprung balances, but the GS can stand toe-to-toe with the best of the Swiss. Thanks for posting--this was very interesting.

 

Thanks, Jezza (and others for the kind words). I couldn't agree more. The verdict's still out how much she'll lose when down to 50% power (or so), but fully wound it's clear she's an engineering marvel. That the 9S can perform at this level without any of the trick materials (Spron is still a good ole' fashioned alloy) or fancy escapement architecture is just mind-blowing. But at the same time, it kinda fits that whole "perfection in the ordinary" motif GS seems to pride itself on, at least when they're not going all-out in the opposite (high tech, cutting edge) direction (ala Spring Drive).

About the only thing that burns me after seeing what this thing can do is the frustration of knowing that Seiko won't let whatever secret sauce they put in these movements trickle down to the low (even mid) end. I've got 10 Swiss watches that cost less than $750 (street prices), and all but one of them are "3 second" watches or better. My Seikos, meanwhile, all average 6 seconds, and most have lousy positional stability. It seems odd that Seiko would cede the bottom end of the market, given that they clearly can build competitive movements at higher price points.

 

Metal on metal?

 

yep, on probe side at least. Cleanest signal, I've found.

 

Beautiful, classic, and quality timepiece through and through. Happy for you, and enjoy it for a very long time.

 

The Hi-Beats rock, hope you enjoy yours.

 

This is very interesting indeed. My superlatives or hi-beat zenith are not regulated to that level, but stability across positions is minimal to non-existent, which I care about the most. Even $300 swiss with eta 2824 does very well as far as deviation, a same price range Seiko movement is all over the place. As you said, lousy between different positions. The best I could achieve in dial up position is on the attached image, but more like 6-8 secs when worn in the beginning at least. Does a bit worse on a winder. Your results are pretty impressive though. Very curious to know how it holds up over time.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

 

This is very interesting indeed. My superlatives or hi-beat zenith are not regulated to that level, but stability across positions is minimal to non-existent, which I care about the most.

You nailed it. Positional variation = imprecision, and precision is what separates the men from the boys. Your Rollies and Primero are a simple slide of a lever (or turning of a timing screw) away from being (near) perfect timekeepers, whereas more volatile movements can only be "net accurate" with A) luck or B) algebra (compensating errors).

I hope the GS holds together as well. Lovely piece...

 

Looking forward to seeing the ongoing results. This is very fascinating! Thanks for sharing the numbers. A Hi-Beat is in my future and this really makes me want to get it sooner than later.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

I’m not technically savvy enough to understand everything you’ve shared, but it sounds like a true win in Watch collecting. I’ve heard great things about GS hi beats


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Wow. Very impressive. It's all about how much time you put into regulating the movement. GS is defiantly on par with the Swiss. Keep that piece!

Here is my Zenith in dial up and 12 up.

 

Wow. Very impressive. It's all about how much time you put into regulating the movement. GS is defiantly on par with the Swiss. Keep that piece! Here is my Zenith in dial up and 12 up.

Ah the original hi-beat.:-!

Must add one to the stable some day. Terrific numbers, mate. If this is a trend, makes me wonder if higher-beat movements may have some latent advantages re: positional variation :think:

 

Lovely watch, I'm glad you are enjoying it so.

As a recovering accuracy-holic, I try to enjoy my GSs more for their beauty than their accuracy, especially since I see with all my watches that, over the 6-12 months after purchase, their performance changes. As I've often said on WUS, the accuracy of a mechanical watch is a wandering target. I've learned that whether my watch gains 1 second or 10 in a day, the world keeps turning and my life is the same. Don't get me wrong - I'm an ex-mechanical engineer, and I get great pleasure from a well-made machine that performs perfectly, it's just that, for me, close focusing on accuracy takes away some of the enjoyment of the watch.

I will be very surprised (and happy for you) if, in a year, you still see such exquisite timekeeping. Fingers crossed!

 

Lovely watch, I'm glad you are enjoying it so. As a recovering accuracy-holic, I try to enjoy my GSs more for their beauty than their accuracy, especially since I see with all my watches that, over the 6-12 months after purchase, their performance changes. As I've often said on WUS, the accuracy of a mechanical watch is a wandering target. I've learned that whether my watch gains 1 second or 10 in a day, the world keeps turning and my life is the same. Don't get me wrong - I'm an ex-mechanical engineer, and I get great pleasure from a well-made machine that performs perfectly, it's just that, for me, close focusing on accuracy takes away some of the enjoyment of the watch. I will be very surprised (and happy for you) if, in a year, you still see such exquisite timekeeping. Fingers crossed!

Cheers mate. I'm still new to this game, and as a "recovering gearhead" (who once bought a sublime LS1 with a Tremec 6-speed, in spite of the horrible Camaro wrapped around it), I'm still spending most of my days praying at the temple of performance, even with these increasingly obsolete technologies (Tube amps, manual transmissions, hand rolled cigars, etc.). Slowly but surely starting to appreciate some the subtleties, though (spent the better part of a half-hour last night just staring at my GS' indices...god what am I becoming), and if the day arrives when I'm finally ready to give up the accuracy-addiction, I'm sure I'll need a good sponsor ;-)

 

Congratulations. Enjoy it in the best of health.

 

274 degrees amplitude? Was it full wound?

Mine is over 320...

Not even the "superlative chronometer"--arguably the finest mass produced automatic movement in the world--nails this this transition. Here's one (not mine) that easily passed Rolex's insanely stringent -2/+2 internal standard:

Just for the sake of history, GS already in the 60s were offering high beat movements guaranteed to say within 2 minutes per month, that is + or - 2 seconds/day.

Longines + or - 1 sec/day with the Ultrachron:

In short Rottex has invented nothing, we just forgot about those excellent movements.

 

274 degrees amplitude? Was it full wound? Mine is over 320...

That's seems awfully high. Even if I try to "overwind" mine (which cannot damage it but can cause a temporary spike in amplitude), it never exceeds 300ish and quickly settles back down to 280 or so after a couple minutes. Unless I'm using the wrong lift angle, I doubt 320 is realistic. What angle are you using? Since no one seems to know, I've been leaving mine at the default 52 degrees.

In short Rottex has invented nothing, we just forgot about those excellent movements.

??? :-sGee whiz buddy tell us how you really feel. You seem to have some very strong, and not particularly positive, feelings about Rolex. I'm not their biggest fan either, but unless the history books are mistaken, their list of patents and horological firsts is nothing to sneeze at. Do you even think we'd have GS if not for the Rolex DJ? As for their movements, I cannot imagine anyone who's ever owned, or even bench tested, a modern Rolex dogging them in such a manner. Say what you will about their marketing/hype/pricing, but don't pretend they're the Bose of watchmakers. By almost every quantifiable metric, Rolex movements are accurate, reliable, and tough as nails. Feel free to post your own timing results if you have first-hand evidence to the contrary. As an old track-hound (my previous addiction), we used to tell fanboys and haters alike "put up or shut up." Timeslips (what you run at the track) confer bragging rights, not "magazine racing" (quoting horsepower and 0-60 times from Car and Driver) cars you've never owned.

I could go on about the fragility of the Cal. 430 (Longines) and other early, high maintenance, high-beats (prone to self-destruction if not lubricated every other Tuesday), but these seem like topics for another thread, no? I only mentioned Rolex to highlight how competitive the 9S85 seems to be with one of the industry's best mass produced movements. From your choice of language (Rottex?, really?), I'm sure you've had (and will continue to have) plenty of opportunities to bash the crown. Perhaps I'll join you in the trash-talking someday, but not until I've had a chance to personally put one through the paces, and even then only if I find that it doesn't live up its reputation. And just so we're clear, my next big purchase will almost certainly be a Rolex 32XX or Tudor MT5600 series--not to make a statement, but of out of respect for their engineering excellence. I approach this hobby/obsession of ours from a different angle than most. For me, it's what's "under the hood"--the "beating hearts" of these mechanical marvels--that thrills the most. Sticking with the car analogy, I'll leave the quality of the leather stitching and the fit/finish of the dashboard to folks who get off on that particular facet of quality.

I didn't know in advance if the GS (movements) were as good as advertised until I bought one, largely on the recommendations of the good folks in this sub-forum, who told me the hi-beat represents the pinnacle of Seiko's (traditional) watchmaking prowess. I trusted their expertise, and that trust seems to have been well placed. The hi-beat is terrific (so far) and I'm delighted to have one in the collection. Folks with similar knowledge (and first hand experience) of Rolex/Tudor have also chimed in favorably about their wares. I have no reason to think they would do so if Rolex/Tudor's movements were sub-par. Like I said, if you have evidence to the contrary, I'm all ears...

 

J love the black dialed highbeat..... sure the movement is high end but the subtle sunburst texture on the dial and the simplicity of the all polished handset/ indicies and text is what won me over in person. I own the silver white version but I'd love to add the black dial one day.
Congrats on your purchase.

 

J love the black dialed highbeat..... sure the movement is high end but the subtle sunburst texture on the dial and the simplicity of the all polished handset/ indicies and text is what won me over in person. I own the silver white version but I?d love to add the black dial one day.
Congrats on your purchase.

Funny, after seeing yours I'm half tempted to to order the silver/white dialed one myself. Strictly for "science," of course.;-) She's a beaut, my friend. Have you seen those indices under magnification. My god...:-!

Looks like 52º is the correct value, or good enough at least.

Yeah I couldn't find anything definitive either, so just stuck with 52º per convention.

I don't want to talk about Rottex again, but...
...their "achievements"...
...bullocks...
...their movements are nothing special...
...they never invented anything special or some interesting technical solution...
...but they are good at telling stories...
...like the myth in the minds of the Rottex techs...
...real invention not the BS that Rottex said...

Come on, man! o|

In this post
https://www.watchuseek.com/f642/sbg....com/f642/sbgj021-accuracy-hi-beat-accuracy-general-4430538-3.html#post44145175
I said that I've never seen evidence that 36k beat is more accurate than 28k, but asked if others have seen such evidence. To date, still no evidence. What do you think? Has 36k proven to be more accurate than 28k?

Accuracy is a red herring. Don't fall for its scent; it will only lead you astray. Borrowing a well-known analogy:

Blue is far more "accurate" than red, but red is by far by the superior marksman. A five minute site-adjustment to his scope (like a turn of regulator screw), and he's the last one you'd want to get in a firefight with. Trust your (excellent) screen name, mate. It tells you everything that sorts a good movement from a bad one. Still not convinced? Check out V1 of my timing study (links provided above) if you haven't already.

As for your question, though I'd need a matched-pair design to "prove" it definitively, I suspect Seiko isn't lying by rating their 5Hz (9S8X) movements higher (more precise) than their 4Hz (9S6X) peers). If you wanted to extrapolate from my findings, you wouldn't have to work too hard to see a pattern. On average, the higher the vpm, the higher the precision. Across the entire sample the correlation is .54. Excluding the high-tech Omega, the correlation rises to ~.62. There are exceptions, of course, but ceteris paribus, a hi-beat will almost certainly be more precise than a comparable low-beat, I suspect.

Talk about a tough question to answer. What is accuracy? What we see for daily rate or the resolution of a chrono? Let's start with the daily rate. [edit: thinking this over, I think the former is accuracy and the latter is precision]

If they were regulated with equal care? Then I expect the high-beat to be more accurate...[edit: precision], the high beat can be more accurate because it slices time up into smaller bits than the 28.8.

^Yes

Omega < GS

^No, but the GS is still very impressive in its own right.

Any update on how it does not fully wound?

See post 36 above b-)

+/- .5 second per day measured after many months, by far my best time keeper save for my quartz compatriots.

:-! Great looker, great runner. Gotta love it...

Great data, love it. I have had several discussions regarding the Omega Co-Axials both 2500 and 8500. IF regulated properly, they are hard to beat.

Thanks, mate. The Omega co-axial seems freakishly good. No wonder they barely (most) modified it when switching from "Coaxial Chrono" (8500) to "Coaxial Master Chrono" (8900) and adding the stricter METAS standards. It's clear they were underrating these movements from the get go. I'd be curious to see how folks feel about Rolex's similar "paper upgrade" and their "new" in-house standards of ±2 s/d. Underrating movements or marketing ploy?

 

Wow, may have to reconsider Hi Beat vs. Spring Drive...

 

^
http://azfinetime.wordpress.com/2012...roadshow-2012/

Looks like 52º is the correct value, or good enough at least.

 

always in love with these movements

 

In this post
https://www.watchuseek.com/f642/sbg....com/f642/sbgj021-accuracy-hi-beat-accuracy-general-4430538-3.html#post44145175
I said that I've never seen evidence that 36k beat is more accurate than 28k, but asked if others have seen such evidence. To date, still no evidence.

What do you think? Has 36k proven to be more accurate than 28k?

Best,
Alan

 

Talk about a tough question to answer. What is accuracy? What we see for daily rate or the resolution of a chrono? Let's start with the daily rate.

[edit: thinking this over, I think the former is accuracy and the latter is precision]

I have heard GS regulates the high-beats more carefully than the 28.8K movements, so they are, in comparison, more accurate. But that 's not fair, the question should be how each perform when perfectly regulated.

If they were regulated with equal care? Then I expect the high-beat to be more accurate - I've heard the higher beat rate makes the balance wheel less sensitive to the wearer's own movements (somewhere I recall that arm movements are around 2.5-3 hz and the further the balance oscillation is from that, the less influence there is). On the other hand, I have read posts over in the Stowa forum about low-beat 6498-1s (18K) that are quite accurate. And, from personal experience, I can say my 6498-2 powered watch (21.6K) is more accurate than my SBGW035 (28.8K) in terms of daily rate (gain of ~ 2 sec/day vs. 6 sec/day), though the GS has better isochronism - the GS gains almost the same amount daily, while the other varies more day-to-day.

And, if you are talking about chrono-type measurement accuracy [edit: precision], the high beat can be more accurate because it slices time up into smaller bits than the 28.8. With a 28.8, you can only time down to 1/4 of a second, with a high-beat it's 1/5th of a second.

So, I can't say for sure whether they are more accurate, too much depends upon how the watch is adjusted. But it sure is nice to watch the almost Spring Drive-like sweep of the high-beat's second hand.

 

Omega < GS

 

Any update on how it does not fully wound?

 

+/- .5 second per day measured after many months, by far my best time keeper save for my quartz compatriots.

 

Numbers are in, gentlemen. I missed the +24 follow-up window over the weekend, and in a bid to test whether my amplitude was too low (per Cuthburt's suggestion), I decided to re-do the timing measurements from scratch. I've now taken three complete sets of measurements (baseline + 24 hour follow-up), one after winding manually, another after wearing the watch for a day, and a third topping off a day of wear with ten manual turns of the crown. Here are the results (Chinese & Russian watches omitted to save space):

The table above includes my revised performance metrics, most of which are derived from existing standards (e.g. COSC, GSIS), others of which are my own constructs. For those of you who are less statistically inclined, the columns (variables) are color-coded from worst (red) to best (green). Since the focus today is on top-tier performance, I've emphasized (in bold/italicized font) the GS along with its three closest peers: the Armani Swiss (STP1-11), the Omega Aqua Terra (8500 Co-axial), and the "former champ" of last year's timing study, the Tissot Visodate.

Bottom line: the 9S85 is a gem
The GS hi-beat is a fantastic movement, even if not quite the world-conquering caliber it initially seemed to be. Of the three dozen watches I've tested so far, it ranks third on most conventional metrics, and second by my own standards. I'll discuss my rationale for the different rankings below, but first, let's celebrate the highlights of this terrific movement.

1) Best-performing Japanese watch I've ever tested, bar none. No other Seiko or Miyota movement, nor any Russian or Chinese movement I've tested, is even close.
2) If the 9S hi-beat were Swiss, it would clearly be within the top quintile, and perhaps the top decile, on most performance measures.
3) Smallest static (within-position) variance of any watch I've ever tested
4) Handily out-performs every ETA movement in my stable, regardless of model number (2824 series vs. 2892), speed (6 vs. 8 bps), or grade
5) Trails the Omega by only 0.5 to 1.5 seconds on most performance indicators, and the STP1-11 (only in the Armani, mind you) by even smaller amounts
6) Is an order of magnitude (10x) more stable (isochronal) "in position" than the Armani, and five times more so than the mighty Omega

Who makes the better movement, Omega or GS?
In terms of pure time-keeping precision, the Omega has a modest, but clear advantage. On every conventional measure of spatial and temporal isochronism, both at baseline (fully wound) and after 24 hours of discharge, the GS is consistently outmatched by its Swiss peer, though only by an average of 1 second. This is not so much a deficiency on the GS' part as it is an astounding feat by the Omega. On the all (and for many, only) important question of positional variation--and the infamously difficult horizontal-to-vertical transition in particular, the GS hi-beat proves to be more than twice as resistant to positional shifts in its daily rate vs. the average Swiss autowinder (1.4 vs. 2.9 seconds, respectively). As great as the GS is, however, the Omega is more than 50% better still, with a Spring-Drive like 0.9 second variance between flat and upright positions. Though the GS' higher beat and stronger mainspring confer a clear advantage over it's more conventional peers, it's still not enough to match Omega's hi-tech materials, twin-barrels, and free-sprung co-axial escapement. The numbers speak for themselves--the Omega is a sub one-second watch on five of the six precision measures. IMO, it's hard to see any mainstream, traditionally constructed, purely mechanical movement ever notching a "win" here. I haven't strapped a Crown (or a Shield) on the timer yet (still deciding between the MT5600 and the 32XX series), but neither of those Rolex/Tudor movements are as technologically advanced as the Omega either. We shall see...

Who makes the better movement, GS or...[gasp] Fossil?
As I've said elsewhere, the STP1-11 looks to be the real deal. A dimensional clone of the ubiquitous ETA 2824, it seems to be every bit as good a movement and then some. While it's clearly capable of delivering ETA-besting performance for a fraction of the cost, I would not consider it superior, or even equal to, the GS hi-beat. Yes, the 1-11 in the Armani edges out the GS on my Timegrapher. That a $300 (street price) fashion watch with a pedestrian 4Hz movement can pull ahead of a hi-beat GS (and even nip at the heels of the Omega in some benchmarks) is downright stupefying. The problem, of course, is the GS goes pummels three other watches powered by the exact same movement! In short, I think the STP1-11 in my Armani is probably a ringer, though I'm also receptive to the possibility that different watchmakers have varying degrees of success in getting the most out of this promising but as yet unproven movement.

Final Thoughts: grand by any measure, and far better than I expected
Last but not least, it bears mentioning what a welcome and definitive answer the GS provides to a question that has long nagged at me: can the Japanese build a competitive mechanical movement, yes or no? Not a pretty one, not a durable one, not a value-priced one, but a properly competitive one. As you can see from the table, over ten consecutive purchases, each more expensive than the last, the answer has always been a resounding NO. Until now. I hereby dispense with my long-held, long-frustrating suspicion that Japanese watches (and Seiko in particular) are good looking, well-crafted pieces with mediocre movements. The GS hi-beat is not only competitive with the Swiss movements, it's within striking distance of the very best of them. The 9S performs well within COSC specs, and for a watch that relies on traditional methods/materials (no silicon springs or fancy escapements), I could not be more impressed. Though I was unable to replicate the seemingly supernatural performance it turned in during my initial testing, the hi-beat is still an excellent performer overall. If I'd had this watch during the first timing study, it would would have taken top honors. As it stands, it still gets very, very close.

And yes, as goes without saying, the watch is an absolute joy to stare at, particularly in the light and up close. That I now own something that checks so many of my fellow WIS' boxes while finally checking my own (with gusto, no less) truly is the best of all worlds. A ±1 s/d timekeeper with trinity-level finishing, all in a package that the average schmo is more likely to confuse with a Timex than a Rolex? Consider me smitten.

Happy to take questions about the methods & findings, and I'll add additional thoughts/comments later. Cheers, -PH

 

Great data, love it. Would love to download the spreadsheet and keep for reference if available. I have had several discussions regarding the Omega Co-Axials both 2500 and 8500. IF regulated properly, they are hard to beat. However, in my experience, most are not straight from the factory. Hence, us accuracy alcoholics, once again are foiled. GS has much better QA standards, IMHO.

As an example my Seamaster Bond cal. 1120 runs +- 1sec (never opened) a day where my Seamaster Rio cal. 2500 runs +6 after 1 year. (Never opened)

 

They make incredible time machines

 

Sounds nice

 

Hey, Fred, take it easy with the obvious speed posting. I see you just joined WUS today and in the past hour you've posted 9 comments with no more than 5 words, and no intellectual content at all. Forum mods take a dim view of speed posters trying to get to the sales corner.

Now, if you have something intelligent to say, we welcome you to the forum. But "sounds nice"? My 4 year old could do better.

correction - 7 words in the Snowflake post.

 

This is crazy!

 

Thanks for sharing!

 

Why the sudden explosion of posts in the past hour, Skyjuice? Don't get yourself flagged for speedposting, the mods look for that.

Edit: having crossed 100 posts, Skyjuice has gone radio silent. Time to start watching the sales corner.