WatchUSeek Watch Forums banner

41 - 60 of 119 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
368 Posts
To me the main benefit of UHF movements is not even accuracy.

With a sweeping second hand, you no longer have to worry if it hits the indices all around the chapter ring. This, I just can't stand.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,006 Posts
There's definitely a market and a new battery every 2-3 years is nothing. Also, easily solvable if also solar.

Someone mentioned Casio Lineage and I'll add Oceanus as a line with sensors to ensure second hand hits directly on markers.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,038 Posts
Another recent thread about quartz clocks reminded me of a question I've had for some time. Technically it should be trivial to give a quartz movement a smooth sweeping hand. I understand originally the 1-second tick was introduced to improve battery life, but nowadays that's much less of an issue.

And since smoothly sweeping seconds give a watch a much higher quality feel, why aren't there more quartz movements with a sweeping second hand? It would make quartz watches a lot more palatable for me personally if I weren't reminded of their movement every second ;)
It´s still a issue.
It may give YOU that feeling, most of us grow out of that feeling once we learn that all it does is making telling the exact time more difficult.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
271 Posts
It´s still a issue.
It may give YOU that feeling, most of us grow out of that feeling once we learn that all it does is making telling the exact time more difficult.
How so? By the time you read the “exact time” the second has already passed on to the next, so I’m not sure I understand how a one beat per second hand tells the exact time more easily than a sweeping one.

I could argue the sweeping second hand is preferable because there is no .5 second position with 1 beat per second. You know in case I need to be somewhere at 3:00 and .5 seconds.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
177 Posts
Yes, I know they exist. The question is why sweeping quartz seconds aren't more commonplace. Especially when there are quite pricey quartz watches out there (e.g. various Tag Heuers, etc.). A smoother sweep would increase the luxury feel of such watches quite a bit.
To be honest - most 'high end' quartz watches aren't even high accuracy, either independently or via radio control - unless you're buying a Seiko, Citizen, or Casio. Tag Heuer uses a pretty basic Ronda movement in their quartz watches and don't have much trouble selling them. If people don't know or care enough to demand top notch accuracy, I'm not surprised that they aren't interested enough to demand a smooth sweeping seconds hand either.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,696 Posts
The Grand Seiko 9F quartz movement ticks at twice a second, but the ticks have different dwell times - according to GS, this is to conserve battery life.
True, but the second movement is nearly instantaneous, so that to the naked eye in real time, it appears to be one continuous movement per second. The small seconds hand on a Bulova Lunar Pilot chrono has two distinct movements per second. I also have a 3-hander Bulova Precisionist, where the 16 ticks per second appears to be a continuous sweeping second hand. Both the Seiko 9F and Bulova Precisionist movements are considered to be high accuracy quartz movements. My 9F is maybe 1 second off in a year.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,696 Posts
To be honest - most 'high end' quartz watches aren't even high accuracy, either independently or via radio control - unless you're buying a Seiko, Citizen, or Casio. Tag Heuer uses a pretty basic Ronda movement in their quartz watches and don't have much trouble selling them. If people don't know or care enough to demand top notch accuracy, I'm not surprised that they aren't interested enough to demand a smooth sweeping seconds hand either.
True, but there are a lot more sources for HAQ:

Breitling Aerospace EVO (or any of their quartz watches)
Certina Precidrive
Bulova Precisionist
Longines VHP
Omega (X-33 Skymaster, Z-33 Spacemaster, James Bond Seamaster Quartz, etc.)

I'm sure there are others. A visit to the HAQ Forum can ferret out more.

The Certina and Bulova are quite affordable. Poor man's way to high accuracy for quartz is a radio-sync or GPS-sync watch. Aside from Bulova, I don't know of a single HAQ watch with a relatively smooth sweeping second hand.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
197 Posts
How so? By the time you read the “exact time” the second has already passed on to the next, so I’m not sure I understand how a one beat per second hand tells the exact time more easily than a sweeping one.

I could argue the sweeping second hand is preferable because there is no .5 second position with 1 beat per second. You know in case I need to be somewhere at 3:00 and .5 seconds.
I feel the same way about the click of a once per second movement that visually makes it much easier to tell it's exactly synced with time.is for example vs a sweeping hand. Visually it's harder to tell exactly when the smoothly moving hand meets the mark vs the very obvious clicking hand. I once upon a time much preferred the "serenity" of no second hand and a smooth minute hand movement, in a way that made the relentless passage of time less obvious. But that's been replaced by a satisfaction with the verifiable accuracy of an atomic watch with its on the second clicks.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,038 Posts
Seiko makes a 3 hand quartz movement that ticks at 4 times per second. It’s only used in a couple of obscure micro brands, one being Hemel.

I think the simple answer is that there’s not really mass market demand for it. There’s probably only a handful of people (basically us posting ITT) that would be interested. Why bother investing time and money in R&D for this new sweeping movement when 99% of your customers aren’t going to care whether it ticks or sweeps?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,638 Posts
It is, but I imagine most users would prefer a longer battery life to a smoother sweep. If a smooth sweep, i.e. four ticks per second, shortened the battery life by a factor of four - I'm not sure it would, maybe it would be less - I wouldn't like that in my watch.
I worked for Energizer corporate a ways back, and can vouch that battery life is non-linear, so your hunch is correct - ticking four times per second wears out a battery MORE than 4x faster.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,230 Posts
It's friggin 2021. We're on Mars, and so are the Chinese.
There are 57 genders.
What could possibly be impossible?

Why don't we have rice grain size nuclear fusion reactors already????
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,638 Posts
I had a Bulova Precionist a while back, and it was 16bps, so pretty damn smooth. Was fun to see it tick. I also had the Lunar Pilot, which ticks at 2bps, so not "smooth" but not as "click-clack" as a 1bps quartz movement.

Sold both of them because they were gondo-huge monstrosities in terms of size. But, that's Bulova. They're like the Ford (Freud?) F-150 of watches: uNnEcEsSaRiLy HuGe So YoU fEeL lIkE a ReAl MaN
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bulovas&BoltActions

·
Registered
Joined
·
915 Posts
From what I remember when quartz watches first came out that many of them had a sweeping second hand, but at the time the quartz tick was a bit like a status symbol since quartz watches were still expensive and state of the art. I remember wanting a ticking quartz watch when I was young. All my watches had a mechanical sweeping second hand at the time.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,036 Posts
We may as well list here the watches with such movement that aren't chronographs. I'm aware of these five, all powered by the Seiko VH31:
Newark 52 (38mm)
Vario Eclipse (38mm, sold out)
Wolbrook Skindiver World Time (40mm)
Kingsbury Monarch (42mm)
WMT W20 (35mm)
LMM-01 Field Watch (38mm)
Edit: added the LMM
Another 4 beat per second quartz movement is the ISA 9500-1010. Used in the Smiths Seafire PRS-37. Maratac used it before as well.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
177 Posts
True, but there are a lot more sources for HAQ:

Breitling Aerospace EVO (or any of their quartz watches)
Certina Precidrive
Bulova Precisionist
Longines VHP
Omega (X-33 Skymaster, Z-33 Spacemaster, James Bond Seamaster Quartz, etc.)

I'm sure there are others. A visit to the HAQ Forum can ferret out more.

The Certina and Bulova are quite affordable. Poor man's way to high accuracy for quartz is a radio-sync or GPS-sync watch. Aside from Bulova, I don't know of a single HAQ watch with a relatively smooth sweeping second hand.
Accutrons aren't thermocompensated, so while they're capable of HAQ-like accuracy, they often aren't, especially as they age. They're also largely out of production, with the Lunar Pilot and Curve/Precisionist chronos being all that's left.

I wish HAQ movements were more common, but other than high performance chronographs like you described above, the VHP and Certina's surprisingly wide catalog are you only real non-Japanese options. Most of your Swiss 'luxury' quartz watches are +/-15s/month Ronda or ETA movements.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
508 Posts
Rolex and Omega were both doing dead-beat mechanical watches in the 50s. Others probably were as well.
Which is kind of a clue that the Swiss watch industry ultimately touted the supposed superiority of the sweep second hand as a way of fending off the onslaught of quartz movements when they presented a challenge to the status quo. IOW, we've been conditioned by successful marketing to believe sweep seconds are better, and for that matter mechanical movements in general too.

I, for one, can clearly see the fractional stutter of most sweep seconds, and find it slightly unnerving or disorienting when I pay close attention. Still, I like both automatic and quartz movements. But I don't find the motion of the second hand fundamentally relevant to choosing one over the other.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,896 Posts
Another recent thread about quartz clocks reminded me of a question I've had for some time. Technically it should be trivial to give a quartz movement a smooth sweeping hand. I understand originally the 1-second tick was introduced to improve battery life, but nowadays that's much less of an issue.

And since smoothly sweeping seconds give a watch a much higher quality feel, why aren't there more quartz movements with a sweeping second hand? It would make quartz watches a lot more palatable for me personally if I weren't reminded of their movement every second ;)

Because watch companies don't really care about you or me or other watch fans in that respect. Why spend extra money trying to create more sweep hand quartz when the majority of folks buying quartz watch don't really care about that? They simply care that it tells the time.
 
41 - 60 of 119 Posts
Top