Submariner accuracy
Discussion
I think we have lost the plot here, I genuinely do.
In the Olympics' - Grand Prix etc. and various other sporting events - where time to 1000th of a second is critical - TAG, Omega and various other companies are happy to display there Company brand value "i.e. we produce accurate time pieces" and be wish therefore to be associated with accurate time keeping AND produce beautiful watches (which are not cheap).
Yet in practice - a Rolex (it could be any of the top watches in reality?) cannot perform this basic function.
Let me just say - that I want a top quality watch (Rolex, Omega plus long list) that does two things:
1. Is great to look at - is made from quality parts, makes me feel good and therefore lasts.
2. Keeps excellent time.
My old TAG does both of these things - but I just want to upgrade.
By the way no "ordinary" car driver now "fettles" a modern car...it is either working or goes to the garage!
In the Olympics' - Grand Prix etc. and various other sporting events - where time to 1000th of a second is critical - TAG, Omega and various other companies are happy to display there Company brand value "i.e. we produce accurate time pieces" and be wish therefore to be associated with accurate time keeping AND produce beautiful watches (which are not cheap).
Yet in practice - a Rolex (it could be any of the top watches in reality?) cannot perform this basic function.
Let me just say - that I want a top quality watch (Rolex, Omega plus long list) that does two things:
1. Is great to look at - is made from quality parts, makes me feel good and therefore lasts.
2. Keeps excellent time.
My old TAG does both of these things - but I just want to upgrade.
By the way no "ordinary" car driver now "fettles" a modern car...it is either working or goes to the garage!
Shezbo said:
I think you have missed my point - the Rolex is supposed to be better?
If it's basic's function is to tell time (accurately) what is the point of having it....if it cannot do that?
Like I say I am in the market for a "nice" watch - it has horrified me that a Rolex will need adjusting each week.....that is very very poor in my book.
Comparing mechanical and quartz watches on timekeeping is apples and oranges because they're completely different technology. Quartz watches are inherently more accurate and always will be. If it's basic's function is to tell time (accurately) what is the point of having it....if it cannot do that?
Like I say I am in the market for a "nice" watch - it has horrified me that a Rolex will need adjusting each week.....that is very very poor in my book.
As mentioned above, I can't think of a single person I've ever known who needs the time (on their wrist) within 1/2 second a day, and if such a person exists they really should be taking some time off before they get ulcers! People who rely on time to that accuracy in their job will have specific timekeepers that go with the job, which will probably be atomic synched and make quartz watches look inaccurate by comparison.
Incidentally, if you're reading this on a Windows device, are you aware that Microsoft only specify their time synching to time servers within 2 seconds a day (about the same as the OP's Rolex) and suggest you use something else if you need better than that?
In motoring terms, my 1996 Pug 405 is almost certainly better than whatever you drive if you take the basic function of a car as being to get you where you need to be:
It's utterly reliable, it's comfortable, it handles well at legal speeds (which it reaches easily) ,it returns at least 45mpg whatever I do with it, I can carry huge amounts of stuff, insurance is cheap, the heater will cook me if I turn it up full, and it only cost £500 so it's the equivalent of a £10 market watch.
Which I guess means the only possible reason for you buying whatever car you have is vanity?
I accept that Tag and Omega are involved with the timing of various sports events, but I can guarantee that the devices used are not a mechanical wristwatch - they are selling their association with their involvement, not the actual devices that are used.
I'm a complete newbie at this mechanical watch malarkey, but I rather doubt that any automatic-movement Tag or Omega is notably more accurate than a Rolex
I imagine that if you walked into any high-end watch retailer and demanded accuracy of a second a week, or even better, you'd be recommended a quartz
I'm a complete newbie at this mechanical watch malarkey, but I rather doubt that any automatic-movement Tag or Omega is notably more accurate than a Rolex
I imagine that if you walked into any high-end watch retailer and demanded accuracy of a second a week, or even better, you'd be recommended a quartz
Riff Raff said:
-4to +6 per day. Most of the recent Rolex I've had (with the Parachrom hairspring) are within a second or two a day it has to be said, but -20 seconds over 8 days wouldn't worry me overmuch.
If the above is correct - I won't be buying a Rolex - for £5K - losing 6 seconds a day is not acceptable. Edited by Riff Raff on Tuesday 27th January 14:27
Are all mechanical movement watches ("chronograph by certificate" - in affects means nothing!)no better than this?
Shezbo said:
If the above is correct - I won't be buying a Rolex - for £5K - losing 6 seconds a day is not acceptable.
Are all mechanical movement watches ("chronograph by certificate" - in affects means nothing!)no better than this?
What you mean to say there is that you'll never buy a mechanical timepiece, full stop. Because by their mechanical nature they are never going to be as accurate as a quartz watch. Yes you can regulate a watch to be very close to being ±0 seconds per day. But everything you do will affect that. From the temperature of your environment, how much you use/wear it, which position you leave it in over night. In addition as the mechanics of the watch age, parts wear, the oils will degrade, which is why regular preventative servicing is important as well. Are all mechanical movement watches ("chronograph by certificate" - in affects means nothing!)no better than this?
The Swiss standard is as above, -4 or + 6 seconds a day. So, losing 6 seconds a day is slightly out of that limit and by that measure you could ask them to regulate the watch.
You can't really use a petrol car vs petrol car analogy. It would be more like sports car vs EV. Sure both do the same job, the EV is cheaper to buy/run etc. But the joy of something mechanical over something electronic is the appeal in a mechanical watch.
@ Shezbo - I understand your viewpoint and I'm not disagreeing. However, given your need for such accuracy in a watch, why are you interested in classic cars, particularly the Merc 300SL? I'd be the first the accept that they're a lovely car, but I don't think many would argue that they are the last word in precision and accuracy. There are certainly several cars available that do EVERYTHING better than a Merc 300SL, for less initial outlay and less ongoing running costs. In fact - name ANY attribute of a Merc 300SL and I'm fairly sure I'll find another car that does it better (unless the attribute is "being a Merc 300SL....)
therefore, its safe to assume that you have one because you like them, and not because its the best at what it does. You may have one because it has the potential to increase in value. You may have one because other people like them. You may even have one because you THINK that other people think better of you (which is not an uncommon reason for buying a posh watch). Quite simply, you have one for whatever motivator was right for you.
Exactly the same as me and my Sub... I could have bought cheaper, better, more functional, more accurate - any number of qualities, but I wrestled with all the reasons for wanting a Sub, and I bought one.
Accuracy is not the only measure of a watch, in the same way that (say) speed isn't the only measure of a car
therefore, its safe to assume that you have one because you like them, and not because its the best at what it does. You may have one because it has the potential to increase in value. You may have one because other people like them. You may even have one because you THINK that other people think better of you (which is not an uncommon reason for buying a posh watch). Quite simply, you have one for whatever motivator was right for you.
Exactly the same as me and my Sub... I could have bought cheaper, better, more functional, more accurate - any number of qualities, but I wrestled with all the reasons for wanting a Sub, and I bought one.
Accuracy is not the only measure of a watch, in the same way that (say) speed isn't the only measure of a car
Nigel_O said:
@ Shezbo - I understand your viewpoint and I'm not disagreeing. However, given your need for such accuracy in a watch, why are you interested in classic cars, particularly the Merc 300SL? I'd be the first the accept that they're a lovely car, but I don't think many would argue that they are the last word in precision and accuracy. There are certainly several cars available that do EVERYTHING better than a Merc 300SL, for less initial outlay and less ongoing running costs. In fact - name ANY attribute of a Merc 300SL and I'm fairly sure I'll find another car that does it better (unless the attribute is "being a Merc 300SL....)
therefore, its safe to assume that you have one because you like them, and not because its the best at what it does. You may have one because it has the potential to increase in value. You may have one because other people like them. You may even have one because you THINK that other people think better of you (which is not an uncommon reason for buying a posh watch). Quite simply, you have one for whatever motivator was right for you.
Exactly the same as me and my Sub... I could have bought cheaper, better, more functional, more accurate - any number of qualities, but I wrestled with all the reasons for wanting a Sub, and I bought one.
Accuracy is not the only measure of a watch, in the same way that (say) speed isn't the only measure of a car
Nigel - I like your post...I do like "nice" things quality watches with great names DO appeal - I was however somewhat disappointed with the accuracy bit (perhaps seeing them in their true light now)- I guess I will also not be wearing it all the time?therefore, its safe to assume that you have one because you like them, and not because its the best at what it does. You may have one because it has the potential to increase in value. You may have one because other people like them. You may even have one because you THINK that other people think better of you (which is not an uncommon reason for buying a posh watch). Quite simply, you have one for whatever motivator was right for you.
Exactly the same as me and my Sub... I could have bought cheaper, better, more functional, more accurate - any number of qualities, but I wrestled with all the reasons for wanting a Sub, and I bought one.
Accuracy is not the only measure of a watch, in the same way that (say) speed isn't the only measure of a car
I guess I went down the route that the money paid would provide the best service and be all things to all men - when invariably it does not!
Back to Watch shop on Saturday then......ha
Shezbo said:
Is it therefore worth spending the money on something that is (just vanity/look nice)not fit for purpose.
BTW - I am in the market for a Rolex/Omega - but I could NOT but something that loses that amount of time, accuracy of time must surely be a pre-request of a quality time piece??
It is fit for purpose – beyond a few hundred quid, all watches are to varying degrees, simply mens' jewellery, that happen to tell the time.BTW - I am in the market for a Rolex/Omega - but I could NOT but something that loses that amount of time, accuracy of time must surely be a pre-request of a quality time piece??
If you can't appreciate that's the case, then stick to using your phone to provide you with the time.
If you do want a nice bit of jewellery that tells you the time accurately, then you will have to look at Grand Seiko quartz or Spring Drive, or just learn to appreciate that a few seconds a day really isn't that big a deal, and there are far more important matters that are deserving of your fretting over.
RichTT said:
Shezbo said:
If the above is correct - I won't be buying a Rolex - for £5K - losing 6 seconds a day is not acceptable.
Are all mechanical movement watches ("chronograph by certificate" - in affects means nothing!)no better than this?
What you mean to say there is that you'll never buy a mechanical timepiece, full stop. Because by their mechanical nature they are never going to be as accurate as a quartz watch. Yes you can regulate a watch to be very close to being ±0 seconds per day. But everything you do will affect that. From the temperature of your environment, how much you use/wear it, which position you leave it in over night. In addition as the mechanics of the watch age, parts wear, the oils will degrade, which is why regular preventative servicing is important as well. Are all mechanical movement watches ("chronograph by certificate" - in affects means nothing!)no better than this?
The Swiss standard is as above, -4 or + 6 seconds a day. So, losing 6 seconds a day is slightly out of that limit and by that measure you could ask them to regulate the watch.
You can't really use a petrol car vs petrol car analogy. It would be more like sports car vs EV. Sure both do the same job, the EV is cheaper to buy/run etc. But the joy of something mechanical over something electronic is the appeal in a mechanical watch.
Some of you guys need to get into vintage timepieces. Some of my old Omegas can be plus or minus 15 or 20 seconds a day (even after a service), with enormous variations across the measuring positions, so they can be all over the place depending on how you leave them positioned overnight. But I don't buy or wear them for their accuracy, I buy them because they are nice to look at. If I need an exact time, I can always look at my mobile phone.
Shezbo said:
I think we have lost the plot here, I genuinely do.
In the Olympics' - Grand Prix etc. and various other sporting events - where time to 1000th of a second is critical - TAG, Omega and various other companies are happy to display there Company brand value "i.e. we produce accurate time pieces" and be wish therefore to be associated with accurate time keeping AND produce beautiful watches (which are not cheap).
Yet in practice - a Rolex (it could be any of the top watches in reality?) cannot perform this basic function.
Welcome to your (first?) induction to the power of marketing – illusion, with an unhealthy dose of smoke & mirrors to keep you from realising it's just an illusion.In the Olympics' - Grand Prix etc. and various other sporting events - where time to 1000th of a second is critical - TAG, Omega and various other companies are happy to display there Company brand value "i.e. we produce accurate time pieces" and be wish therefore to be associated with accurate time keeping AND produce beautiful watches (which are not cheap).
Yet in practice - a Rolex (it could be any of the top watches in reality?) cannot perform this basic function.
Shezbo said:
If the above is correct - I won't be buying a Rolex - for £5K - losing 4 seconds a day is not acceptable.
Are all mechanical movement watches ("chronograph by certificatecertified chronometer" - in affectseffect means nothing!) no better than this?
Aside from fixing your own inaccuracies, not all mechanical watches are on the edge of their performance specs, as your remark would indicate.Are all mechanical movement watches ("
Rather than state that there are many certified and non-certified movements providing exemplary timekeeping from various brands, it seems you will not be satisfied with anything less than a thermocompensated quartz offering.
For that, we're back at Grand Seiko again, and iirc, Breitling also have/did them too, so you may have to buy pre-owned.
bobbybee said:
@ PJ S
Do you work for Seiko?
Just wondering as quite a few of your answers have been either GS or Spring-Drive loaded
Why does one have to work for the brand that they are endeared to?Do you work for Seiko?
Just wondering as quite a few of your answers have been either GS or Spring-Drive loaded
I think you need to spend a lot more time looking back at many of my previous posts in here, and by inference of your remark, you've fallen into the trap that only the Swiss make great watches, well apart from the Germans (who're mostly under Swiss control), oh and the French – one which I reviewed recently.
3/10....Bobby needs to read more, and be less suspicious!
Shezbo said:
Riff Raff said:
-4to +6 per day. Most of the recent Rolex I've had (with the Parachrom hairspring) are within a second or two a day it has to be said, but -20 seconds over 8 days wouldn't worry me overmuch.
If the above is correct - I won't be buying a Rolex - for £5K - losing 6 seconds a day is not acceptable. Edited by Riff Raff on Tuesday 27th January 14:27
Shezbo said:
Nigel - I like your post...I do like "nice" things quality watches with great names DO appeal - I was however somewhat disappointed with the accuracy bit (perhaps seeing them in their true light now)- I guess I will also not be wearing it all the time?
I guess I went down the route that the money paid would provide the best service and be all things to all men - when invariably it does not!
Back to Watch shop on Saturday then......ha
I genuinely can't tell if you are on the wind up. For every second that passes this chaps watch registers 0.99997106482 seconds. The percentage error here is 0.00289351851% which seems pretty damn incredible for a mechanical instrument to me.I guess I went down the route that the money paid would provide the best service and be all things to all men - when invariably it does not!
Back to Watch shop on Saturday then......ha
Submariners are not known for their accuracy, more their virtues. If actually used as a submariner then I doubt a few seconds a day would be a concern.
I have 2 Longines HydroConquests (blue, amazing colour). The 39mm quartz one can be put away, taken out and still be accurate. The 41mm auto needs to be reset after a rest in the drawer, which negates the long term accuracy. I prefer the look of the automatic, but the quartz has a similar look and is easier to live with.
For real accuracy I have a radio controlled, solar powered £250 Casio Edifice that wakes up after storage in the dark and is extremely correct. I just wish it did auto time zones.
Submariners are good. Seconds are seconds. It will still stop after a few days storage.
I have 2 Longines HydroConquests (blue, amazing colour). The 39mm quartz one can be put away, taken out and still be accurate. The 41mm auto needs to be reset after a rest in the drawer, which negates the long term accuracy. I prefer the look of the automatic, but the quartz has a similar look and is easier to live with.
For real accuracy I have a radio controlled, solar powered £250 Casio Edifice that wakes up after storage in the dark and is extremely correct. I just wish it did auto time zones.
Submariners are good. Seconds are seconds. It will still stop after a few days storage.
Gassing Station | Watches | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff