NavList:
A Community Devoted to the Preservation and Practice of Celestial Navigation and Other Methods of Traditional Wayfinding
Re: wristwatch chronometers
From: Lu Abel
Date: 2012 Apr 18, 17:02 -0700
From: Lu Abel
Date: 2012 Apr 18, 17:02 -0700
I had a friend who bought a Rolex for over US $ 1000 and it kept worse time than his Timex. When he complained, Rolex's response was "your watch meets our standards". So much for price correlating with accuracy. Sent from my iPhone On Apr 18, 2012, at 4:20 PM, Alexandre E Eremenkowrote: > > Paul, > > I noticed that expensive watch manufacturers never say in their > advertisement anything about accuracy:-) > (Which means that you can buy a $10,000 watch, it will go with > accuracy of $100 watch, and you cannot even complain:-) > I suppose that accuracy is not an important consideration for people > who buy $10,000 wrist watch:-) > > And finding any such data on those expensive watches is > really hard. > I know that relatively recently a new type of escapement was invented, > it is called "co-axial" and it is claimed that it is comparable > or even better than the real chronometer (detent) escapement, but can be used > in a wrist watch. Apparently only one watch manufacturer uses this > new escapement, and this is Omega. The word "co-axial" ust be written > on the dial. > I wonder whether these Omega co-axial outperform marine chronometers > or not. Unfortunately, the cheapest of them > are sold at a higher price then chronometers. > > Concerning inscriptions on the watch "Chronometer", the Swiss > have some testing procedure, which legally allows having this > inscription. As I understand this testing procedure has little > in common with real chronometers testing. > > Alex. > > On Wed, 18 Apr 2012, Paul Hirose wrote: > >> >> Today on the back of a magazine I saw an advertisement for the Rolex >> GMT-Master. The "Superlative Chronometer" on its face interested me >> enough to investigate this watch on the Web. I had never looked at Rolex >> prices before. I just knew they were really high. And I was right! >> There's no way in hell I'll ever own a Rolex. Anyway, according to this >> site a mechanical wrist chronometer isn't all that accurate compared to >> a cheap quartz watch. (The site also says "Superlative" is just >> meaningless Rolex hype.) >> >> http://chronocentric.com/watches/accuracy.shtml >> >> By accident I also came across a modern (nautical style) chronometer >> maker. I like the feature that keeps it running for a few minutes while >> you change the battery. But I think it would be more practical with a 24 >> hour dial, big second hand, and an ugly but tough plastic case. >> >> http://www.muehle-glashuette.de/en/nautical-instruments/yacht-and-marine-chronometer.html >> >> -- >> >> >> >> >> >> >> : http://fer3.com/arc/m2.aspx?i=119156 >> >> >> > > >