- Posts
- 241
- Likes
- 352
unxsr
·Weird question but if you can to choose when buying a vintage watch, would it “better” to buy one that runs faster or slower? Curious if one is favored over the other?
Buying a watch that runs fast vs slow
- Posts
- 12,047
- Likes
- 20,923
Davidt
·Generally if it hacks, running slightly fast is preferred as it’s easier to reset.
I guess I slightly prefer a watch to run fast but really as long as it’s running well after service and within reasonable time given the condition, I’m happy
I guess I slightly prefer a watch to run fast but really as long as it’s running well after service and within reasonable time given the condition, I’m happy
- Posts
- 241
- Likes
- 352
- Posts
- 16,767
- Likes
- 35,146
JimInOz
··Melbourne AustraliaFast or slow, no better no worse.
A fast running watch can be a symptom of a problem with the movement (lack of power getting to the balance assembly).
A slow running watch can be a symptom of a problem with regulation (hairspring "over length").
Or any other of lots of reasons contributing to variable timekeeping.
It would be my last of many considerations when assessing a vintage watch for suitability.
A fast running watch can be a symptom of a problem with the movement (lack of power getting to the balance assembly).
A slow running watch can be a symptom of a problem with regulation (hairspring "over length").
Or any other of lots of reasons contributing to variable timekeeping.
It would be my last of many considerations when assessing a vintage watch for suitability.
- Posts
- 12,047
- Likes
- 20,923
Davidt
·Can you clarify whether you’re talking pre or post service? If pre service I agree with Jim, i pay it little mind with regard to Movement health.
My reply was referring to performance post service.
My reply was referring to performance post service.
- Posts
- 498
- Likes
- 407
norb1967
·As long as it winds, sets and doesn’t make any horrible noises I wouldn’t care. If it had an unknown service history I’d get it serviced at purchase
- Posts
- 907
- Likes
- 4,353
wilderbeast
·Hypothetically, I prefer fast to slow - and most of my vintage pieces run a tiny bit fast. But I’ve been amazed at how accurately some of them have been regulated to run after a good service.
with the vintage pieces it’s rarely an issue, since I usually only wear them for one day at a time and rotate frequently.
with the vintage pieces it’s rarely an issue, since I usually only wear them for one day at a time and rotate frequently.
- Posts
- 2,840
- Likes
- 30,223
Duracuir1
·I prefer it a bit fast because I don’t like to be late.
- Posts
- 16,770
- Likes
- 47,469
STANDY
··schizophrenic pizza orderer and watch collectorAs long as it’s not more than a minute or two fast or slow I don’t really care.
Put it on wear it and take it off… never been one to second count.
Just looked at the time and it’s 7:15pm and looked at my watch and it’s 7:15 also…All good
Funny thing is a Luminox that cost $260 over 13 years ago is the time standard all mechanical watches I own are set to..
Put it on wear it and take it off… never been one to second count.
Just looked at the time and it’s 7:15pm and looked at my watch and it’s 7:15 also…All good
Funny thing is a Luminox that cost $260 over 13 years ago is the time standard all mechanical watches I own are set to..
- Posts
- 21,759
- Likes
- 49,362
Dan S
·Would not be a consideration.
- Posts
- 5,267
- Likes
- 48,615
Jones in LA
··Not in LA anymore.I have found that with vintage watches, an individual watch's timekeeping tendency (fast vs slow) may take a little time to "settle" following a servicing, the point being that how a watch keeps time when you purchase it may not be the same six months later.
I never allow a watch to be running behind the correct time when I'm wearing the watch (I have a paranoic fear of being late for something). So for a watch that is a consistent time "loser" I just set it a little fast (not more than two minutes), and for a watch that is a consistent "gainer" I try to set it as close as I can to the correct time when I put the watch on.
Most people don't like their watches to be time "losers", but think of it this way: each day you wear a 'losing' watch (that has been intentionally set fast) your watch will become more accurate each day you wear it 😁
I never allow a watch to be running behind the correct time when I'm wearing the watch (I have a paranoic fear of being late for something). So for a watch that is a consistent time "loser" I just set it a little fast (not more than two minutes), and for a watch that is a consistent "gainer" I try to set it as close as I can to the correct time when I put the watch on.
Most people don't like their watches to be time "losers", but think of it this way: each day you wear a 'losing' watch (that has been intentionally set fast) your watch will become more accurate each day you wear it 😁
Edited:
- Posts
- 1,867
- Likes
- 2,274
Kwijibo
·I don't really understand the question or may be I'm stupid. A Watch doesn't have to run fast or slow but with a decent delta in the 6 positions which results in a decent average accuracy on the wrist. When you have an important delta it's rather logical that when wearing it you have more risk of inaccuracy as your days are not always the same : walking, sitted at your desk, your watch at night on your table (position?)
according to the condition/age/quality. A 30 second delta on very old watch in not rare. As for myself, a delta superior to 20 seconds on (let's say) a post 50's watch really p... me off but this can be due to many factors : balance, mainspring, jewels setting, condition of the wheels.
However, one thing to remember is that in 24 hours there are 86400 seconds. So if a watch runs at +5 a day it's just a 0,00005% Error. EDIT : 0,005787037037037% error
according to the condition/age/quality. A 30 second delta on very old watch in not rare. As for myself, a delta superior to 20 seconds on (let's say) a post 50's watch really p... me off but this can be due to many factors : balance, mainspring, jewels setting, condition of the wheels.
However, one thing to remember is that in 24 hours there are 86400 seconds. So if a watch runs at +5 a day it's just a 0,00005% Error. EDIT : 0,005787037037037% error
Edited:
- Posts
- 177
- Likes
- 169
dpwaber
·I don't really understand the question or may be I'm stupid. A Watch doesn't have to run fast or slow but with a decent delta in the 6 positions which results in a decent average accuracy on the wrist. When you have an important delta it's rather logical that when wearing it you have more risk of inaccuracy as your days are not always the same : walking, sitted at your desk, your watch at night on your table (position?)
according to the condition/age/quality. A 30 second delta on very old watch in not rare. As for myself, a delta superior to 20 seconds on (let's say) a post 50's watch really p... me off but this can be due to many factors : balance, mainspring, jewels setting, condition of the wheels.
However, one thing to remember is that in 24 hours there are 86400 seconds. So if a watch run at +5 a day it's just a 0,00005% Error.
- Posts
- 1,867
- Likes
- 2,274
Kwijibo
·yup sorry forgot my /100 divison.
- Posts
- 177
- Likes
- 169
- Posts
- 647
- Likes
- 1,498
johnireland
·I like to know what the watch is doing. My classic 1013 was 23 second ahead of the world clock on June 28...and today it is 32 seconds fast. A total of 9 seconds gain over 8 days. I'm more than pleased with that. I wear it about 12 hours a day and then it sits in a pouch in my jacket pocket while I wear another watch for 12 hours.
- Posts
- 5,373
- Likes
- 18,671
pdxleaf
··So on and so on and scoobie doobie dooYour question doesn't say how fast or slow.
If a newer watch and it's running one minute fast per day, i would prefer that over 1 minute slow. Neither is great, but I might get lucky and the fast watch is just magnetized, which is a cheap and esay fix.
If an older watch, it could be crud and worn jewels that made it run fast. This could be true for a newer watch but might be less likely as that takes time to cause that much wear.
Magnetized watches can run faster or slower. I was trying to think of a situation where faster or slower would be preferable and that's all I could think of. Even that though is a guess and hope you got a lucky fix.
One thing Omega did was made their METAS +/- 0 and +5. It's still a 5 sec difference but they know it's better to be early than late. So generally you coukd say people prefer slightly faster than slow.
But since you asked about buying vintage, i suppose you are trying to learn something about the condition of the movement. One is not better than another as the fix is a service. I suppose different parts are involved and it might be more difficult to source good replacement parts needed (whether it's slow or fast )for the vintage movement, but that's a rabbit hole too deep for me.
I like how you think though. Never stop being curious. 😀
If a newer watch and it's running one minute fast per day, i would prefer that over 1 minute slow. Neither is great, but I might get lucky and the fast watch is just magnetized, which is a cheap and esay fix.
If an older watch, it could be crud and worn jewels that made it run fast. This could be true for a newer watch but might be less likely as that takes time to cause that much wear.
Magnetized watches can run faster or slower. I was trying to think of a situation where faster or slower would be preferable and that's all I could think of. Even that though is a guess and hope you got a lucky fix.
One thing Omega did was made their METAS +/- 0 and +5. It's still a 5 sec difference but they know it's better to be early than late. So generally you coukd say people prefer slightly faster than slow.
But since you asked about buying vintage, i suppose you are trying to learn something about the condition of the movement. One is not better than another as the fix is a service. I suppose different parts are involved and it might be more difficult to source good replacement parts needed (whether it's slow or fast )for the vintage movement, but that's a rabbit hole too deep for me.
I like how you think though. Never stop being curious. 😀
- Posts
- 241
- Likes
- 352
unxsr
·Your question doesn't say how fast or slow.
If a newer watch and it's running one minute fast per day, i would prefer that over 1 minute slow. Neither is great, but I might get lucky and the fast watch is just magnetized, which is a cheap and esay fix.
If an older watch, it could be crud and worn jewels that made it run fast. This could be true for a newer watch but might be less likely as that takes time to cause that much wear.
Magnetized watches can run faster or slower. I was trying to think of a situation where faster or slower would be preferable and that's all I could think of. Even that though is a guess and hope you got a lucky fix.
One thing Omega did was made their METAS +/- 0 and +5. It's still a 5 sec difference but they know it's better to be early than late. So generally you coukd say people prefer slightly faster than slow.
But since you asked about buying vintage, i suppose you are trying to learn something about the condition of the movement. One is not better than another as the fix is a service. I suppose different parts are involved and it might be more difficult to source good replacement parts needed (whether it's slow or fast )for the vintage movement, but that's a rabbit hole too deep for me.
I like how you think though. Never stop being curious. 😀
I really appreciate for your response. Super helpful!
- Posts
- 21,759
- Likes
- 49,362
Dan S
·One thing Omega did was made their METAS +/- 0 and +5. It's still a 5 sec difference but they know it's better to be early than late. So generally you coukd say people prefer slightly faster than slow.
I always thought this was because it's easier to fix the time on a watch that is slightly fast by hacking for a few seconds.
- Posts
- 367
- Likes
- 2,580
mcemeren
·Fast and consistent preferred but as long as I like the watch, we somewhat get along no matter what 😀.
