So the movement technology in the last 2 decades is what if you are spruiking it.
?????
@Archer has had many posts and threads on the difference between a 3861 and the 1861 and it鈥檚 not anything as technology advanced as you think.
The 1861 I have at the moment isn鈥檛 far off from a few seconds a day so maybe get your 10s a day ones regulated.....
Also the airport security magnetic thing is a myth that鈥檚 been busted many a time here. Suppose it was the X-ray was it ?? Or is it the IPad or Mac you talk about here
So help us understand your rationale here, on that "
regulation needed to make a 1861 accurate" perspective which you & others have voiced. Is that somehow a feather in the cap of the 1861?
If you're a NASA astronaut, or work in equipment acquisition/maintenance for NASA, would you want to:
Option 1: receive a timing instrument that works 0-5 seconds accuracy out of the box from the supplier, no intervention needed?
Option 2: receive a timing instrument that works -1 to +11 seconds accuracy out of box, but could be improved after you take it to a local watchmaker to get it regulated? Because we're not busy enough with figuring out moon landings and living our lives, and have time to take flight instruments to first get regulated before pressing into service?
As for the airport thing: with 2 flights every week for years on end before COVID, I got around to testing a few variables like using vs not using iPads & laptops in flight. The only consistent variable I found for when that Reverso would get magnetized was whether I went through the TSA-Pre scan cylinder, versus taking the watch off and running it the traditional carry-on scan. Maybe I've got a bad habit of holding my wrist too close to the rotating TSA-Pre scanner while holding my arms up in the air?
The only consolation upside to having a watch that frequently got magnetized was that I ended up carrying one of those blue, portable demagnitizers with me in my carry-on. That occasionally led to cool conversations with fellow WIS, who spotted me using that blue demag gadget in airport lounges. They instantly recognized what I was doing, and we'd strike a fun chat about our watch collections. But on the whole, I'd much prefer a watch that I never have to worry about being magnetized during routine travel & daily use.
Why are fellow forum members getting upset that our 1861 movements have been replaced by newer technology? I never get defensive and go on the offensive, when a product I own gets replaced by something else that performs better, and others are voicing their appreciation of the newer product.
If Ferrari/Alfa introduced a new version of the 690t engine so that it can do 35 MPG, instead of the 8 MPG I currently get when I drive it in Race mode... or doubled the service intervals on some of its components... I'd welcome the newer tech with open arms! Huzzah for progress.
