Hi all

I bought my first new watch in years this week - let me restate this. Barring that $150, fantastic Mako I bought a couple of years ago to go scuba-diving, I bought my first new, expensive watch in years this week. Ok, let's spill the beans, I bought my first new speedie (have a couple of 70's ones already)

I wound her up, let her sit in the box for 24hrs, then pulled her out of the box, wound her up again, then off to the timegrapher it went. Numbers are 15s/d off or similar, in most positions. Beat error was 0.5-ish, which is ok in my books. Amplitude, 240deg or close, which is ok, but not stellar. Consistent results across positions. I trust the seller, but I have nothing to benchmark it against as far as new watches are concerned.

Is this "normal" performance for an brand-spanking-new 1861?

Thanks!
Paul

 

I'll let the experts reply to you on the timing. Seems a bit off to me, but more importantly lets see some pics!

 

That are bad results if watch is fully wound. And I hope you lift angle on 50 degree befor timing.

Amplitude should be over 300 and beat error no more than 0.3. -+15 also no good but still ok.

I am surprised by thise results.

 

Check out @Archer reply on Timegrapher question on WUS : http://forums.watchuseek.com/f2/get-timegrapher-995608-2.html

According to his answer the Amplitude is within Omega specs if you measured it at 50 degrees lift angle.

The accuracy is a bit off. Should be -1 to +11 on daily average. Not sure what should be the period to measure the average though..

 

Forget the timegrapher.
Wear it for a week and see how much it deviates.

 

Hi Paul - first keep in mind that a "new" watch may have sat at a dealer for years, so do you know just how new it really is? Was this an AD or grey market seller, and do they offer a warranty?

Contrary to what has been posted, there is no minimum amplitude specification at full wind, which is what it appears your tests were done at. There is an amplitude at full wind that I expect to see, which is different from a hard specification, so 240 degrees at full wind is certainly low no doubt. But the only way to know for sure if it passes Omegas amplitude spec is to fully wind it, wait for 24 hours, then test it without winding it again. Check both horizontal and vertical positions, and none should fall below 190 degrees. Of course the lift angle must be set properly to 50 degrees for these to be valid.

Beat error can be as much as 0.6 ms per Omega specs, but on this watch there's no reason it can't be closer as it's very easy to adjust with a moveable stud carrier. But regardless it's within specs - again contrary to what has been posted.

Not sure what you mean when you say "Numbers are 15s/d off or similar, in most positions." Does this mean 15 s/d off zero, and in one direction, or both directions?

Since this is not a chronometer grade watch, it only gets measured in 3 positions, so CH, 9H, and 6H (dial up, crown down, and crown left respectively). Maximum deviation between those 3 positions can be as much as 15 seconds at full wind, and the watch is still within specs. At 24 hours after full wind, the delta can be as much as 20 seconds over those 3 positions. Average daily rate at full wind should be between -1 and +11 seconds, and that calculation is not done while wearing it, but based on the results of those 3 measurements done at full wind.

Since wearing it for a week and checking the deviation tells you very little about the condition of the movement, if you want to be sure it's right or if you should send it back, here's what I suggest you do. Fully wind the watch, set your machine's lift angle to 50 degrees, and take the three timing measurements I've noted above at full wind. For each position write down the position, daily rate, balance amplitude, and beat error. Don't wind the watch, and repeat those same 3 tests 24 hours later, then post all 6 of those results here, and I'll give you some input.

Cheers, Al

 

@Archer I will reply some of your questions because I sold the watch to Paul. It was sourced from Omega Boutique. I was told it is not older than March 2015. It does have official Omega Warranty.

 

Thanks Al for the schooling, much appreciated, I was hoping someone would write something detailed like this

I certainly didn't mean this to be a "tension" thread -. This is why I made a point of not naming the seller! Demollo took very good care of me and I can recommend him anytime. I am confident the watch is proper, recent, and as much in working order as a seller can reasonably expect. The very fact that Darek comes out in the open on his own right here is a testimony to his honesty

Net, I'm just trying to understand how to look at a new watch that everyone knows. As a noob I bought a timegrapher to tinker around and learn how this all works, and because I had the opportunity. I will shamedly admit I let the timegrapher pick the default setup for the lift angle, which might very well not have been 50deg, and I will double-check this tonight. Until then, the rest is moot I think!!!

Update to come tomorrow

thanks!
Paul

 

Most timing machines default to 52 degrees, which in this instance would make the numbers look higher (better) than they really are. If you set it to 50, I would expect to see about 12 degrees lower than the previous readings...this is bad news...

 

Will provide a full update tomorrow then.

Thanks!
Paul

 

Thanks again Al, this is much much appreciated

I obviously couldn't let her sit for 24hrs after winding her up but I couldn't resist setting up the lift angle up to 50deg and trying again after winding, say, about 40% probably (Always hard to judge)

Here are the results:

CH: +8s/d // 272deg // 0.2ms (very stable)
9H: +13s/d // 234deg // 0.5ms (readings vary at each 12s period, esp rate from +11s/d to +15s/d, amplitude is always between 229 and 240deg)
6H: +14s/d // 254deg // 0.1ms (readings vary at each 12s period, esp rate from +11s/d to +17s/d, beat error between 0.0 and 0.1ms, amplitude started > 250deg but dropped as I kept it in this position to as little a 225deg after a few minutes then stabilized there).

REsults are repeatable when I change back to a specific position.

To complete the experiment beyond specs, I then put it dial down (name?!?), told you, like to tinker with stuff : +13s/d // 279deg // 0.1ms

I also reset the lift angle to 52deg and i'm in the same ballpark, except amplitude which shoots to 294deg dial up and >300deg dial down (kind of consistent directionnally with the above)

Net - it's much better now. Not sure what happened yesterday...

I will wind her up fully then run the experiment again tomorrow after she has run 24hrs without any intervention.

Suddenly I like her a lot more now

Thanks Al and everyone for educating me

Paul

 

Now full wind

CH: +1s/d // 302deg // 0.2ms (very stable)
9H: +2s/d // 282deg // 0.4ms (somewhat stable)
6H: +6s/d // 271deg // 0.0 to 0.1ms (somewhat stable)

And will repeat again tomorrow after she's sat in the box for 24hrs...

Not sure what happened yesterday but there definitely was something severely wrong with my testing procedure (might have been that great red wine bottle I opened...)

Thanks!

 

Now you can enjoy your wonderful watch fully

 

Based on those numbers I'd say ... Look at the watch, smile and enjoy the speedy


Ah... and sell the timegrapher... It's doing you no good

 

thanks - care to develop the very last statement for me, please?

 

Well you and your time grapher converted a non issue into an issue.

That's like scrutinising a new watch under a 10x loupe...

Stop messing with your new watch - start enjoying it.

 

That is an interesting way to look at it indeed - let's agree to disagree on this one

 

Complicated experiments like these should also be performed with a minimum of two observers especially when there is a great bottle of red wine.

Call me next time.

EDIT : Plus to be scientifically useful you need triplicates.

 

24hrs - here we go again

(after a bottle of Alsace's finest cremant - Sorry Jonatan, no red wine this time! - but with 50deg lift angle )

CH: +5s/d // 289deg // 0.3ms
9H: +13s/d // 228deg // 0.,6ms
6H: +11s/d // 240deg // 0.6ms
(all very stable - and about directionnally consistent with full wind measurements)

Al said: " At 24 hours after full wind, the delta can be as much as 20 seconds over those 3 positions. "
-> within specs
"Average daily rate at full wind should be between -1 and +11 seconds, and that calculation is not done while wearing it, but based on the results of those 3 measurements done at full wind."
-> within specs (or close enough...)

If someone was looking for a benchmark for a brand-spanking new (or 1.5yr old) "real-world" speedie..., this can be useful as future reference

Will keep tinkering with the timegrapher - too cool a toy to leave it in the box to be honest - even if sometimes the results can come as a bad surprise despite adjusting the lift angle properly (most data available on the almighty internet)

Thanks all (Al !) and have a good weekend

Paul

 

The lift angle setting on the Timegrapher only affects the amplitude reading. Lift angle is not like an experimental variable whose values can be changed to see what happens. There is one lift angle that is correct for your watch (50) and that is what it should remain at on the Timegrapher. The amplitude will change for valid reasons (more friction at some positions than others, for example), but amplitude changes due to incorrect lift angle settings are meaningless.