I know about watches, isochronism, etc. If you read carefully what I wrote, I used the words "psychological," "give the impression," and "most things."
I'm relaxed. I predict you'll respond to this because you need to get the last word in.
I was actually agreeing with you, but the chip on your shoulder must be so large you can't see the screen properly...
And I predict you'll respond to this because you like to get the last word in. Or not - I don't care really.
Most things tend to slow down as death approaches, not speed up.
I have found my Speedmaster to run faster in hours 24 - 36 (since fullly winding).
I figured it would slow down under "common sense" of less power = slower. And then I could almost hear Archer telling me "you know nothing about how watches work" 😀
It seems counterintuitive at first, but if you think of a pendulum swinging in a spring powered clock when it has more power behind it, it will swing more to each side, and covering that distance takes a specific amount of time. As the spring runs down, the pendulum is not receiving the same power, so it swings less. The shorter swing doesn’t take as long, so this means the clock runs faster.
In watches that are not isochronous, the same thing happens to the balance. As the power runs down, the balance amplitude decreases, the time needed for the balance cycle (tick and tick) decreases, and the watch runs faster.
Watch companies take great pains to minimize this effect. But depending on what the specific setup of the watch is, it can still run fast as the watch runs down just like your Speedmaster does.
Based on the number of times I’ve explained this to watch collectors and enthusiasts over the years, it’s not common knowledge. Again I understand why people think the way they do about this topic, as most would not have the background to think of it this way, but if you think about it as a pendulum it does make “common sense” that a shorter swing takes a shorter duration.
Cheers, Al
It seems counterintuitive at first, but if you think of a pendulum swinging in a spring powered clock when it has more power behind it, it will swing more to each side, and covering that distance takes a specific amount of time.
I'm still dumbfounded by those that have the expectation to have Quartz accuracy with their new mechanical timepieces?!
I understand that mechanical watches, in general are much more expensive than their much more accurate Quartz cousins and that those new to mechanical timepieces would expect the same level of accuracy, but I think that it's quite amazing that many mechanicals, old and new, can and still achieve such accuracy as -4 secs per day.
I wouldn't worry a second (or 4!) with a rate of -4 secs per day...it's astounding performance just short of perfect!
Cheers,
I have a new Speedmaster pro, I am a very new forum member, and I have a question about accuracy.
My new speedy loses about 4s a day.
Hi, and welcome to the Forum.
Some questions for you:
1. How did you measure the accuracy of your watch?
2. Are you aware just how much the timing varies by position? I recently bought a low-end timing machine and have had fun taking measurements. While I don’t put too much faith in any particular value, I do believe the general outcome across positions. With what I’ve seen, I am much less concerned about the particular “accuracy” as I know it is subject to quite a bit of measurement error and positional variation. (Lots of fun to measure though!).
I have 3 modern cal 1861 Speedmasters and recorded measurements for each as seen in the below graph. I took 3 separate readings for dial up (most common position when I wear them) and you can see that variation exists simply from one measurement to the next. The 3 dial up readings for a particular watch tend to be close to each other, but not exactly the same. Best to take any individual accuracy reading with a healthy dose of perspective...
Hi, thank you for the welcome, It is very interesting to see your measurements, they show that there is common trend in all the 1861s you tested so it maybe can be used as a guideline. As I do not have a timing machine I doubt that I can do these kind of measurements with any kind of accuracy. I just did an average measurement over some days without taking notice of position, although I suppose during the night it would be a dial up. I am not concerned really for the watch, 4s per day is amazing, anything below 10 for me is acceptable. I was just more interested to understand why the accuracy range of Omega is not symmetrical to 0.
Specific to the 1861: Is this watch particularly sensitive when it comes to regulation? Is the movement more intolerant to shock than similar calibers?
Maybe it's just my brain that is getting old, but wrt pendulums, I thought that the amplitude (unless very small or large) did not affect the frequency which is a function of the length of the pendulum. For example as explained here https://sciencing.com/affects-swing-rate-pendulum-8113160.html 😒
