Zenith

Do you think it is an interesting complication? a useful one? Do you consider purchasing the watch? Or have done so already? What are your experiences with it?

Your input is appreciated.

Regards,
Marcus

this is the one I would like to get. I am not a great fan of chronographs, generally preferring a digital stopwatch for timekeeping. However the Striking 10th absolutely enchants and fascinates me.

Not only is it a very good looking watch, but the history of the movement means a lot to me.

I do think it's an interesting complication. In a way, it stretches time, allowing us to see and live fractions of a second. The way Zenith designed it, it is useful since it is tied to the chronograph and not just a visual curiosity, altough it is also visually delightful.

I have some problems with the design of the Striking 10th/36000vph: date in the wrong place (should be at 4:30), wrong overlapping subdials (the upper subdials should overlap the lower one), lack of bezel, etc. Let's just say that if this movement were in a ChronoMaster, I would be more inclined to buy it. I would like to have one some day. As a Zenith fan, the Striking 10th and the Charlie Vermot 36000vph are special.

For those of you design mavens, here's a striking 10th next to its ancestor, the ref. A 386 El Primero of 1969. What do you think of the way Zenith handled fitting a larger watch to El Primero?

they succeeded. The older version has subdials that are too large.

I just wish they had kept the design details instead of changing them for the worse.

. . . the more proportionally correct dial offered in the 40th anniversary model . . .

. . . which, along with its cushion case, makes for an exceptionally handsome presentation, in my humble opinion.  On a purely æsthetic level, this model is by far and away my favorite.  However, the unique timing capabilities offered by the Striking 10th . . .

. . . probably make the larger case a requirement.

In most respects, the original (as well as the contemporary equivalently sized) El Primeros offer a more appropriate sense of scaling, and I find myself instinctively preferring them.  The dilemma is the greater level of legibility that comes with the larger casing, especially when coupled with the Striking 10th sweep chrono hand. 

Choices, choices . . .   

I agree with you about the New Vintage 1969 - the more attractive of the two revivals of the A 386 scheme. But then, I am a huge fan of the somewhat quirky case of these models - not everyone is. The dial is the same size as that used in the A386, and in fact has been presented as an original dial often on the 'bay and even once at an Antiquorum auction. In fairness, Antiquorum made a note that the dial was not original once their attention had been drawn to the substitution.

. . . of Zenith's cushion case design.

As much as I like it in the abstract . . .

. . . it's the presence it exudes on my wrist that entrances.

Cordially, Art

The idea that the striking 10th renders the "heartbeat" of the movement I find riveting.  But I gather its appeal is limited.

J

. . . because the ability to demarcate a tenth of a second with utter legibility is compelling to someone that would exclusively take advantage of the functionality offered by a chronograph to time racing events. 

There are many uses for a chronograph that don't call for high levels of precision or legibility, but for a fan of motor sports, the ability to time an event to the tenth of a second and make a sensible read out without squinting is invaluable.  There is only one chronograph that fits that bill . . .

   

. . . and the Striking 10th is it.

Cordially, Art

...the sub-dial obscuration is an issue....The big red hand is great, as you say, for reading fractions of a second without squinting. But due to the obscuration of the seconds subdial, some thought will be required for anything between 30 (ish) and 45 (ish) seconds....Perhaps it'd become intuitive? But perhaps not much fun at a place like Phillip Island... Then again, a split seconds feature is what you really want for timing laps....

. . . shouldn't be an issue because the acclimation period is practically non-existent. The chronograph seconds hand subdial at 3:00 . . .

. . . runs in parallel with the sweep striking seconds hand, so it's a simple matter of mentally fusing the two. Of course, there's a place for a split seconds to time consecutive laps, but it's hard to pass up on the legibility and sensibility of the Striking 10th ;-) . . . .

I thought it might be intuitive given that they are keyed to each other and given that the overlap only really covers 15 odd seconds, you'd be out of the obscuration zone before the red hand had been around a little less than twice...

Thanks for the feedback. The 10th is probably the most interesting and useful chronograph out there, function-wise.

Last nit-pick! I despise little logos on the end of seconds hands...eeeech. At least the Zenith star is reasonably integrated and unobtrusive.

...is not really an acute issue in the Striking 10th, as Art points out. Recall that the principal chrono hand circles the dial once every 10 seconds. Thus, when you look at the subdial seconds hand, you don't need to read each second, you just need to know what 10-second rotation your are on. In other words, all you need to know the difference between, say 35 seconds and 45 seconds. Even with the overlap, you are not likely to make a mistake there, even with only a quick glance.

Now, on the regular 36000VPH chronos (see below), the subdial overap is a big problem, since you need to know the difference between 18 and 19 minutes. I still can't really bring myself to believe that a manufacture that wants to be known for chronographs let design trump functionality here. And yet it appears to be so, especially as it appears that the 2011 models are going to continue the arrangement.


This message has been edited by LouS on 2011-01-18 17:27:54 This message has been edited by LouS on 2011-01-18 17:28:41

I replied to Art, but that reply is just applicable to your post. Your points are well made and well received. Makes perfect sense!

nt

... I love it.

The 10-second dial makes it very easy to read off short time intervals and takes advantage of the natural frequency of the El Primero (10 oscillations per second). In combination with the 60-second counter at 3 o'clock it makes for a very animated dial. I was with Art last year on the first occasion I got to play with this watch and was very impressed. The styling emphasizes the history of the company, but there are plenty of nods to modern manufacturing with silicon parts that shows that Zenith is not just stuck in the past (which some have accused them of because of their reliance on the 40-year-old El Primero movement).

The only design feature that bothers me is the inability to read some of the subdials accurately, but that would not stop me committing to this piece. It marked a turning point for the company in my mind.

Andrew

A pretty nice watch, with styling dating back to the original from 1969...but I have to agree with Art on this one, the 40th Anniversary was much more of a homage piece to the original El Primero chronograph of 1969.  The actual watch itself, though, I have a few thoughts on:
The case: With a much more contemporary design, the additional foudroyante complication is likely necessary for the larger case, but enthusiasts shouldn't fault the company for it. 
The movement: Sweet...a chronograph with a foudroyante movement.  So either the engineers from Zenith gave the engineers from Hublot a call, people shared ideas, or people took a great idea and ran with it.  But the big deal here is that people are now able, on a larger scale with greater ease, to see exactly how many 10ths of a second has passed while timing an event.  While I would have liked to see something of a Hublot King Power-type foudroyante on a Zenith sport watch, this does just nicely on a easy to read, easy on the eyes chronograph.
Strap: Elegent...nice...not my cup of tea.
Dial: The coloring, like the original El Primero of 1969, is a great look.  The updated font on the dial/subdials, plus the make-up of the hands (the seconds star at the opposite end is a nice touch), as well as the 1/10th marks on the inner bezel provide a really nice look.
Caseback: Reminds me of a Chronomaster.  Not a bad thing... A really nice touch is the oscillating weight/rotor...the design is much nicer than it was a couple years ago.
Overall:  I'm not a "dress watch" kinda guy.  When owning a dress watch, I'd have to worry about wearing it...and I don't own safe queens for the sole purpose of that I wear every watch I own.  If I wanted a piece to show off in a museum then I might as well open up my own gallery.  With watches, and especially when it comes to Zenith, I'd much rather wear it than worry about wearing it.  So I'm unsure if I'd buy this particular watch, even though I think it looks great.

Zenith has and always has been a forward-thinking manufacturer, as it grew from building mechanical automatic chronographs to quartz (when they were the rage) back to automatic chronographs...and upping the ante with complications ranging from flyback chronographs to multi-axial tourbillons.  This is a step in a positive direction, instead of simply diving (no pun intended) into an avant garde method of watchmaking, Zenith is bringing it back to it's functional roots before taking more "extreme" steps in it's watch-making process.

...to which I mostly agree, with the exception of your opinion on "safe queens". I think that today nearly every series produced watch can be worn in all everyday situations, excluding maybe the shower, sauna and working with the jack-hammer.

Regards,
Marcus

. . . power sanders . . .



. . . and hedge trimmers . . .



. . . ;-) . . .

... since this is a dedicated sports watch, I do expect it to perform well under all these conditions, even if afterwards, it looks like this:



Marcus