WatchTech

Dear All,

I hope this Thursday have treated you all well, or is currently treating you well!

Recently, on a topic which has surfaced up with much debate on the HOME forum, with regards to the launch of a latest timepiece which claims to be the most accurate mechanical watch in existence, we have come to face other fundamental question, that is the ability to set your watch to that of the international atomic time standard.

Now this is a door for a huge debate, which i hope that everyone, from both sides of the game, will join in. Whether you are like the Swiss, that says that anything that stops a balance wheel is bad for the entire system, or that of the Germans ( of which i proudly belong to) which states ultra logically that if you are not able to Sekundenstopp ( Stop seconds in Deutsch) your watch, how are you actually able to 1. Set it to the correct time to the seconds, assuming you have a seconds hand, and 2. Accurately measure the rate deviation of the particular timepiece.

I'll just start by saying a few analogy which i think is appropriate for this issue. If you cant stop the seconds of your watch ( which i shall refer to as Hack from now on), it's equivalent ( at least in my very humble opinion) to saying that you started off a race NOT from the start line, the zero position. Could Usian Bolt start from the 90m line, cross the 100m line a few seconds later, and say that he is the fastest runner on the planet? He had to start from the start line, that is the zero position as with the others right?

Could a race care do the same on a circuit? Start ahead of others, not from a reference line, and say that he is the winner just because he crossed the finish line 1st?

Would you prefer to measure a distance of say 10cm on a ruler from 0cm, or from 10cm? 0cm to 10cm, and 10cm to 20cm, these 2 options measure the EXACT same distance, BUT would you measure from the 10cm line? Maybe alot of you will. But not me for sure.

You might argue that this is different, as historically Chronometers usually dont hack, as what is important is that they keep the same rate deviation, to a small degree as possible, from whatever starting point they took. So a deviation of +1 secs/ day , is considered excellent as long as it keeps to that everyday. SO after 30 days it should real +30secs. Fair enough, but for a bona fide perfectionist like me, i wont and cannot accept.

Today we have atomic clocks which take their superb rates from the oscillation of the ceasium 133 atom, and thus i would say that God has blessed Men to have a much closer ( though totally far from it) measurement of the exact NOW Time.

Therefore, it is in my belief that where possible, and it always is for mechanical wristwatches, to be able to measure out the time from that reference which has been given to us by the Almighty. We may not be able to reach it ever, but dont you find happiness in being able to seek it out, and to be that one bit closer than not?

It's no wonder that i love Lange so much, for all their pieces, including Tourbillons after 2009, hacks.

Simple, straight, pure. What more could you ask for?

If i had all the funds in the world, you'd see me getting Langes only. And damn am i serious about this.

The finest finish in the industry, the most logical concepts, the clearest legibility, what more could one ask for?

I would love to hear all your opinions, and criticism of what i have stated in my above rant.

One learns something new everyday, and if i am wrong, do say so. And then please allow me the honour of what i should know from what i have not known.

Always grateful to hear from others about the passion of my life that i have loved since i was 3

Tschuss and i leave with you all a humble shot collection of my most precious TRUE Chronometers in my life.

Stephen

Whats the common factor between them all? All of them hacks!

And I hope it is not important for Patek owners too...

I use the second hand as a working indicator... and not to accurately set the time.

Fx

Dear Xavier,

May i ask why do you hope it's not important for Patek owners too? I would have loved Patek more as a brand if they had more hacking watches.

Look forward to hear your insights.

Stephen

Honestly, I prefer movements that hack because I like to be able to set the watch to the exact time, but it's not a big deal to me either way.  

Hey,

I appreciate this very much!

Tschuss

Stephen

... because it is easier how accurate those watches are - indicator of the timing of servicing.
But, I do have those which I can do similar things by pulling the crown and unwinding the minute hand, and it is totally okay.
Further, I have some vintage watches and another exotic watch which doesn't either - but it is still okay, because I don't choose watches by the hacking mechanism only.  I don't wear the same watch everyday, so the watch stops in a few days.  So, when I use next time, I try to sync the second hand with my reference quartz when start winding the main spring......

So, the answer is - it is preferable, but not top priority.....

Ken

Hi Ken,

While often you and a few others have told me that it's perfectly fine to hack a watch by the reverse method, but on the other hand other sources which i have read and talked to says it isnt fine. I prefer to stick with the latter as the reverse crown method somehow doesnt sound right to me personally.

Of course this is just my 2 rupiahs.

Stephen

.. but at least a few watchmakers told me it is okay....  But I know that there are other opinions, too. 
What do you think, Professor Don?

Ken

... considering the stopping of the movement by means of a slight reverse pressure on the crown to be of potential danger for the movement, due to its effect on lubrication. Neither of them, though, was able to back his statement with a really profound explanation, so I assume it had more to do with feeling and tradition.

I have a watch without hack seconds that even does not react on the reverse pressure at all (UN perpetual).

Regards,
Marcus

Hey Marcus,

Would you be saying then that the reverse pressure does not work and is not recommended?

Please enlighten!

Stephen

 

... on all my El Primero movements it was the only way to exactly set the watch to a time signal - well, more or less exactly, since the restarting sometimes needed a slight twist on the crown in the right directions, sometimes causing the minute hand to move as well, which destroyed the careful time setting again.

What I said was that there are some watches where this method does not work at all, because they won't stop, in spite of the reverse pressure on the crown. My UN perpetual is such a watch.

And I also said that some watchmakers argue that stopping an escapement by backward crown movement might cause lubrication problems, but this is not the general opinion.

To sum up, I am clueless whether doing this is good or bad for a watch.

Regards,
Marcus

Dear Marcus,

Thanks for the clarification!

I guess then we just have to wait till someone more knowledgable with an absolute verdict that can be backed up to chime into this thread!

It gets interesting!

Tschuss

Stephen

... as there are too many factors involved, with partially contradicting influences, so all we can achieve is a compromise. In my opinion, John summed it up perfectly a few posts below.

Regards,
Marcus

No message body

...Hacking has nothing to do with the accuracy of a watch, only how you perceive that accuracy.

Therefore, a matter of personal preference.

Hey Ben,

For me it just allows me to be able to judge and read out the rate accuracy with ease.

And with the "right" way, in the sense of my ruler/racing analogy.

G'day

Stephen

It was part of the whole statement re: the way you perceive/judge/measure the accuracy. And to me, it's purely a preference thing.

I myself lean towards the hacking side, but not very heavily at all.

[A semi-related question: how long do you wear the one watch? (and if it is more than a few days, do you adjust for drift during that period? or just measure the drift when it's time to switch over?]

Dear Ben,

I see, well at least you do "lean" towards it!

I often wear my watches only one day at a time, but on the occasion when i do wear a timepiece for consecutive days, say its a new watch and i want to test the rate accuracy, i do adjust for the drift, although i have to admit that i hack and reset the watch ( assuming it hacks) daily. So it is resetted afresh everyday.

Cheers

Stephen

Just like you would not integrate a fuel-saving start-stop automatic into a highly sohpisticated racing engine, every stopping and restarting of a chronometer's balance might affect the performance. However, it remains to be clarified how large this effect could be in real life.

Regards,
Marcus

Maybe I should rephrase that to "long term accuracy".

I see it like this...
If you stop the balance it will take some time for the balance to start its periodic oscillation again.
How long this will take will depend on, among other things, the position in which the balance has been stopped.
In any case the oscillation will not start perfectly immediately.
So in any case the first couple of oscillations will have have errors until the amplitude has built up etc.
That would mean for me that the first second will not be the same as the following seconds.
For best accuracy I would want to claim the balance should never be stopped.

On the other hand I am sure I would never notice it is my watch was off by 1/5th of a second, for example, and stayed that way.

Another thing to think about, an atomic clock is never stopped to be set, nor is a quartz watch.  The oscillator runs continuously, but the instant from which the counting starts is changed.  The counting mechanism runs in parallel, but separate to the oscillating system.  In a normal mechanical watch the counting mechanism is part of the oscillating system and can't be separated from it as it supplies the power to the oscillator.

I think that Minerva Villeret has a watch with a resetable second which uncouples the second hand from the oscillator to set it to zero.  A mechanism similar to a chrono.  Thus the balance does not need to be stopped.
Have you looked into that?

Don

Such as the SpheroTourbillon from JLC and the RL ReferenzUhr from Lange. These 2 allows you to uncouple the seconds hand from the moving geartrain, zero reset them, and restart them when you release the pushpiece.

But after handling them and understanding them, i very personally do not feel satisfied with them.

Maybe it's tradition and habit, both which as they say die very very hard.

Thanks for chiming in!

Tschuss

Stephen

Hacking allows one to set the time very precisely. It is not necessary to check accuracy, however, as on a non-hacking watch one can just synchronize the minute hand with the second hand and make a note of how far ahead or behind the watch is, following which rate deviation will be easy to trace.

Still, I like hacking for the ability to set the watch to the exact time.

I also like non-hacking because when I change time zones I can change the time without losing track of the seconds.

Let's be realistic, however: there is always some friction between the second hand and the other hands, so if I set the watch backward I almost inevitably stop the movement, while if I set it forward I usually gain about two or three seconds as I move the hands through up to 11 hours (23 in the case of a watch with quick-set date).

In short each approach presents its own elements of entertainment.

Thanks for writing some points down!

Stephen

Hello Stephen, This message has been edited by ei8htohms on 2012-10-13 06:13:10

I am alos thankful for your comment regarding the cannon pinion. Can a (too) loose cannon pinion cause other problems as well? Apparently, my watch's inability to stop the balance by reverse crown movement is due to that problem.

Regards,
Marcus

Hello Marcus,

Your watch has such a complicated calendar mechanism that it would not surprise me to learn that it exhibits this behavior by design. Perhaps it doesn't employ a traditional cannon pinion at all or else it is kept loose to minimize the risk of some kind of damage (pure speculation on my part).

The only other downside to having a cannon pinion that is too loose is that the hands will slip in use. A hard shock might knock them out of position, they might lose time during a calendar change, etc. If these things are not happening with your watch, I'd be very hesitant to open it up just to tighten the cannon pinion even if I knew it was looser than it should be under ideal conditions.

_ john

... I will ask the UN service department and shine with the knowledge borrowed from you .

Regards,
Marcus

Dear John,

Thank you very much for your wonderful insights as usual!

Learnt alot from just what you wrote!

Tschuss

Stephen

when I forget which direction to turn the crown on occassion but I never do it on purpose