Reply With QuoteInteresting. There are several conflicts going on here: tradition v innovation, romance v technology, nostalgia v practicality, visual complexity v simplicity.
There's space for both systems in my collection!
Sent from my A0001 using Tapatalk
Quartz vs. mechanical
is as those who have scratched below the surface of Swiss marketing know pure Swiss pink cow dung.
With the rediscovery of quartz now becoming main stream wisdom, I think it fun to point to an interesting watch:
The caseback reads; mechanical, electric, quartz
It is totally correct too as it uses a battery, qco, a balance spring and traditional gear train.
The balance spring drives the gear train.
The quartz crystal oscillator regulates the balance spring.
The battery powers the balance wheel and the qco.
It totally brings home how ludicrous any discussion/controversy is:
A watch is a miniature time keeping instrument and for centuries engineers have sought to maximize isochrony with maximum reliability and minimum maintenance.
There is no discussion possible that the solar powered rc/sc solid state watch is the optimum sofar. Period.
An analogue display with physical hands ALWAYS has a gear train, whether a PP or Swatch system 51, regardless of the power source, regardless of the oscilator type.
When we now take a step back and look at that gear train, we can see a huge difference between drive by spring tension or some sort of electric drive:
- With the spring the gear train is constantly under full load of the tension of the spring. The balance wheel only serves to slow down the unwinding rate to clock speed. The Seiko spring drive tech illustrates this clearly.
- With electric drive the gears are pushed forward just enough to obtain clock speed.
The huge difference being the load on the gears.
The ever so clever watch engineers were totally aware of the maintenance horror so looked at electrics for centuries and for decennia tried to get it to fit in a wristwatch case. Especially Hamilton and Lip should be mentioned.
A secondary advantage of eliminating the main spring as power source is doing away with the difference in tension between fully wound and almost unwound, reducing isochrony.
This was one of the things the automatic winding mechanism sought to solve/improve.
As to the type of oscilator it should be pointed out that a quartz crystal is PHYSICALLY vibrating JUST like a tuning fork or a balance spring. The tic-toc of the balance mechanism is an audible hum in the tuning fork watches and a too high for us to hear pitch tone in the qco.
The qco controlled, balance spring driven, battery powered movement has it all really AND illustrates that the controversy between quartz and mechanical is nothing more than Swiss marketing fed bs:
1. There is no discussing the technical merits of the above.
2. There is no discussing taste so like whatever horologic tech rocks your boat.
I love that electric quartz mechanical
Interesting. There are several conflicts going on here: tradition v innovation, romance v technology, nostalgia v practicality, visual complexity v simplicity.
There's space for both systems in my collection!
Sent from my A0001 using Tapatalk
But I like the clockwork cogs, springs and wheels - just because.
There is a place for both, and long may it continue.
Although it is probably possible to make a current automatic watch to the accuracy of the standard quartz accuracy of 0.5 secs per day - I am sure it would not be cheap, but possible. In years to come I am sure we will again see a leap in accuracy as tolerances are brought down even further.
I don't see automatics ever coming close to thermocompensated quartz, but at least they are improving.
I'm not up on the latest quartz technologies, so maybe someone more informed could contribute, but has there been a 'substantial' increase/refinement in the technology in the last ten/twenty years or so?
It's just a matter of time...
Go a step further and we can just use our phones to check the time, it's all about choice, surely we can discuss that or should the forum just be closed down?
There are quartz automatics, even a few with solid state digital display. Adding tc would be no challenge but there simply is no market.Originally Posted by Omegamanic
Yes, an interesting watch. There's a fairly comprehensive thread on the subject of interesting quartz here:
http://forum.tz-uk.com/showthread.ph...g-Quartz/page4
A smart watch would be a better observation.
Of course one can discuss. Just make sure you know a bit more than Swiss marketing blurp when you do. THAT is my point really.
See my response to Omegamanic too.
Interesting link.
The 'hummer' tuning fork tech was used both as oscilator and as motor. The Beta21 is an example as are several ESA calibers. The only example of both a tuning fork and quartz crystal as oscilator is the Bulova 224x.
As I wrote, the horologic engineers sought all sorts of ways to eliminate the main spring and find more stable oscilators. When the qco was becoming the way to go, the stepper motor was still a bit behind hence a wonderful variety of drives such as the balance spring and the tuning fork.
The most ingenious one must surely be the magnetic motor in the Omega Megasonic 720Hz.: It has NO physical connection in the drive!!
The Seiko spring drive I mentioned is a weird retrograde concept reintroducing the spring load on the gear train combined with a qco. The only goal of the design was to appeal to the mechanical fashionistas and it succeeded in an astonishingly successful way.
The crux of my thread being; like what you like but don't confuse preferences with technically better or state of the art of horology.
Having just discovered the Seiko Spring Drive myself, this thread is quite interesting. The marriage of a mechanical system with that of a quartz crystal, reading up about it I find it really quite ingenious. Can't wait for the new Seiko boutique in London so that I can have a look at one. It might not be the most interesting to look at but I love good mechanics.
If you have read the above you would gather that the Seiko spring drive is ever so clever, well made, UNgood mechanics.
I think the OP is pointing out that a quartz regulated watch can have all of those things as well, it's not either or.
Yes. Indeed.
No display caseback for that one!Yes. Indeed.
That's certainly not a good-looker.
Thing I don't like about Quartz is taking case back off to battery change. Can bugger up seals and water resistance
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I only have three quartz, the ubiquitous g- shock 5600, a bonkers Black Dice LED thing that the wife likes, and my go anywhere do anything Citizen, which with world time, radio control, perpetual calender, sapphire and titanium, is to me pretty much the perfect grab and go work/ holiday watch. I like the styling too. It took me a long time to track the titanium version down and even longer to source a couple of extra links but this fulfills everything i want in an everyday quartz.
ktmog6uk
marchingontogether!
It's funny how some of the technology changes to meet market desires.
When quartz was in it's infancy and still an expensive option, companies were making mechanical watches to appeal to the quartz market e.g. the jump hour digital display mechanical watches such as this Amida Digitrend.
Also, if the dead battery is left in, there is a danger of it leaking and ruining the movement.
Better??
It's funny how some of the technology changes to meet market desires.
When quartz was in it's infancy and still an expensive option, companies were making mechanical watches to appeal to the quartz market e.g. the jump hour digital display mechanical watches such as this Amida Digitrend.
Indeed and with quite a mediocre movement too.
In this case the watch was intended as a lookalike of the at the time top notch fashionable GP LED driver watch which is now incredibly sought after.
An amazing caliber btw, the GP LED one. The more so when one realizes that they would also launch the founding father of modern analogue quartz watch architecture.
@the lovers of gears and cogs: GP had the gearbox for this movement made by JaegerLeCoultre who would also bring it out under their own brand. The gears are the same as for a traditional watch with main spring loading the gears. In the GP350 it is unloaded and has 'eternal' life needing nooooo maintenance.
There is a market for tc. I purchased one, but at around Ł4K list price is pretty crazy!
I have a number of Quartz-Autos, but they don't interest me as much as purely Quartz, or purely automatic.
The vast majority have no main spring.
I have nothing against Quartz, but on the whole, I'm more interested in something that works with either wrist action or simple winding, than something that uses a battery.
It's just a matter of time...
If the movement in the opening post was not enough to illustrate that clockwork cogs, springs and wheels are not the exclusive domain of mechanical watches, I show you a Seiko battery powered one.
It has a clockwork consisting of a balance spring driving gears, running in 16 jewels.
The white thingamy is the insulating container for the battery.
In this movement basically the only architectural change is the elimination of the main spring by a battery. That eliminates the load on the gears and any variance in spring tension, resulting is less wear/maintenance and increased isochrony.
The movement in the opening has a quartz crystal oscilator added to regulate the balance spring. That adds better accuracy.
See that you CAN have your clockwork cogs etc. with less maintenance, more pr and better accuracy?
Have a look too at quartz chronographs. Many have a traditional chronograph model sitting on top of the cogs and gears of the analogue movement. The 'quartz' bit only times the pulses of the stepper motor that drives the mechanical clockwork
Imo the GP quartz equation of time line is one of the finest examples of traditional mechanical clockwork with quartz accuracy:
So it is NOT about clockwork cogs/gearsbut about a spring as the main power source regardless of the load it puts on the gears.
Well, then the Seiko spring drive is THE solution for you. It has a main spring wound by an automatic mechanism and offers the accuracy of a quartz crystal oscilator.
Why would 4K for a tc quartz be silly? That is simply brainwashing by the Swiss mechanical marketing which has succeeded in making you think that a 50 year old mass produced basic movement is worth an arm and a leg
Btw a Credor minute repeater quartz with main spring costs you 345K Euros.
That is IF you would be allowed to buy one, which mere mortals are not
That Seiko movement does nothing for me in looks. The part shot of the GP looks much closer.
I have tried spring drive watches, but they do absolutely nothing for me.
It's not a 50 year and old movement though is it? It's a refined and updated version of an older technology - a bit like a petrol engine compared to an electric motor.
Now, the Credor Minute Repeater or Sonnerie would be lovely watches to own, but mostly because they actually look very interesting, not because of the tech.
Looks have to be the deciding factor. I've had many Quartz Omega Seamasters, because they have the same look as the auto version. I'd happily own a Seiko with a 9F movement, if I found one I like the look of.
I'd buy a watch based on;
a) looks
b) price
c) quality/finish
d) known brand
e) movement
The above order may change depending on the day or my mood.
It's just a matter of time...
I find it really interesting that the quartz debate is one of the few areas where people (well, forum members anyway) generally prefer a less accurate, technically inferior product. I know 'inferior' is emotive, and non quartz watches are marvels of engineering, i just mean a more accurate method was discovered, but for some people they prefer the less accurate, maybe more 'pure' non quartz version.
A bit like those that swear by a valve radio perhaps?
Personally i see the beauty in both, and particularly the value of quartz. On a budget you can get a lot of bang for your buck.
No! it's one battle that quartz won't win.
Better??
Vive la différence:
image credit: MaggyPee on r-l-x.de
I don't see any downside to having more options, and I appreciate my OQ at least as much as its fully-mechanical cousins.
In the eye of the beholder I suppose, and I find this appealing
As do I this....
Yes, that's a lovely finished movement!
Edited to state the OQ. Also the Speedy is lovely too.
It's just a matter of time...
I get the concept and price of a Spring Drive and was considering a Certina Precidrive, but I don't see how Tag can charge what they do for what is essentially a very cheap quartz movement.
I guess those that like mechanical are purists and long may that continue. In a world of disposable items, something tangible, that moves, is something special.
Last edited by messym; 15th February 2017 at 14:10.
Do you have a source for that? When I contacted G-P about my, hitherto unknown, Revue MSR they insisted that they made the movements for all of the G-P 35X variants. This list now seems to include:
Girard Perregaux
JLC
Favre-Leuba
Breitling
Revue (MSR)
Consul
Yes. I am not near my library but I gave the sources several times in the various topics about the movement.
Again also applicable to well made movements without the load of a main spring to wear them out.
You are only looking at finish. Rather superficial and as illustrated by the QC, GP and SD examples just as easy to achieve with quartz.
It is akin to modern car enthusiast swooning over an engine bay which show nothing more than designed for effect vanity covers.
Looking a bit deeper there are imo few calibers more fascinating to look at then:
All it needs to appeal to the skin deep lookers and clockwork lovers alike is a bit of a polish and a window with a view on the steam engine like motor and gearbox only.
Last edited by Huertecilla; 15th February 2017 at 11:13.
For me, something made with quality is something made with quality!... irrespective of whether its considered mechanical or "quartz".
I had a bit of a recent rant here about Tag and their rip off F1 range with ~Ł30 ETA movements, but overall, I've room for quartz but would want something well made like what you have shown above in the various pictures.
In today's market then, who would you say is producing a high quality quartz worthy of collecting? Seiko Spring Drive are already mentioned. Rolex don't seem to list the Oysterquartz on their website - is that still made? Who else is putting out a superquartz these days that will be looked back on as one that was brilliant in its execution?
(and strangely... despite my acceptance of quartz, or rather, non mechanical only watches.. I'm still left cold by smart watches).
Warning this post contains tongue in cheek provocation
The quartz vs mechanical debate has raged on ever since the dawn of time ( well quartz controlled time anyways )
Eminent scholars have argued back and forth, and adventurers have sailed oceans, divers reached unfathomable depths and astronauts gone to space.
Primarily to prove what is best, all was in vain though, the arguement is easily settled without going to such lengths.
Surely, as we all know by now, its all to do with soul (..... or perhaps re-soul)
Alternatively you can just like what you like, and adjust your perspective accordingly.
This Town is surely big enough for the both
The soldering on those Longines movements is proper shoddy, looks like it was done with a hot shovel.
For me there is another aspect to it: The milestone aspect.
Anyway some, by no means exhaustive, examples;
GS 9Fs.
GP Laureato Quartz jubilee
Several Ventura models with he RX being my personal favorite
Seiko SDGA
TAG Heuer Microtimer (digital)
Seiko Astron GPS
Citizen Appleseed
Omega Spacemaster Z33
Breitling Emergency
Mondaine Stop2go
and a bit cheeky but definitely worth a thought; the Apple watch.
Last edited by Huertecilla; 15th February 2017 at 13:17.
Wow, that Rolex OQ is a beautiful movement, irrespective of whether it is quartz or mechanical.Vive la différence:
image credit: MaggyPee on r-l-x.de
I don't see any downside to having more options, and I appreciate my OQ at least as much as its fully-mechanical cousins.
Its the only real good-looker on this thread - ironically, given the identity of the OP! Rolex did the job properly.
As for finish - poor finish=poor quality.
You are only looking at finish. Rather superficial and as illustrated by the QC, GP and SD examples just as easy to achieve with quartz.
It is akin to modern car enthusiast swooning over an engine bay which show nothing more than designed for effect vanity covers.
Looking a bit deeper there are imo few calibers more fascinating to look at then:
All it needs to appeal to the skin deep lookers and clockwork lovers alike is a bit of a polish and a window with a view on the steam engine like motor and gearbox only.
No sorry, you can roll some dog poop in icing sugar but it's doesn't make it a doughnut.
In the same way that Omega charge even more for a cheaper Quartz module in some of its watches.
It's just a matter of time...
^
I still don't mind hearing about something other than a generic ETA movement on a watch forum once in a while.
That Rolex OQ does look very well engineered indeed (over engineered?), and I wouldn't expect anything less from Rolex - though it's still 4 jewels short of the 7A28 ;-)
Don't get me wrong there's a place for everything, in fact I love the tech inside my new Seiko.^
I still don't mind hearing about something other than a generic ETA movement on a watch forum once in a while.
Thats a nice looking watch!
Don't get me wrong there's a place for everything, in fact I love the tech inside my new Seiko.
Sure Mr C, but one has to consider it was a very hand made movement. They're not far off released to market prototypes. When you see the electronic section in Real Life(™) it's tiny and double sided and the discrete components equally miniscule(from the hearing aid industry of the time apparently). These weren't made in "stamped out" automated production runs like most circuits, they were hand soldered component by component, wire by wire using magnification(different boards can vary a little depending on the skill of the person)*. That's before we get to the quartz oscillator. Also hand made, natural Brazilian crystal hand cut, hand shaped and hand tuned to the correct frequency with scarily tiny flakes of gold foil. Then we have the main timekeeping mechanism(the quartz is the master that cybernetically - oh yes - adjusts the slave tuning fork on the fly to quartz accuracy). Tuning fork movements are a bit of a black art in themselves, to manufacture and regulate. The "fork" in this case is the horizontal bar in the pics above. Also hand wound coil(main failure for these). Then we get to the traditional "watchmaking" gears.
It was a dead end and one might say (glorious?)failure at the very dawn of the quartz watch. Beyond any personal yay/nay gut feelings on the matter(and I can see both sides, Marmite it is), the case could be argued that this was the most "handmade" quartz watch ever and indeed considering the very different and novel disciplines involved in the whole one of the most handmade personal timepieces there has been. Certainly up there near the top.
They are very delicate mind you and many have given up the ghost down the years(and lately even dead ones are going for pretty big money. Maybe someone somewhere is fixing them?). They can be remarkably accurate though. This is my one(serviced and tweaked by our own KiethT) where for fun I took monthly accuracy checks. Well under 30 seconds per year, more like 15 or 20. Please excuse the awful pics…
That's pretty good IMH and one of my most accurate watches, quartz or no. And it buzzes and is cybernetic. They had me at that TBH.
+1.^
I still don't mind hearing about something other than a generic ETA movement on a watch forum once in a while.
*"silicon chips" used by the Beta 21 project were still scarily expensive and in limited supply at this time, so even with all the labour costs this looked to be a cheaper bet for Longines, so they went off piste. Though the design and patent was a few years before they were available.
Don't get me wrong, I think that the Ultra-Quartz is clearly a wonder of the age and I appreciate your comment regarding hand made border-line prototypes. My comment was solely regarding the quality of the soldering as even at that scale it is (admittedly with great skill and practice) possible to achieve consistency, lining up surface mount components neatly whilst avoiding solder blobs, overflow and creating miniature antennas. A neatly soldered joint is a thing of beauty, for me that is demonstrated in the Seiko movement posted by keitht.
My daughter has just clocked me looking at the 6512 movement photographs and pronounced them 'a bit ugly', so it's official.
Oh I agree Mr C. I had a late 60's NASA circuit board that was also "handmade" and OK a little larger, but the soldering was a work of art. I suspect Longines retrained some existing staff to do the work, or it was an outsourced short run.
Nevertheless I would have my instrument maker friend make up a special case back with a window showing the motor and gear box and wear it even when it was a non working example.
Man, it is such cool engineering WAY out of ANY horological box and one of the most steampunk mechanical calibers bar none. It being cybernetically regulated is kicking it out of the field.
Ok so mainstream wisdom don't get it. Well, those swoon over Swiss marketing too so what does THAT say???
I envy you BIG time Mr.Curta about that working one. Keith must have surrealistic dreams about it ;-)
I wish... That's in Wibbs' enviable collection.
Posting Permissions
