Reply With QuoteDon't know about fifteen quid but Casio 'atomic' watches are available for under £30. Not a great looking watch, but as an example https://www.amazon.co.uk/Casio-WV-58DU-1AVES-Controlled-Stainless-Bracelet/dp/B000MMB05A
I seem to have given up on my watch winder.
I`m not bothered about keeping my autos permanently wound any longer and i can live with having the wrong date.
Nowadays i just select a watch for the day, set the time and wear it - but i`d like a `reference` time to set to.
I don`t think my bedside alarm clock is suitable, and i have a habit of setting that fast to fool myself into getting up and then realising it`s actually earlier than i thought..(i`m easily fooled)
So what is needed is a watch that keeps good time, i`m assuming a cheapo Casio will do the job but which one, are they all much of a muchness accuracy-wise?
I`m not so pedantic that a radio-controlled atomic clock jobbie is needed - unless they can be had for fifteen quid..!
Don't know about fifteen quid but Casio 'atomic' watches are available for under £30. Not a great looking watch, but as an example https://www.amazon.co.uk/Casio-WV-58DU-1AVES-Controlled-Stainless-Bracelet/dp/B000MMB05A
Have you got a 'smartphone'? If so - just save a link to http://time.is and you have time shown synched to the most accurate time pieces available.
I like Time Is as well
Any bog standard quartz watch is so accurate that you effectively never need to bother checking its timekeeping. When the clocks go forward or back, you will probably find that its lost or gained around 20 or 30 seconds since the last clock change. I posted on here a while back that I rediscovered a discarded Pulsar quartz analogue, and found that it had lost well under a minute in the probable 3 or so years since I last set it!!! Why some people feel the need for super-accurate quartz movements or even radio control baffles me completely...
Bog standard quartz are quoted at +-15sec/month.
I've used time.is and timeanddate.com - both highly accurate. The time on my iPhone always matches these; presumably it syncs with an accurate time source/server somewhere anyway.Originally Posted by MartynJC (UK)
Might this be at all impacted by fluctuations in wifi / data connectivity though? I'm no expert but this is why I don't use the pips on digital radio to measure timekeeping as it is always behind due to buffering or whatever its called.
Fairly accurate, nothing to worry about unless it goes mental!
I have always fancied one of these..but cant think when i would wear it tbh
I had a digital bedside clock that would loose about 1 min a month
If you use an app like WatchTracker it compensates for any network delays.
I'm sure you are right, but real world performance is often somewhat better. I guess the +/- 15secs is the minimum spec.
My worst cheapo digital gained 122 secs per month.
My newest casio (2015) gained 11 sec per month.
You can get lucky and get a really accurate one.
It's much better than the pips on the radio / and more recently DAB radios -
from the time.is site:
Time.is is friendly to mobile devices. It uses minimal bandwidth and the design is adapted to small screens.
Precision - synchronised with atomic clock time
Time.is is synchronised with an atomic clock - the most accurate time source in the world. The displayed time will normally have a precision of 0.02-0.10 seconds. The precision depends on your internet connection and how busy your computer is.
What makes Time.is exact
- Time.is displays the time for your detected (or chosen) location, not the time according to your computer's clock.
- The server which hosts Time.is is synchronised to atomic clock time.
- Time.is adjusts to DST (Daylight Saving Time) even if your computer clock doesn't.
- Time.is is always updated with the latest information about DST transitions and time zone modifications.
- The displayed time is not just updated once a second, but at the beginning of every second. Many web clocks, and even the clock of some operating systems, will update the seconds at an arbitrary time within the second, and will drift when the computer is busy, causing jumps of two seconds when the drift has accumulated to a second.
- If you adjust your computer clock, Time.is will issue a resynchronisation.
- Time.is is hosted on a modern, quick, dedicated server, which delivers the requested page in minimum time.
- The code for Time.is is trimmed and light-weight, thus eliminating latency caused by the time it takes for the page to load and render.
- Synchronisation via Ajax ensures maximum accuracy.
Many of their factors are a given (correct time zone etc) and no doubt they have fast servers, optimised code and such like but what they have no control over is the local users set-up.
Having said this I tried on both phone and PC and both were (to my eye) exactly the same as atomic G-shock.
Good website, nice feature saying how fast or slow your clock is
Sent from my MotoG3 using TZ-UK mobile app
I was very surprised recently when I discovered that my Casio is only losing a second a week. Have I just got very lucky, or is that usual for a analogue quartz? It means that I only need to correct at the start and end of Summer time, and can safely set mechanicals to it, so naturally I'm pleased. Was only sixty quid.
I do have an Ipad to hand in the marital chambers, but it`s a bit of a faff picking it up, opening the case, swiping a couple of times, entering a p/w, opening the browser and then going to Time.is.(ain`t life hard?)
I`d rather just glance at another watch, even if it sometimes means i have to go to the effort of pushing a backlight button to read it..
Am I the only one who thinks a Casio WT looks amazing for its price point?Fairly accurate, nothing to worry about unless it goes mental!
I have always fancied one of these..but cant think when i would wear it tbh
Sent from my MotoG3 using TZ-UK mobile app
Just a thought -
This would be in budget - £12.99 from amazon:
Radio Controlled LCD Wall Mountable and Desk Clock (New UK Version) Jumbo LCD
Last edited by MartynJC (UK); 19th February 2017 at 23:22.
I have a Casio calculator watch - a CA53 bought from Amazon for £15 (I was watching Breaking Bad at the time and Walter White wears one in the series) and every time the clocks change it has gained under 2 seconds in 6 months (!?!) - one of my non solar atomic g shocks is nearly as accurate, the rest are around 15 seconds per month. I think it's luck tbh but it does amuse me that my cheapest and nerdiest watch is the best performing!
Sent from my HTC One_M8 using Tapatalk
Most cheapo quartz will do just fine. Although why not treat yourself to a nice quartz watch that you can enjoy and set other watches by.
You could go retro(ish) and get a nixie tube clock with GPS antenna!
- - - Updated - - -
You could go retro(ish) and get a nixie tube clock with GPS antenna!
Would love a large nixi clock. IN-8?
My gshock is about 5 years old it was about 1 minute out at one point, it's now only 10 seconds out - after all that time! Quite impressive.
Well, 12.99 does it.
See how accurate time keeping has progressed?
You can get the stunning F91-W chronograph for less than a tenner and 12.99 buys you a small rc clock!
7 years ago I treated myself on a what I think an ubercool solar powered rc controlled digital. The current rate on ebay is more than I paid.
I means basically that you could get a nice spot on reference watch for .... nothing.
OK, so after much thought and deliberation i`ve opted for a radio-controlled desk clock as suggested by MartynJC - but not that particular model because it`s bloody HUGE!
I have had to choose a model with more modest proportions as i don`t think there`d be enough space for the one he linked to atop my bedside cabinet due to all of the discarded beer cans, finished-off wine and whisky bottles and sundry empty crisp and dry roasted peanut packets that seem to accumulate after a weeks worth of rest and relaxation in the comfort of the marital chambers.
It came in well under budget at £12.83 so that`s good, and also means i`ll be able to get rid of that dreadful iphone charger combined with alarm clock that i inherited from offspring number two, too.
Having a radio-controlled clock updated with the exact time will of course put an end to my little trick of setting the time fast to allow for a certain degree of `wiggle room` in the mornings wake-up routine but i`m sure i`ll adapt and get used to that in due course.
The Wave Ceptor option certainly gave me something to think about and i was initially responsive to the idea of adding another watch to the fold and am thankful for the idea, but having a timepiece such as this in my collection is a very dangerous game to play..
The easy `grab and go` stress-free no-worries characteristics of such a device could lead to complacency in the Right-Force wristwear options department and there is a risk that eventually it could frequently win favour too often over my extensive - and expensive! - supposedly high-quality Swiss watch collection rendering them semi-redundant and relegated to expensive and obsolete bedside curios.
Cheers.
Time over internet is subject to a propagation delay. You find the site, connect, and it returns the current time at the time of the query. When the query result gets back to you though, although fast, it takes time.
This delay is compensated for based on the initial connect time and first response after, but there is a margin of error. That said, it's negligibly affected by network speed/wi-fi and probably has a lower error margin that other methods.
Sent from my Nexus 6P using TZ-UK mobile app
I once had a cheap casio that work bought for me a few years ago to time stuff. It went straight in the drawer in about 2001, and when I extracted it in about 2010 to give it to my son as a toy, the thing was still running (lithium battery) and it was within a minute or two of correct time. The battery eventually went a couple of years ago so I changed it and it's still somewhere in the house, probably faithfully keeping good time. I should find it and show it some love really.
That is what they are of course but you can still enjoy them as such on your wrist. Most people leading a modern life do not need time on their wrist so for many the wristwatch has a different main function; that of jewelry; a statement.
I wear something accurate and sturdy as my daily (nooooo clocks, nor mobile phone about for most of the time) and put on a curio (which I first set by the modern tech) for going out.
But yes, you are correct. The Swiss mechanicals are anachronistic curio tech. which was reinvented during the early eighties exactly as having such as added value.
I'm intrigued to why people need to have there watches so super accurate? I just grab my phone, look at the time and bam, watch set and wound.
Also if I had to have super accurate time during the day I wouldn't look past a quartz.
Fair question.
I want my quartz grab and go watch accurate enough that I don't have to reset it more than once every few months, ideally 6. I like my best mechanical to be accurate enough to last a good few weeks without being more than a minute out, worn most days (currently at +/- 2spd or less). At the other end of the scale I've got some old vintage watches that I'm happy to wind and set each time, just like you said.
Also I marvel at the engineering that creates very accurate watches, quartz or mechanical.
I really don't want to have to look at my phone every time I put on a watch.
Out of interest, where would you draw the line - at what point would a watch just become too inaccurate for you?
Too innacurate? For me on an auto/mechanical anything more than 30 seconds a day might become annoying. On a quartz I suppose two seconds a day.
I only really get to wear my autos at weekends and through the week I'll wear a beater quartz or tracker. I have a few autos so swapping between them means they will unwind hence it will be set to the right time when I want to wear the watch again. So for me they do not need to be very accurate.
Why differentiate?
That is like giving an F1 team a few laps lap head start because they use yesteryear's engine tech.
Surely a quartz has far less working parts and is far more accurate than a mechanical.
Because of this I give allowances to mechanicals as not only does it still amaze me watching all these tiny parts swinging away but they have to endure bangs/G forces while doing so.
Personally I just can't expect them to be as accurate as a quartz.
It's exactly this necessity of having lowered expectations of mechanical accuracy that makes keeping an eye on what they can achieve so pleasurable, seeing them surpass the limits of what would be reasonable.
You mean MOVING parts.
Secondly; yes, and. That does not change the issue of making extra allowances for being less good at it.
Look, for appreciation's sake one can totally see the mech-tech as awesome or as a wonderful curio BUT in the light of a time keeping instrument, which was asked for, it simply is not on to accept a different order of accuracy. You either specify 10 second/year, per month or day and then tc quartz, quartz or mech is the min.requirement.
The apple watch is pretty accurate...
http://www.iphonefaq.org/archives/974363
just checked mine vs time.is and it's bang on as far as i can tell, but then i think i'd truggle to see 50ms difference...
The easiest way is to keep it away from the phone and docking station for a month.
My rc Seiko is then still within a second.
Posting Permissions
