I often hear people mention hacking in a watch and I know what it means ,but sometimes I’ll read about a movement and people say yes but it doesn’t hack .
Maybe it’s just me but when I set a watch I’m not that bothered if it’s a few seconds out ,is there a particular reason people really like it .
Maybe a dumb question for some .
Sent from my iPhone using TZ-UK mobile app
I've owned many watches that don't hack and it doesn't really bother me. Sure, if you can stop the second hand at 12 it makes setting the time against something else easier, but equally if you are running 10 or 15 secs behind that other source on a non hacking watch it is just as easy to monitor time performance and that's without using timing equipment.
Many highly desirable watches don't hack...
I have a couple. It's fair to say it bothered me far more when I was pondering getting one, thinking it would bother me not being able to stop the second hand when setting.
In real life however, it's no big deal. It's easy enough to get within a few seconds and unless you have a freakishly accurate mechanical watch, it'll be out by a few seconds after a day anyway!
Don't give it a second thought now! (No pun intended)!
My 5711 pisses me off as non-hacking, but I suppose I can't complain as I picked it up at RRP years ago! But, yeah, on a sample of 1 non-hacking watch, I definitely prefer my other hackers.
I’m sure I’ve had watches that don’t hack but you can slow/stop the second hand in another way.
I like to set the time to the exact second when I’m setting the watch if I can. It will be a few seconds out after a day or so anyway but it’s a habit !
does not bother me at all...
I didn’t for one second think I would be the slightest bit bothered by a non-hacking movement. Then I got one and found it incredibly irritating. For a bit. Like a couple of wears. Then I got over it.
So, on balance, hacking is nice but a nice watch that doesn’t hack won’t hack me off.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Because going over the top requires split second accuracy.
Fairly well covers my experiences. What I find slightly surprising is the ‘higher end’ models seem not to hack - neither my Patek or VC have hacking seconds whereas others - Rolex, Omega, Breitling etc generally do.Originally Posted by NCC66
also there're the two-handers..
The infotainment on my Mum's Polo is lightyears ahead of my GLC and both cars are the same age. The big boys don't have to try as hard is my view.
I have a 50 year old Datejust that doesn’t hack and it’s doesn’t bother me.
What does is no quick date when you have to wind the thing like buggery to get it to advance 30 days!!
But you can apply the minimum amount of back pressure on the crown, and it holds the second hand just like it was hacked.
It's just a matter of time...
Correct......usually! The trick is to do this with the watch in the lowest state of wind possible whilst allowing it to run. It depends how tight the cannon pinion is, if it’s reasonably tight this trick will work.
When servicing old watches the cannon pinion often needs tightening, a tricky process involving a staking set and a small hammerI adjust them to give the correct ‘feel’ to hand setting, not too tight but not loose. If the movement can be stopped by holding the crown I’m even happier, but usually this won’t work when the watch us in a high state of wind because the torque being applied through the train wheels overcomes tge friction in the cannon pinion.
The question I'd have is ok fine no hacking on a £40 Vostok but come on Patek don't tell us all about your marvellous movement that doesn't even hack and has a stated 35-45 hour power reserve! By modern terms that's neither use nor ornament! Why would a watchmaker not add hacking if they could?
Hacking is important to me as firstly I insist on the seconds lining up precisely against the minute marker when seconds are at 60 and secondly I set the watch to the atomic clock as I track the accuracy. Eccentric I know but if I'm spending the same amount of money on a watch as one might on a car I will insist on these things.
Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk
Not bothered at all. Unless you have some sort of OCD hacking is fairly pointless on a mechanical watch which is inherently inaccurate anyway. Lining up the minute hand with the seconds hand on a non-hacking watch is easy after a bit of practice. It's a bit like a date complication - some people don't seem to be able to function without it.
Out of interest, can making the seconds hand stop on a non hacking movement in this way cause any damage at all?
I used to do it on cheaper seikos but a little reluctant on the cal.36/el primero movement in my tag heuer.
I expect a good level of accuracy in my watches and a non hacking watch is a turn off for me.
I put the question to my Wife......She said what the hack are you on about!.
And get a life.
In my skx costing £150, I think so what. In my 2 hand intramatic it doesn't matter. When I pay £500, £1k, £4k etc. It seems reasonable that the watch has the hacking option, especially for initial setting.
Sent from my CLT-L09 using TZ-UK mobile app
No, it can’t cause damage , it’s simply another way of applying braking force to the movement. If it was harmful I wouldn’t recommend it!
What I don’t recommend is frequently spending 10 minutes turning the hands to set the date on a watch with no quickset facility. This causes wear to the cannon pinion, especially on a watch that hasn’t been serviced for many a year. It’s like slipping the clutch in a car, eventually the cannon pinion will wear and the hand- setting will fee loose. Eventually the hands won’t turn when the watch is running. Some old watches without a quickset date allow the date to be advanced by turning the hands back to 9 o clock then advancing past 12, not quite ‘quickset’ but better than nothing.
Older watches rarely had a hacking facility, they started to become commonplace in the 70s. A small pivoting lever engages with the sliding pinion and moves when the crown is pulled into handset position, the other end touches the balance wheel rim and causes the watch to stop. It’s a simple design, if it doesn’t work on a watch with dubious history there’s every chance the hacking lever has got lost at service time. It could be argued that subjecting the balance to the abrupt shock of being braked in this way is potentially harmful, but that doesn’t seem to be the case.
Although I have modern watches I mostly prefer vintage so on a lot of watches hacking doesn't come into it. Don't miss it either.
Cheers,
Neil.
My watches are mainly functional, and as such now almost exclusively quartz or digital. I can't see the point of a timepiece that doesn't tell the time, to the second.
Sent from my XQ-AU51 using Tapatalk
Doesn’t bother me, but I do prefer the ability to hack.
Rotating watches, it allows me to easily see when time-keeping is off, potentially indicating a need to service or demagnetise.
Plus, if I’m setting the time on a watch, it may as well be correct to the second. I use time.is etc. as a reference.
With something like a high accuracy quartz 9F Grand Seiko, there’s also a geeky pleasure in knowing the time on my wrist is right. The accuracy of that watch is part of the attraction, after all.
Non-hacking:
Hacking:
It doesn't matter to me - but if push came to shove - I know which one I would keep...
How do I get my Casio F-91W to hack?
How else are you meant to sync up with your squad!?
Thought it was an important feature then I got a non-hacking watch & soon came to realise it doesn't matter one jot
Sent from my motorola one action using Tapatalk
that reminds me, i've got a box of Ferrero Rocher leftover from christmas! nom!Non-hacking:
Hacking:
It doesn't matter to me - but if push came to shove - I know which one I would keep...
ktmog6uk
marchingontogether!
I do prefer a hacking movement, does slightly annoy me that I can't accurately set my omega speedmaster!
Especially as I like to see how my watches time against an atomic clock
Sent from my SM-N976B using Tapatalk
Unless I’ve misunderstood the usefulness. I see it as handy to set the time and I think I’d dislike doing that with a watch that doesn’t hack, but also for stopping the movement in the event of damage. Otherwise, I can’t see another advantage.
As mentioned, most non-hacking watches allow you to stall the second hand with just a little back pressure on the crown. 'Problem' solved.
You could also ask, why have a second hand at all. I'm surprised we don't see more quartz watches without second hands. Immediately the giveaway that it's a quartz is removed, and in its place you have the calmness of very high end two handers. Not so good when the battery runs out I guess, but maybe there could be some kind of end of life indicator.
I like the Calibre 11s, where you can’t even tell if it’s running without either staring at the minute hand or clicking the chrono on.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Like Seiko 6138/9.
Cheers,
Neil.
thought it was just to synchronise with other watches???
i would never buy a watch that could not hack.
its so Seiko 5 cheapness
Almost fell off the sofa laughing at this, seems a very strange way to think!
I’m currently wearing a 1962 18ct gold Omega Seamaster, nicely restored by my good self, the watch is an excellent example, keeps time to 3 secs/ day, its got to be worth two grand..........but guess what, it doesn’t hack so perhaps I should scrap it for the gold content because it’s no use as a watch, is it?.
I also own a Seiko 5 that gets worn as a beater, perhaps I should scrap that because someone might see it and think I can’t afford a decent watch.
you may like this one then:
Good point, if only I did!you may like this one then:
But the giveaway is two lcd screens!!! I’d rather have a second hand, Im a big automatic fan, but we do seem a bit over critical of quartz, the biggest issue I have with automatic watches, especially Seiko, is the fact you can buy a 5k watch with a high beat, high end movement that leaves the factory unadjusted or regulated.. is that to make the quartz look good!!
As far as hacking goes, overrated.. the crown and auto mechanism last for years when there is no reason to play with them!!!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
From a repairers viewpoint, two- handed quartz watches are a pain because you can’t be certain it’s running! Most will move the minute hand 3 times/minute, so you end up watching the movement closely and waiting for a tiny ‘jump’. Wife’s Omega Constellation is like this, it was stopping intermittently when it needed service and it wasn’t obvious . I ended up stripping it down hastily a couple of days before setting off on holiday, she wanted to take the watch so I had to fix it.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
