closing tag is in template navbar
timefactors watches



TZ-UK Fundraiser
Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: ETA 2000-1 regulation

  1. #1
    Master
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    London
    Posts
    2,203

    ETA 2000-1 regulation

    My wifeís Longines uses the eta 2000-1 and is running at minus 20-30 seconds in all positions. Is that normal? Assume this can be regulated to be more accurate?

    Stu

  2. #2
    Grand Master
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Wakefield, West Yorkshire
    Posts
    22,289
    Are those figures produced with the watch fully wound? If the watch isn`t running in a high state of wind it won't give good results.

    I`ve never come across this movement, and after a few minutes reading up on it I don`t want to! Small and not easy to work on, with the added bonus that many of the parts are restricted and not available via Cousins.

    If it needs work it'll be a job for some lucky lad......not me!

    The watch might just need regulating, or possibly the auto-winding isn`t working properly so it's always running at low amplitude. Hand-wind it fully and check it again.

  3. #3
    Master
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    London
    Posts
    2,203
    I hope itís just regulating, the amplitude is 280 ish and best error is 0.1-0.3. Just not sure how accurate or not they are supposed to be.

    I have given it a proper wind and results are the same.

  4. #4
    Grand Master
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Wakefield, West Yorkshire
    Posts
    22,289
    If the amplitude's 280į that's fine. Forget about beat error, provided it's below 1 it won't affect the watch to any significant degree, on a modern watch that's easy to set it should always be around 0to 0.3 and it shouldn't change significantly.

    Sounds like the watch does need regulating, which should be an easy job.

  5. #5
    Master
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    London
    Posts
    2,203
    Quote Originally Posted by walkerwek1958 View Post
    If the amplitude's 280į that's fine. Forget about beat error, provided it's below 1 it won't affect the watch to any significant degree, on a modern watch that's easy to set it should always be around 0to 0.3 and it shouldn't change significantly.

    Sounds like the watch does need regulating, which should be an easy job.
    Cheers. Seems to be that way. Digging around it says the movement is only regulated in 2 positions and is acceptable up to plus/minus 30 seconds so in theory itís ok. I do think it could be made more accurate though.

  6. #6
    Grand Master
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Wakefield, West Yorkshire
    Posts
    22,289
    Quote Originally Posted by Stuno1 View Post
    Cheers. Seems to be that way. Digging around it says the movement is only regulated in 2 positions and is acceptable up to plus/minus 30 seconds so in theory itís ok. I do think it could be made more accurate though.
    If you've now got a timegrapher you can check the precision of the watch easily by comparing the rate in all 6 positions. I would expect the maximum difference to be 20 seconds or better, even taking account of the size of the movement and the limited claims made. The overall rate will approximate to the average of all positions, but this is very approximate and can vary from one watch to another. When a watch is being worn it is moving around, this will cause the amplitude to fall and the rate at any given moment won't equate to any of the fixed positions.

    I don`t think there's any great mystery with this watch, the amplitude's healthy but the rate needs regulating. If there's positional variations of 40+ seconds that suggests all's not quite so well.

    Sometimes a watch will appear to defy logic, the figures will all look good but a significant disparity between 'on the wrist' timekeeping and the estimate based on numbers will be observed. I can`t explain that.

  7. #7
    Master
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    London
    Posts
    2,203
    Quote Originally Posted by walkerwek1958 View Post
    If you've now got a timegrapher you can check the precision of the watch easily by comparing the rate in all 6 positions. I would expect the maximum difference to be 20 seconds or better, even taking account of the size of the movement and the limited claims made. The overall rate will approximate to the average of all positions, but this is very approximate and can vary from one watch to another. When a watch is being worn it is moving around, this will cause the amplitude to fall and the rate at any given moment won't equate to any of the fixed positions.

    I don`t think there's any great mystery with this watch, the amplitude's healthy but the rate needs regulating. If there's positional variations of 40+ seconds that suggests all's not quite so well.

    Sometimes a watch will appear to defy logic, the figures will all look good but a significant disparity between 'on the wrist' timekeeping and the estimate based on numbers will be observed. I can`t explain that.

    In 7 positions the variance was no more than 10 seconds. I think itís all good. Just needs regulating.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Do Not Sell My Personal Information