Stopping chronograph without resetting

[Allwatches]

Hi

I was wondering whether there is any harm in starting and stopping a chronograph and not resetting it to zero, leaving it at a non-zero position for a long period of time. Are there any adverse issues caused like a tilt in the chronograph hand, or any other issues caused by the watch anticipating either a reset or a restart?

A bit of a technical question as I don't have any technical watch making knowledge.

Thanks

[LorneG]

No harm at all as the hand is disengaged from the mechanism and can happily sit there for eternity. I've had mine at the 7 seconds mark for almost 10 years now and every watch I send out has it at that point, as well as every watch picture on my website.

I wish the right hand pic below had been in focus as it has my trident seconds hand at exactly the same angle that neptune has been holding his trident at the very epicentre of 'the empire' since 1411. Poor focus was due to a bit too much vino plonko at dinner last night.

[ped]

Why? I don’t think I could handle it personally

[LorneG]

Why? I don’t think I could handle it personally

it looks better - to me at least

[ped]

Fair enough, can't argue with that - it means you can see the sundial at 12 better. We're all pretty strange around here aren't we!

[Stringer]

Does no harm, to my (limited) knowledge.

It just means the Chronograph hands are unsupported, except by the brake, so they might move in the event of a hard knock, but nothing serious.

In fact, for Chronographs with no Date complication (like a Speedmaster Moonwatch), many use the Chronograph seconds hand in exactly that fashion, as a makeshift date indicator, with no ill-effect.

[LorneG]

Fair enough, can't argue with that - it means you can see the sundial at 12 better. We're all pretty strange around here aren't we!

we certainly are all ever so slightly strange. if you a tri-compact chronograph with maker/model written at 12 o-clock then moving the seconds hand also prevents it cutting the text in half