New Seiko Astron Anyone?

[ricardo1970]

I know I shouldn't, because I'm a bit of a horological purist (I nearly talked myself out of my Velatura Direct Drive) but I really, really covet one of the new Astron GPS models. It’s the only quartz watch I would pay high end money for.







Let's look at the headlines:

47mm High-Intensity Titanium case (stronger than steel but only 60% of the weight). Sapphire Glass. 100m Water Resistance.

The time is correct to atomic clock precision. ASTRON is accurate to one second every 100,000 years.

ASTRON takes just 6 seconds to update the time, while a radio-control watch takes 120. The time zone update takes only 30 seconds in ideal conditions.

ASTRON receives time information even if you are on the move, while a radio control watch needs to stand still to receive the signal.

Wherever you are under the sky, you can get the correct local time, either automatically or on demand, simply by pushing a button.

The new ASTRON GPS Solar is so energy efficient that it can connect to the GPS network using just the power of light. Over 100 patents protect Seiko’s technology.

Once a day in case the watch is fully charged, it automatically connects to a satellite to receive the time information. On demand, time zone information is available with just one push of a button.
ASTRON recognizes 39 time zones, more than any other watch, which cover up to 29 time zones at most.

ASTRON has a perpetual calendar, so the date is always accurate, even in leap years, until February 2100.

There is a one-push button for adjustment to “Summer Time” or “Daylight Saving Time”.


The Multi-indicator at the 10 o’clock position has four functions:

1 Satellite acquisition status indication during GPS satellite signal reception
2 Power reserve indication
3 In-flight mode on/off indication
4 DST (Daylight Saving Time) on/off indication


Personally, I love the technology that allows 1 second/100,000 years accuracy, automatic timezone recognition and solar power. I also like, but don't particularly love, the aesthetics. The blue lume is cool, alhtough it has already been done elsewhere.

What does anyone else think?

Is it too expensive for a quartz watch? (I know Spring Drives are quartz regulated but they are fundamentally mechanical)

Do you like the styling?

Would the functions be of any use to you?

[Ottovonn]

I don't get the stigma attached to quartz pieces. You're not paying for a simple mall Seiko. You're paying for the next advancement in high accurate wristwatch timekeeping, the technology that takes quartz to the next level.

Function-wise the watch wouldn't be of much use to me, but since it's a luxury piece that rides on the tech behind it, the price is justifiable considering it's the first of its kind to take atomic timekeeping to this level of accuracy and efficiency.

That said, like you, I love the tech, but the looks aren't drawing me in. I'd prefer a combination of aesthetically pleasing features and advanced technology to drop that much money on a watch.

[ricardo1970]

It's not that I have a deep loathing for quartz watches. It's just that I am prepared to pay a lot of money for my watches and I know where the money goes into it with a mechanical movement due to the labour intensive operations to produce such a movement. Quartz watches are produced by machines in high numbers, even clever thermo-compensating ones. There just isn't any soul in my humble opinion. The £1750 to £3000 price tag of the Astron would normally definitely need to be a mechanical movement to justify its price tag. However, the additional technology and benefits would make me seriously consider one.

One very useful feature for me, that I did not previously mention, is that I like the absolute 100% any-time precision of the Astron which I could use to set my mechanical watches by.

I really can not wait to see them in the flesh.

[napel]

Someone with credibility would have to drive it and verify all the bells and whistles work just like they were intended before I shell out that kind of money for a quartz.

[South Pender]

I think that, when you strip away much of the advertising bumf, you'll find that--for those of us within range of a radio transmitter--this watch doesn't do anything that a RC watch can't do. Much is unknown at this point about the actual performance specifications of this new model, and won't be known until it's in owners' hands. A number of the points you have made can be debated. First, any RC watch can give you the same 1 second/100,000 years accuracy (assuming, of course, the wearer is within radio-signal range). Second, I don't know where the idea that a RC watch can't pick up the signal when one is on the move came from, but I doubt that it's true. In addition, the RC signal with many watches is received during the night, and one is normally sleeping then with the watch on or beside the bed. Third, this notion of a RC watch taking 120 seconds to update the time is news to me, but, even if it were true, who cares? All you need is one time-reception per day to stay within less than 1/2-second of atomic time at all times. Many RC watches are titanium, and most are solar power--just as with the Astron. Most RC watches have perpetual calendars (because the date is carried in the signal) and easily change for different time zones and DST.

We have found, through the Citizen Appleseed, that the power demands of satellite-controlled watches are much greater than those of a RC watch. We don't know yet just how much light-charging will be necessary with the Astron. It could be much more demanding in this regard than any RC watch. Another disadvantage--at present at least--is the huge case size necessary to house the satellite-reception components. Any watch that is 47 mm. in case diameter and16.5 mm. in thickness is just far too large for most men and would, I think, look odd on one's wrist. In time this may change, and more normal-sized models will likely appear.

My view of the Seiko Astron satellite-controlled model is that it is an interesting beginning for satellite technology in watches (just as the Citizen Appleseed was), but the technology has a way to go before it will produce a watch I'd be prepared to wear. The one clear and undisputed advantage of this technology, of course, is that it will provide time synchronization anywhere on the planet, whereas RC is restricted to locations within reach of the six existing radio transmitters in North America, Europe, Japan, and China. However, this situation may change too, with more radio transmitters possible in the future.

I've owned several RC watches and would consider my latest Citizen CB0100-52E as about as good as it gets for a watch getting external correction. It is titanium and of only slightly larger than normal size--43 mm. in diameter x 9.7 mm. thickness, and weighing a mere 84 g. It has Citizen's Perfex 3000 receiving system, which hasn't missed the radio signal once in almost four months of use (I'm about 1075 miles from the Ft. Collins transmitter).

I agree that this new Astron development is an exciting technical development in horology, but I can see no advantage whatsoever in this new technology over RC technology for those of us within range of a radio transmitter.

[harris498]

I wish I could see a wrist shot to see how huge it really looks in the flesh. But, as always, South Pender's points are valid and accurate. I could pick up a Chronomaster and a GS quartz for 5000 pounds. No synching, wonderful accuracy.

But then again, I hang out in HAQ, so my view is a bit skewed, I suppose.

[petew]

I've seen my Casio RC watch successfully perform an auto sync while driving in the car at about 50mph once at 4am in the morning. It didn't take 120 seconds either so we know that part of the advertising copy is incorrect.

[Isdaako]

Like the looks, not the price.

[Catalin]

It's not that I have a deep loathing for quartz watches. It's just that I am prepared to pay a lot of money for my watches and I know where the money goes into it with a mechanical movement due to the labour intensive operations to produce such a movement. Quartz watches are produced by machines in high numbers, even clever thermo-compensating ones. There just isn't any soul in my humble opinion. The £1750 to £3000 price tag of the Astron would normally definitely need to be a mechanical movement to justify its price tag. However, the additional technology and benefits would make me seriously consider one.

One very useful feature for me, that I did not previously mention, is that I like the absolute 100% any-time precision of the Astron which I could use to set my mechanical watches by.

I really can not wait to see them in the flesh.

You are delusional if you believe that a 3000 EUR mechanical watch is not made (more than 99%) by machines. Even 50 k$ models (where the rest is hand-made) still have a few parts made by machines (like the sapphire crystal).

[Manuel Garcia O'Kely]

As a matter of interest, the full string of data used by the WWVB for RC watches takes a full minute to send, see: WWVB - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

IIRC, the way it works in the watch is that it listens for the string, then listens to get a second string to verify the copy, if it gets two in a row, then it sets watch, otherwise, tries again.

The frequency on WWVB is so low [60 kHZ] that it cannot be sent faster. The GPS is in the GHz range, data flows at a much faster rate, plus all the GPS is really sending is a time string - that's how it works.

Both are viable options. The GPS is a more reliable daytime signal.

I wonder if this corrects for leap seconds - the GPS signal does not use leap seconds, they use serial seconds actually - that would put the GPS time base roughly 17 seconds fast, IIRC. I know that my iPhone uses the Cell phone/GPS signal and when I check it against the atomic clock it's different.