Ball Hydrocarbon GMT Review by k7lro

[k7lro]

Ball Hydrocarbon GMT I – Model DG1016A-SJ-WH

Watch ownership is subjective – subject to our budgets, our whims and even the influence of the internet and its experts.

I am no such expert but I do enjoy watches – from my Torgoen T6 quartz to the current crop that I own now to those watches that I no longer own, I know what I like and I hope to share a little of that with you.

The Ball Watch Company has a long and illustrious history. Like so many other companies, there appears to have been a break in their continuity of watchmaking with a reincarnation appearing in the early part of 2000.

There’s a lot of internet chatter about the company – I guess there’s a negative aspect to some if the owners are Asian. Some have gone so far as to claim that their watches are manufactured in Asia.

I’m sure there’s a little hidden truth in every claim so I decided to poke around a little. According to the Secretary of State’s office in New York, the entity information is as follows:

Selected Entity Name: BALL WATCH COMPANY, INC.
Selected Entity Status Information
Current Entity Name:
BALL WATCH COMPANY, INC.
Initial DOS Filing Date:
JANUARY 25, 2000
County:
NASSAU
Jurisdiction:
NEW YORK
Entity Type:
DOMESTIC BUSINESS CORPORATION
Current Entity Status:
ACTIVE
Selected Entity Address Information
DOS Process (Address to which DOS will mail process if accepted on behalf of the entity)
BALL WATCH COMPANY, INC.
76 NARRAGANSETT AVE
LAWRENCE, NEW YORK, 11559

Chairman or Chief Executive Officer
HENRY DUONG
276 NARRAGANSETT AVE
LAWRENCE, NEW YORK, 11559

Principal Executive Office
KEVIN KOUCH
276 NARRAGANSETT AVE
LAWRENCE, NEW YORK, 11559

Registered Agent
NONE

You can review this information at http://appsext8.dos.state.ny.us/corp_public/CORPSEARCH.SELECT_ENTITY - just enter “Ball Watch Company” in the text box.

Now, I have no real information on Mr. Duong or Mr. Kouch. One appears to be a citizen of Hong Kong and the other appears to be Canadian. Perhaps they’re also US citizens – who knows – who cares?

Mr. Jeff Hess is the CEO of Ball Watch USA – he’s claimed in several postings that the ownership isn’t Asian – I tend to believe him but there’s some amount of parsing in his responses also. You can see a few of these comments here: http://forums.timezone.com/index.php?t=msg&goto=2319576&rid=44235#msg_2319576 It would appear that his comments may only apply only to the US entity.

What about their manufacturing facility? The watches clearly state, “Swiss Made”. If you poke around the Internet (http://www.righttime.com/rt/links.htm) a bit more, you can find their address in Geneve Switzerland as follows:

BALL WATCH COMPANY SA
c/o LEONARD SA
Route de Chene 41a
1200 GENEVE
Tel : 022/700.73.53
Fax : 022/700.53.54

Maybe the question should be, who is Leonard SA? From the same link, you find an entry for Leonard Montres SA - same company?

LEONARD MONTRES SA
Route de Chêne 41a
1208 GENEVE
Tel : 022/700.73.53
Fax : 022/700.73.54
leonardsa@gve.ch

The original Ball Watch Company appears to have used watches from other watch companies in the past – it may be that this practice continues since these companies are in close proximity to each other. Again, I don’t know – and don’t really care - the designs appear to be 100% Ball-influenced.

I am the first to admit that I don’t have the answers – I did this mostly out of curiosity. Beyond that, I don’t care who owns & benefits from the sale of any product and long as they’re doing it in a somewhat ethical manner. The fact that several members of their staff regularly appear in various forums says a lot to me in a positive manner.

Having said that, if any of my information is incorrect, I am more than happy to make changes. You know how this internet stuff can be – what’s written will be available for years to come. My agenda was to purchase a watch that isn’t on everyone else’s wrist, represents a good if not great value and has design features that are attractive to my perceived needs.

Let’s look at the watch and as others have noted, it a grand watch.



Don’t be intimidated by the size – with a case size of 40 mm and 14.1 mm high, you’d think that us guys with smaller wrists might not be …uh… equipped to wear such a watch but if you look at the sides, you can see that the design of the lugs allows the watch to be worn by even smaller-wristed guys. In fact, the design may limit the larger guys – the lugs may cut into their wrists.

Moving to the dial, I found it to be a pleasing combination of blue hands on a white dial with the red GMT hand being easy to quickly find and interpret from the 24-hour bezel.



As with other Ball Watches, this one is equipped with 17 micro gas tubes on hour, minute, second hands and dial for night reading capability. Bright – as bright as I’ve ever seen in a watch but exceedingly hard for my camera to capture:



I like the weight and feel of cold steel. An old country doctor, who had just diagnosed a particular problem that I was suffering from, leaned back in his chair and made his opinion pretty clear: “By the time it gets this bad, cold steel is the beat deal.” While he wasn’t referring to watches, steel in a world of plastic has a certain comforting feel to it.

Details on the band and clasp are typical Ball. There are half-links that will allow you to obtain a better level of comfort.



You’ve seen pictures of the backs of other Ball Watches. It features the Ball Submarine -



**** Edit, Sept. 29, 2007 **** Please allow me to make a correction. Just above, I referred for the submarine on the back as the "Ball Submarine". That is inaccurate. As I learned, it's actually the bathyscaph Trieste. Bathyscaph literally means "deep boat". There's some excellent information here on the history of this depth-breaking submarine - it's well worth your time to read it. I apologize for my initial inaccurate statement. Your Ball Hydrocarbon is designed and constructed as to be worthy of the Trieste image on the back of the watch. I think the Ball Watch team did one heck of a job in the selection of this vessel:



Lastly, there’s the crown and protective collar for it. Unless the crown is screwed down, the clasp won’t engage properly:


Lastly, there are the design considerations including cold temperature endurance down to – 40C, shock resistance to 7,500G, water resistance to 300m and anti-magnetic tolerance to 12,000 A/m. I assume that if I’m ever subjected to those outer limits, I’ll be dead but when I’m on a adventure motorcycle trip to somewhere like the Copper Canyon in Mexico, I won’t have to worry about my watch taking a beating.

Time-keeping ability? I don’t know yet. My assumption is that since it uses the automatic calibre ETA 2893-2, it’ll be more than adequate. Most Ball owners are reporting excellent results with their watches. I see no reason not to expect the same from this Ball Watch.


Like I mentioned, this is my first attempt. My camera is a 4 year old Sony. I think it did a pretty good job but I can improve on the lighting. I learned that I need to look at the watch with a magnifying glass before I take pictures. (Did you notice the fiber under the bezel clamp at the 2 o'clock position? I didn't until I zoomed in on the pictures. What else do I need to improve? Constructive comments are appreciated!)

[scuttle]

Lastly, there are the design considerations including cold temperature endurance down to – 40C, shock resistance to 7,500G, water resistance to 300m and anti-magnetic tolerance to 12,000 A/m. I assume that if I’m ever subjected to those outer limits, I’ll be dead but when I’m on a adventure motorcycle trip to somewhere like the Copper Canyon in Mexico, I won’t have to worry about my watch taking a beating.

Originally I read the acceleration spec as 7500ms/2 - 7500G is about ten times better than this! 7500ms/2 is standard for an ISO approved diver and works out as equivalent to a 1 meter fall on to a fairly rigid floor. 7500G otoh approaches the 10 meter drop a G-Shock can take and would put the Hydro on a completely different level to any other mechanical I have ever heard of. I thought the use of G was a mis-print in the review, but the claim is the same on Ball's site. To be honest, I think it is a mis-print on Ball's part - according to their spec they're using a standard ETA 2893, and I can't how they can alter the laws of physics so radically in their favour....

[scuttle]

Ok - I chased down more info on the Hydro's shock resistance...

Ball make a big thing in their ads about the Hydro being good for a 7500G acceleration. This sounds terrific but this it isn't really true except with some very important caveats that aren't mentioned in the ads.

In the real world, reading the small print on the Ball site and expanding it with reference to the ISO dive watch standard, the Hydro is good for a 1.5m drop on a wooden floor and nothing more. Sort of - it should still tick, but you might need a new movement to restore non-junker accuracy. In fact, Ball don't even promise non-junker accuracy after a 1m drop - or a 50cm one.

By comparison, a G-Shock which is a true caveat-less 7500G watch (if not a bit more) can take a 10m drop with no loss of accuracy. (The actual record for a G is claimed to be 25 floors on to a rigid floor, but I suspect that this was a light case watch with a wide strap that acted as an airbrake, so that it reached terminal velocity after justa few floors...)

Any ISO certified diver will be good for at least a 1m drop, subject to accuarcy permanently dropping to a minute a day post drop. In the nature of things almost all watches that pass the test will exceed the 1m requirement by some centimetres, so there is no reason to believe the Hydro is significantly tougher than a $200 Seiko or Citizen mechanical dive watch- or even the average quartz non diver. (I regret to say my £40 Uzi tritium vial 200m watch has had two 1.5m ish drops, with no loss of accuracy, between my Butterfingers Disease and shelf climbing cats.)

I quite understand why the reviewer thought the Hydo would literally survive anything that wouldn't kill him! If it could have survived an arbitrary 7500G acceleration (instead of only a very small force that would produce a external acceleration on the case, not on the mech because of the shock absorb system, lating no more than X microseconds only) with no loss of accuracy this would have been true. Based on Ball's ad copy, he reasonably assumed that the watch was several orders of magnitude tougher than it actually is.

Besides being arguably naughty in their ad copy on this, Ball have also been un-becomingly reticent at the post-drop loss of accuarcy aka "your watch may need a new mechanism" issue - even on their "detailed" technology webpage (link below). You have to reference a page on the watch's drop standard on their website that references the ISO dive watch standard against the standard to find this out...

Link to most relevant page at Ball:

http://www.ballwatchusa.com/technolo...technology.htm

Good summary of ISO standard (actually costs money to buy the real thing!)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shock_resistant_watch