I have a great interest in precision timekeeping, and bought recently a Bulova Precisionist being persuaded by the claim of better than ten seconds a year accuracy.
This however, is clearly not going to be achiveable with the Claremont Two tone watch I bought.
It has lost three and a half seconds already from when it arrived on 17th February that is 3 1/2 seconds in only five weeks; which if stable at this rate means a loss of 35 seconds in a year ....way-out from the claimed ten seconds accuracy. The watch has been kept mostly in its box at a stable temperature of near 28 degrees centigrade.
You might be interested in the exchange of e-mails when I complained about this to Bulova.
The exchange is on-going, and I am still not satisfied with their response. IN fact I think it is inadequate and unsatisfactory. I do not liike to be fobbed-off with arguments which are clearly not addressing the problem. It is clear they do not want to know about the inadequacies in accuracy I am experiencing with the Precisionist movement in my watch. I shall wait a little longer to continue with rating the watch and contact them again. I sent copies of the e-mails to their head office, customer service and watch servicing departments.
Here are the e-mails, progressing downwards:-
Douglas Denny to Bulova. 03/02/2012
Dear Sir or Madam,
I recently bought a Bulova 'Precisionist' watch purely for the relatively
low cost compared with most temperature compensated watches for the exceptional timekeeping qualities which are ascribed to it, wishing to use it for navigational use as a precision timekeeper for
use at sea; i.e. in other words as a chronometer.
I have some reasonable horological expertise myself as I repair clocks, and
heve even repaired Bulove Accutron tuning fork movements myself, even
producing a strobe light triggered by variable frequency generator to
enable the adjustment of the jeweled indexing for the tuning fork accutron.
I also have still a 'Unisonic' divers watch which I bought in 1969.
The watch I bought : a Claremont Two Tone Ref 98B140 itself is a rather
large piece of 'bling', being much larger than I envisaged when I bought
it via the internet - I thought it would be a standard size like the Rolex
Explorer, but it is enormous for the small calibre movement inside so I was
not happy about that to start with; however, on rating the watch I found it
is nowhere near the accuracy you claim for it and it is this which I am
complaining about. The watch is acceptable as a chronometer in appearence
which is not too much of a problem, but the rate and accuracy is not
acceptable if your claims for accuracy are to be believed.
It arrived on Feb 13th and it has lost 1 and 1/2 seconds in three weeks in
a stable room temperatere. Now this is very good by anything expected of a
standard quartz watch but is double the worst error expected for what you
claim is possible for a Prescionist watch i.e. less than ten seconds per
That will not go down well on the watch bloggs where watch performance is a
regular issue for comment. The race is on for a watch company to produce a
really outstanding perfrmance watch at reasonable cost. I thought this
watch would be exactly that - but it seems your claims are not viable.
Have you any comments to make about this?
I would be intersted to know if it is possible to change the rate with
adjustment at the source - i.e. the movement. I have done this with my
Casio Chronograph which is now over twenty years old, is a standard quartz
with capacitor adjustment and not themo-compensated, and maintains accuracy
of better than a second a week.
Yours faithfully, Douglas Denny.
Reply to my e-mail of 3rd March:
BULOVA to Douglas Denny. March 07, 2012 Subject: Re: Bulova Precisionist - Timekeeping Not to Standard Quoted
the rate is calculated over 1 year period. It can not be over a period of a
month or two and make the calculation for the year. As explained to our
service division that temperture changes come into play with the
precisionist. so in warmer season the performance will differ from colder
I'm not saying that every movement is perfect. we have seen a very good
performance record on the precisionist models
Reply to Bulova's e-mail of 7th March.
Douglas Denny to Bulova: 09 March 2012
Dear Sir or Madam,
Your unsigned reply, from an anonymous person, is very poor. It is an inadequate response with no technical information about the movement itself as I requested.
You admit that "not every movement is perfect" yet try to make a case for saying there is unlikely to be anything wrong with my particulat watch implying it 'might' be better in different seasons as th etemperature changes, and further imply I should threfore wait ayear to find out ! That is proposterous.
The watch has been kept in a constant 28 degrees Centigrade, which is what wrist temperature is, and is therefore not going to change its rate from one season to another.
The bottom line is your watch is not fit for purpose for the claim you make for the "precisionist" movement, of better than ten seconds a year.
I would normally request a refund from the supplier, but that is not fair as they are not responsible for claims made of it. The only recourse is, perhaps, to take Bulova UK to court action in the County (small-claims) court to recover my money, and that I shall consider when I have more evidence for the watch not fulfilling the claims you make for it. I shall wait a month or two more to confirm my experimetns with the rate.
I think your present response will be of interest on the "WATCHUSEEK" website for everyone to see the inadequate, almost dismissive, response from Bulova and for them to make up their minds as my practical experiments with your claims for accuracy. I think it ialready clear your precisionist movements in watches will not even be better than twenty seconds a year let alone ten.
My watch is now currently 2.8 seconds slow in four weeks: that means 36.4 seconds slow in a year - well above what you claim for it of ten per year... and note at constant 28 degrees C. temperature - wrist temperature. Even my 1962 Mercer mechanical chronometer is nearly as good as that.
I shall look forward to your further reply.
BULOVA to Douglas Denny: 09 March 2012.
This month it may be 2 seconds fast this month it may be 2 seconds fast
next month. And the way its explained as the temperature changes it may run
slower off setting the seconds gained. and can only be judged over the one
ENDS. No further exchange of e-mails so far.