Inaccurate Citizen HAQ Chronomasters -- a flaw?
Like Tree10Likes

Thread: Inaccurate Citizen HAQ Chronomasters -- a flaw?

Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 23
  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Posts
    49

    Inaccurate Citizen HAQ Chronomasters -- a flaw?

    Accuracy tests from my 2nd Chronomaster AQ4030 are now in:

    +6.6 SPY on wrist 24/7
    +14 SPY at room temperature
    Is it outside factory specks of +/-5 SPY? You be the judge.


    Last year I owned another HAQ, Citizen AQ1040. The accuracy test was:
    +5.2 SPY on wrist 24.7
    +11 SPY at room temperature

    I found many posts by Citizen HAQ owners who repeatedly report Citizen HAQ manufactured in the last 5 years or so running too fast, outside specks.

    Are there any reasons for me to stay with Citizen HAQ?

    My Bluetooth-sync Oceanus syncs 100% 4 times a day, is reliable and dead on accurate.

    Are Citizen HAQ days over ?..

  2. #2
    HAQ and AW moderator
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    6,759

    Re: Inaccurate Citizen HAQ Chronomasters -- a flaw?

    What was the span of the interval you used,and what measurements technique?

  3. #3
    Member gaijin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    GMT -7
    Posts
    7,304

    Re: Inaccurate Citizen HAQ Chronomasters -- a flaw?

    Quote Originally Posted by Chasy View Post
    Accuracy tests from my 2nd Chronomaster AQ4030 are now in:

    +6.6 SPY on wrist 24/7
    +14 SPY at room temperature
    Is it outside factory specks of +/-5 SPY? You be the judge.


    Last year I owned another HAQ, Citizen AQ1040. The accuracy test was:
    +5.2 SPY on wrist 24.7
    +11 SPY at room temperature

    I found many posts by Citizen HAQ owners who repeatedly report Citizen HAQ manufactured in the last 5 years or so running too fast, outside specks.

    Are there any reasons for me to stay with Citizen HAQ?

    My Bluetooth-sync Oceanus syncs 100% 4 times a day, is reliable and dead on accurate.

    Are Citizen HAQ days over ?..
    How are you doing your testing?

    TIA

    Looks like Mr. Moderator beat me to it
    ronalddheld likes this.
    "So?"
    -Andrew Breitbart 1969-2012

  4. Remove Advertisements
    WatchUSeek.com
    Advertisements
     

  5. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Posts
    49

    Re: Inaccurate Citizen HAQ Chronomasters -- a flaw?

    - Test span was 2 month with each watch (on wrist). Several days (watch 1) or two weeks (watch 2) at room temp.

    - Accuracy source: internet time server App on Android, synced immediately before each measurement.
    Multiple repeat measurements were done on each day to confirm error is small and value converge on the same answer.

    - Measurement method: 30fps video, frame-by-frame analysis to observe second hand movement with about 30ms resolution.

    Method was robust enough to give ball park accuracy closely enough after about ~1 day.
    After several days, accuracy converged on more or less a constant value.
    When day by day measurements no longer changed the answer, test was complete.

    When averaged accuracy remained 6.60+/-0.02 for multiple days in succession, I called it done 6.6SPY.

  6. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    607

    Re: Inaccurate Citizen HAQ Chronomasters -- a flaw?

    I too have heard complaints about Citizen claimed vs in the field accuracy. I don't own one, but there have been other mentions of this on f9.

  7. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Posts
    49

    Re: Inaccurate Citizen HAQ Chronomasters -- a flaw?

    Citizen customer support says
    "accuracy depends on humidity (?) and time of year (??), and may change depending on month (see graph)." and that "after a complete year watch should be within 5SPY".

    Great if true. But, I have zero evidence for this. My watches never decelerated and tried to offset the out-of-specks gain.

    Has anyone ever seen Citizen HAQ to go from positive error to negative error on a different time of a year, as Citizen customer support proposes the watch will do?
    Attached Images Attached Images


  8. #7
    Member gaijin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    GMT -7
    Posts
    7,304

    Re: Inaccurate Citizen HAQ Chronomasters -- a flaw?

    Quote Originally Posted by Chasy View Post
    Citizen customer support says
    "accuracy depends on humidity (?) and time of year (??), and may change depending on month (see graph)." and that "after a complete year watch should be within 5SPY".

    Great if true. But, I have zero evidence for this. My watches never decelerated and tried to offset the out-of-specks gain.

    Has anyone ever seen Citizen HAQ to go from positive error to negative error on a different time of a year, as Citizen customer support proposes the watch will do?
    I have not tested a Citizen HAQ so I can't comment on that, but I certainly have observed such cyclical rate changes with my Omega Calibre 1666C:



    Tested using a LeoNTP Stratum I Time Server and 120 frame/sec video:




    Daily rate varied from about -1.0 Sec/Year to about -16.0 Sec/Year.
    ronalddheld and Chasy like this.
    "So?"
    -Andrew Breitbart 1969-2012

  9. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Posts
    49

    Re: Inaccurate Citizen HAQ Chronomasters -- a flaw?

    This is how forum's wisdom could be useful. Amazing data.

    I wonder what is the reason for the periodicity. Can it be seasonal temperature variation? Internal design?
    (one model is that two closely tuned quartz crystals have a "beating" period of about a year)

  10. #9
    Member dicioccio's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Roma, ITALIA
    Posts
    865

    Re: Inaccurate Citizen HAQ Chronomasters -- a flaw?

    I would suggest to complete a full 1 year test to calcolate the "seconds-per-year" accuracy. Deviations of the claimed 5spy accuracy in my opinion are more than acceptable for the 2 months period you are conducting the test.
    Last edited by dicioccio; 4 Weeks Ago at 23:20.
    ronalddheld and Tom-HK like this.

  11. #10
    Member Tom-HK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    1,497

    Re: Inaccurate Citizen HAQ Chronomasters -- a flaw?

    I, too, would give it a full year. I wore and timed my Citizen almost every day for the better part of a year. I bought the watch in the winter and as summer drew on the rate did, indeed, increase as expected. The change was relatively small, however these things always are small when the entire span of the accuracy range is just five seconds out of thirty-five million. I was initially quite determined to give it a full year because the pattern suggested that there might be a corresponding slow down in the following winter.

    In my case, however, the watch passed 6 SPY of cumulative gain before twelve months were up and there was absolutely no chance of a winter dip being big enough to correct it to back under 5 SPY (barring a freak, month-long deep freeze, which I thought was most unlikely in sub-tropical Hong Kong), so I opted to send it back to Japan under warranty rather than see out the entire year.

    My vintage, 1970s Citizen HAQs, on the other hand, have been (or had been - I sold one) very consistent sub-5 SPY performers. Then again, when one of them was off-spec (shortly after acquisition and restoration), I was able to simply open it up and regulate it. I fine-tuned that watch to run just perfectly for the conditions in which I was keeping it. Can't do that with the modern crop of Citizen HAQs.
    Last edited by Tom-HK; 4 Weeks Ago at 23:52.
    Chasy and dicioccio like this.
    The 4.19 MHz Collection
    Casio - SP-400, module 75
    Casio - SP-410, module 75
    Casio - SP-400G, module 75
    Citizen - Crystron 4 Mega, cal. 7370
    Citizen - Exceed 4 Mega, cal. 1730 SOLD
    Junghans - Prototype, cal. 667.20
    Junghans - MegaQuarz, cal. 667.26 SOLD
    Omega - Prototype, cal. 1522

Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

    Posting Permissions

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