Is this the new defintion and direction of this forum.
Like Tree39Likes

Thread: Is this the new defintion and direction of this forum.

Page 1 of 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 77
  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    3,088

    Is this the new defintion and direction of this forum.

    I noticed Ron has put on the table that HAQ is now "less than or equal to 10 s/yr based on performance not specifications." Has some interesting implications if that's the new norm.

    Based on performance, sorry all you Certina, Tissot, and Chris Ward owners. Even though those Precidrive watches are specd at 10 s/yr, most of them aren't meeting those specs. A quick look at the posts show the DS Action Divers, the DS-8's, and a bunch of the current batch of DS2's aren't making the grade. You'll be missed.

    Bulova based on performance is actually performing better than a lot of the Certina's, but again not routinely at 10 s/yr, at least you have the Bulova forum.

    Morgenwerk, sorry no performance data for a complete year ever. Maybe if 2 or 3 people post some data you'll be welcomed back.

    Apple watch sure you're thermocompensated, and specd to be the most accurate watch in the world. No one is going to leave you not connected for a year, you're out of here.

    Now of course there is COSC, an independent verification that the watch is probably 10 times more accurate than a normal watch, apparently is not good enough.

    That leaves us with a few models from Citizen, Seiko, Longines, and Breitling(as long as they keep making quartz). Perhaps a few vintage models from Omega and others if they are still meeting that spec.

    Now I believe some folks have speculated that it be based on the technology the watch has. So if its feasible than it's in? Seems awfully random, and a leap of faith as opposed to you know the reality of specifications. Who makes that call?

    Personnally I would prefer if this was Highly Advanced Quartz forum. Lot of cutting edge stuff happening in the GPS and Bluetooth area along with the traditional High accuracy quartz, and leave it at COSC based on specs.
    dicioccio likes this.

  2. #2
    Banned ppaulusz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Budapest, Hungary
    Posts
    3,654

    Re: Is this the new defintion and direction of this forum.

    I wrote earlier: "Current 32kHz thermocompensated (digitally by inhibition) movements perform very much alike regardless of manufacturers. Small but meaningful differences are the results of better/finer thermocompensation algorithm (hash table) and careful calibration out of the factory. This latter one is not an issue if the movement is equipped with a digital calibration terminal as it allows precise fine-tuning at any time for any environment (wearing habit, etc.)."
    "Spare me from the marketing claims and just let me know of the applied technologies and I will know whether the movement is HAQ"

    We will never have really meaningful user-feedbacks because this forum is only attended by fairly limited number of owners of HAQ watches. That is a fact! Hardly anyone is participating from Japan (perhaps the biggest market of HAQ watches!). Let's not forget that not everyone is capable to express himself/herself in English so they are out as well! And I could continue on... This forum can't be the proper source of full-scale data collection. That has never been the purpose of the forum. However this forum collected plenty data/info/knowledge/thoughts over the years and that resulted in the only logical and practical conclusion: the applied technologies are the only meaningful factors not the marketing slogans!

    I myself would not have put any number like 10 spy or 15 spy or COSC as a limit of HAQ because individual watches might fail due to be part of a not ideally calibrated batch out of the factory regardless of brands and models and that is simply a quality control issue nothing else!

    In my opinion any watch that is fitted with one or both of the following is HAQ and normally should perform within 1 second/month or 12 seconds/year:
    - digitally thermocompensated movement (inhibition technology)
    - MHz-range quartz oscillator

    Other precision/accuracy options are in the nice to have category:
    - automatic digital calibration (eg: Morgenwerk-style)
    - manual digital calibration (eg: selected ETA and Seiko movements)

    A side-note: Honorary HAQ status might be awarded to watches with 196kHz/262kHz oscillators but without digital thermocompensation they would not be up to real HAQ-level. I'm not sure whether Bulova (a Citizen company) applies but does not declare digital thermocompensation in case of its 262kHz models...
    Last edited by ppaulusz; January 15th, 2019 at 10:18.
    dicioccio and Miguel like this.

  3. #3
    Member dicioccio's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Roma, ITALIA
    Posts
    886

    Re: Is this the new defintion and direction of this forum.

    I agree with both of you but I would also add that relying too much on categories could lead to misunderstandings and will limit the scope of the forum that, in my opinion, should be to gather people interested in achieving great time performances (or with their own watch, or buying a new model).

  4. Remove Advertisements
    WatchUSeek.com
    Advertisements
     

  5. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    76

    Re: Is this the new defintion and direction of this forum.

    I love this little HAQ section don't know much about the detail discussed but respect you all !

    HAQ is not dead by any means.... It has it's niche..

    I get the purity bit now of not having sync with RC or GPS... ie the need to be super accurate in it's own right..

    I think that's the crucial bit at the end of the day...

    W

  6. #5
    Member IAvictorinox's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    Posts
    950

    Re: Is this the new defintion and direction of this forum.

    Quote Originally Posted by ppaulusz View Post
    the applied technologies are the only meaningful factors not the marketing slogans
    To be clear...

    You keep saying this but you do not realize that something like COSC, though a designation often used in slogans to sell watches, is also a trusted certification in its own right. When people evoke COSC certification it is not to say that a watch performs at the limits of their standards (my COSC watches perform better!); rather, it is a benchmark used to to say that watches are designed perform at least as well as the standards. There's a distinction between your interpretation and mine. You say "slogan" and I say "certification." What a watchmaker does with the certification is up to them. COSC itself is an independent, accredited non-profit entity for the measurement of watches. One could make a case for the fact that the Swiss gov't also wants to keep exporting watches (as your brought up in another thread ... and I get that) and therefore use COSC to market their pieces but, by all accounts, COSC has the critical credentials and could be used as a distinction of some kind (probably the outer limits of a HAQ distinction). I like your idea that these things should be determined on a case-by-case basis but the reality is that we do not have many independent institutions for this type of thing.

    I am new to the HAQ forum (and probably caused too much trouble already) but I think that continually constricting your parameters for inclusion will slowly reduce the possibility for new participation. IMHO. It may be helpful to establish identifiable levels or degrees of HAQ. "High," "Higher," and "Ultra-High," for example.
    Last edited by IAvictorinox; January 15th, 2019 at 20:24.
    Baume & Mercier Malibu (MV045083) Concord Mariner (14.E7.1881) & Mariner SG (15.22.533) Ebel Type E (E9330C41) & Type E (E9187C41) TAG Heuer 6000 Chronometer (WH5115-2)

    Instagram @ebel_ution

  7. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    351

    Re: Is this the new defintion and direction of this forum.

    COSC is HAQ, in my opinion.

    20 spy is HAQ.

    10 spy is HAQ.

    5 spy is even better.

    1 spy is The grail we are waiting for.

    The purpose of f9 is clear to me. 15 spm standard quartz is not HAQ.
    Radio and GPS is interesting, but not HAQ. My car has a GPS synced clock, it's nothing to be amazed at. My cheap plastic running watch has GPS sync. Whoop-te-do.

    20 spy Swatch group movements clearly are HAQ.
    BillSWPA, dicioccio and Miguel like this.

  8. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2018
    Location
    UTC-6, USA
    Posts
    41

    Re: Is this the new defintion and direction of this forum.

    wbird- Thanks for starting this thread. I was previously going to make some comments but didn't want to hijack "Re: ***What HAQ watch are you sporting today?***" or "Re: New Seiko Astron GPS 5X movement an HAQ? threads. This looks like a good place to continue to cuss and discuss HAQ properties.

    While I have been interested in High Accuracy Quartz watches for many years I am also relatively new to this forum, as you can see by my "join date". I have read many, if not most, of the HAQ posts here from 2009-2010, 2013-2015 to present. I did not find a concise, workable definition of "What is an HAQ?".

    I noticed Ron has put on the table that HAQ is now "less than or equal to 10 s/yr based on performance not specifications." Has some interesting implications if that's the new norm.
    -- yes it does.
    This forum can't be the proper source of full-scale data collection.
    I definitely agree with this statement. The only people who will ever have enough data to make any statistically significant statements about the accuracy of a particular watch movement or model number are the QC folks in the manufacturer's factory. Hopefully, they use that data to set an accuracy level spec. with 95% or 99% (or higher) statistical confidence level. Some value that they will defend. By defend, I mean an accuracy value that they will accept warranty returns for and re-regulate or replace the movement if its performance is outside of that specification. To me, if they will not accept a warranty return for accuracy, then it is marketing BS and not a product specification.
    I myself would not have put any number like 10 spy or 15 spy or COSC as a limit of HAQ
    I don't know if 10, 15, 20 or COSC's ~25.5 s/y is the most appropriate. I don't think it really matters as it is arbitrary anyway. But it needs to be some value. Manufacturers use some seconds-per-unit-time value to express the accuracy of their products. Timing machines display some seconds-per-unit-time (among other values) to show the accuracy of a unit-under-test.

    Part of the controversy in accuracy comparisons certainly comes from over zealous (or down right deceitful) marketing claims in the past. Not mentioning any names, but you know who you are.
    Companies that do that eventually hurt themselves...Hey Volkswagen, how are those diesel emission tests coming along?

    I just hope this leads to a concise, workable definition of HAQ so that reasonable comparisons can be made (even with the wear so-many hours per day weasel words).

    After all, this is a hobby...enjoy your watches.

  9. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    3,088

    Re: Is this the new defintion and direction of this forum.

    I understand the argument for applied technologies, but it presents more problems than it addresses. A watch lets say early Seiko and current Certina, that has all the appropriate technology, merely has the potential to be HAQ. When a watch markets itself to employ TC, and 10 s/yr accuracy, and never meets 10 s/yr, isn't that simply advertising? Anybody, say a watch maker like Hoptroff, can make that claim and become part of this forum.

    Than I have those Bulova's that are backing off their accuracy claims, employing a technology that for the most part we guess at, and are routinely testing better than a lot of the Certina's.

    What is more relavent the potential or the reality?

    Simply put, if you state and can achieve COSC accuracy, you're good here in my opinion. I would rather we figure out how you're doing it, as opposed to why if you have the approved technology and can't. I also think if 10 s/yr becomes the standard it will become quite quiet around here.

    Might add that COSC is more than marketing. An advertizer can make any claim, COSC certification provides the customer a guarentee that the manufacturer's claims are valid. That added value is no different than say FDA approved, NIST traceble, UL certified, or any one of a number certifications many industries seek.
    IAvictorinox likes this.

  10. #9
    HAQ and AW moderator
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    7,207

    Re: Is this the new defintion and direction of this forum.

    Older watches are not necessarily expected to meet modern specs. We still discuss them.
    dicioccio likes this.

  11. #10
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    3,088

    Re: Is this the new defintion and direction of this forum.

    I want to clarify, that it may seem I'm being a little hard on Certina. I don't want to give the impression I don't like the brand and watches. I really like mine, and am not disappointed that it routinely runs in the 15-20 s/yr range as opposed to the 10 s/yr Precidrive specs.

    Perhaps I'm a little concerned that Certina, Tissot, and other current watches would be considered non HAQ, with 10 s/yr requirement, that nearly none of them will meet. I would think 10X times as accurate as a normal watch should be adequate.

Page 1 of 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

    Similar Threads

    1. Look what the heck I just found! Is this a new model?>>
      By rex in forum High Accuracy Quartz watches
      Replies: 5
      Last Post: October 5th, 2008, 19:08
    2. Replies: 13
      Last Post: January 14th, 2008, 01:38
    3. Replies: 18
      Last Post: October 1st, 2007, 12:02
    4. The New Before and After
      By Tellog in forum Officine Panerai
      Replies: 1
      Last Post: December 7th, 2006, 07:00
    5. Airwolf? Is this the new addition? any info?...
      By TimeOnTarget in forum Breitling
      Replies: 4
      Last Post: May 2nd, 2006, 04:46

    Posting Permissions

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