It's nice that someone is writing about HAQs, of course, but the article was so heavily riddled with errors that I would hardly know where to start in attempting to correct the misconceptions.
Ask me about 4 MHz watches
Nice read. Thanks for posting.
If I bleat when I speak, it's because I've just been fleeced!
A nice article.
Odd to feature the discontinued Z-33 rather than the current X-33 Skywalker.
Staying quiet for a while...
Always enjoyable to read about highly accurate quartz watches. The author shows the limits of his research when he characterizes production of and interest in haqs as something recent.Over the past decade-plus, there have been some fascinating developments in the quartz sphere that have led to a new field of watches called HAQ (High Accuracy Quartz) that make precision the primary objective.
The article would be better if the author spent a couple evenings reading the stickies on this forum. Still, any publicity is good publicity.
"Never go to sea with two chronometers; take one or three." - Fred Brooks
I've also got a real problem if he trumpets the Precisionist...but then skips the PreciDrives altogether. Which are more accurate, at COSC standard if not in the more rigid standard he states. Plus, the chronograph movements are rated to 10 SPY.
There's a rather nasty backhanded insult leveled against COSC certification...it's not 10 SPY so it's not HAQ.
It feels like he *did* do a cursory review here, and that was about it.
I dropped a few pointed remarks. We shall see if they actually publish the comment.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)