Accuracy on Breitling Aerospace
Clyde R. Shappee
What is the specified accuracy on a Breitling Aerospace? Is it
specified?
I wear the watch 24 hours/day, except when in the shower.
I bought mine a year ago and it was slow 3s/week. I wrote the factory
in July stating my dissatisfaction, and a request for repair,
adjustment, or movement replacement. I got a terse written reply from
the factory saying that my requests would be met.
I got a phone call from the Connecticut office and was told to return
the watch, as it was out of tolerance; "It should be on".
I sent them the watch, in November and got an E-mail from the service
manager saying the watch was in tolerance of 180s per year. He
contacted the factory, and got a quote for an upgrade to the SuperQuartz
movement. Too expensive.
/\//\/\/\/\/\
I have noticed that the accuracy has improved now to 2 seconds per week
(this was in July, and now) and I am wondering if the quartz crystal is
just aging in the right direction, and I should just be patient.
/\/\//\//\/
I _love_ the watch. I hated to be without it while the
Connecticut office pulled my chain.
I just don't see the point in have the super cool feature of being able
to change time zones, preserving the seconds setting, if the watch is
going to drift so badly.
/\/\/\//
I have other quartz watches that are dead on after 180 days, on or off
a body.
What say you fellow Aerospace owners?
Clyde
Jim Wayda
year and it is subjected to a high range of temperatures.
"Clyde R. Shappee" <cly...@world.std.com> wrote in message
news:3E09F9AB...@world.std.com...
Scott A. Ekleberry
do you expect this thing to keep time???
--
Scott A. Ekleberry-Watchmaker
It's About Time! Watch Repair
www.itsabouttimeonline.com
sae...@woh.rr.com
"Clyde R. Shappee" <cly...@world.std.com> wrote in message
news:3E09F9AB...@world.std.com...
Clyde R. Shappee
in 180 days, and a US ARMY issue Swiss movement watch that is good for 2
seconds in the same period.
I read that a COSC certified quartz movement is to be +/- 0.2 seconds per day,
so I'd be happy with 36 seconds in a half a year... but expect better,
especially since the watch is always on my wrist.
Clyde
Scott A. Ekleberry
thing I can speculate is you are timing it against an atomic clock. I all
fairness to Breitling (even though I despise their parts policies), the
temperature alone could throw it off that much, or even your body heat. The
thing may be dead-on on their timing machine. I admit I'm not familiar with
the watch, but if you want precision down to the very .01 second then maybe
you should get one of those atomic watches everyone brags up. Just
wondering, why do you need it to be that accurate??
--
Scott A. Ekleberry-Watchmaker
It's About Time! Watch Repair
www.itsabouttimeonline.com
sae...@woh.rr.com
"Clyde R. Shappee" <cly...@world.std.com> wrote in message
news:3E0A07FE...@world.std.com...
Clyde R. Shappee
I compare it to Radio station WWV, from NIST.
I guess my expectations are that it would be better, that is all... After all,
it is an expensive Swiss watch, wouldn't you expect it to be better?
Do you have one and how accurate is yours, or do you just not care?
As for the atomic watches, they are ugly, not as stylish as the Aerospace, and
don't have the features.
Scott A. Ekleberry
other threads on here you will begin to realize that many of these "high
priced" quartz watches have cheap movements in them, some costing $10 or
less (TAG comes to mind). The movement in yours is probably one of the
"higher grade" quartz movements (if there is such a thing) costing around
$100-$150. Throw in a case they have about $50 in and you get THEIR cost to
make the watch. I don't know what you paid, and really it isn't any of my
business. My point here is that "high grade" quartz watches are over priced
at the very least, and often don't keep any better time than a $20 quartz at
Wal-Mart. I have heard of some of them keeping atrocious time, so 2 seconds
a week seems pretty damn good (and it probably isn't going to get better to
be honest), and a LOT better than almost any mechanical watch is capable of.
--
Scott A. Ekleberry-Watchmaker
It's About Time! Watch Repair
www.itsabouttimeonline.com
sae...@woh.rr.com
"Clyde R. Shappee" <cly...@world.std.com> wrote in message
news:3E0A1173...@world.std.com...
Thore B. Karlsen
<sae...@woh.rr.com> wrote:
>Well, it may be expensive, but that doesn't make it great. If you read the
>other threads on here you will begin to realize that many of these "high
>priced" quartz watches have cheap movements in them, some costing $10 or
>less (TAG comes to mind). The movement in yours is probably one of the
>"higher grade" quartz movements (if there is such a thing) costing around
>$100-$150. Throw in a case they have about $50 in and you get THEIR cost to
>make the watch. I don't know what you paid, and really it isn't any of my
>business. My point here is that "high grade" quartz watches are over priced
>at the very least, and often don't keep any better time than a $20 quartz at
>Wal-Mart. I have heard of some of them keeping atrocious time, so 2 seconds
>a week seems pretty damn good (and it probably isn't going to get better to
>be honest), and a LOT better than almost any mechanical watch is capable of.
Except my mechanical watches, most of which keep time to around 1 second
a week. :)
--
Be seeing you.
John E. Golden
> 2 seconds a week is only 104 seconds a year, less than 2 minutes. How
> well do you expect this thing to keep time???
I had a Seiko Perpetual Calendar Quartz Watch guaranteed accurate to within
20 seconds per year. At first it was only accurate to within 30 seconds per
year. I sent it back and whatever they did made it accurate to within one
second for the following year (as compared with the Naval Observatory).
Of course, this is not a matter of accuracy one needs, rather accuracy one
wants and pays for.
Regards,
John E. Golden
Scott A. Ekleberry
--
Scott A. Ekleberry-Watchmaker
It's About Time! Watch Repair
www.itsabouttimeonline.com
sae...@woh.rr.com
"Thore B. Karlsen" <s...@6581.com> wrote in message
news:tl6k0v8r8ajb3tmou...@4ax.com...
David Pendleton
I have a Chrono Colt Automatic and a Colt SuperOcean, both of which perform
miserably, in spite of regular 'Breitling maintenance'.
My CCA has recently taken to stopping while on my wrist (it only comes off
to shower), I don't even wear the SO anymore as it is completely unreliable.
I am currently composing a letter to Breitling. Others have told me this is
pointless, but I will contact them anyway.
Caveat emptor.
--
ROT13 my email address to reply: qni...@gpd.arg
"Clyde R. Shappee" <cly...@world.std.com> wrote in message
news:3E09F9AB...@world.std.com...
Thore B. Karlsen
<sae...@woh.rr.com> wrote:
>> Except my mechanical watches, most of which keep time to around 1 second
>> a week. :)
>Yeah, right. :)
No kidding. :) My IWC Portuguese chrono, my Ulysse Nardin 1846, and my
Omega Seamaster Pro were/are all between 1-2 seconds a week fast. I
haven't checked lately, that may have changed as they've broken in.
Yay ETA!
--
Be seeing you.
Jack Denver
expensive, is not marketed or warranted to be more accurate than any other
quartz watch. This model is not sold with a COSC certificate, so you are
not entitled to COSC performance. The spec on an expensive quartz watch
(except for a few special models sold a being super accurate) is 1/2
second/day. The spec on a $20 Casio is.....1/2 second / day. To get beyond
1/2 second a day (consistently - some cheaper watches, even the $20 kind,
happen to be dead on in actual wear just by luck) you need special measures
such as temperature compensated movements. Whatever money you paid for that
watch was not for super accuracy, which was never promised for that model.
All your money got you was a famous name that sponsors balloon races or
something...nothing to do with accuracy. Bretling told you to send the watch
in just to be nice but once they put it on the timer and saw it was with 1/2
sec/day they realized that you were just a pain in the ass who thought that
just because you paid a bushel of money for the watch it should meet some
arbitrary standard of performance that existed only in your mind and they
told you to shove off, and rightly so.
You have to reset the watch once every six months for daylight savings
anyway. Very few people need to know the time to within less than 1 minute
and those that really do have GPS or radio controlled clocks or reset their
watches to a known reference more often or buy superquartz movements or COSC
quartz chronometers, etc. Sorry, Clyde but spending a lot of money doesn't
entitle you to anything in this case.
"Clyde R. Shappee" <cly...@world.std.com> wrote in message
news:3E09F9AB...@world.std.com...
Scott A. Ekleberry
it. It would be a first, even mechanical chronometers are only rated for
about +/- 4 seconds per day, not 1 second a week. I don't mean to belittle
or agitate you here, but such statements may lead ALL who read this news
group to believe that ALL mechanical watches should be that accurate. Such
things just aren't the norm.
--
Scott A. Ekleberry-Watchmaker
It's About Time! Watch Repair
www.itsabouttimeonline.com
sae...@woh.rr.com
"Thore B. Karlsen" <s...@6581.com> wrote in message
news:k8qk0vgj47fa5dqqf...@4ax.com...
Jim Wayda
All of my other mechanical watches vary from 30 seconds per week to 140
seconds per week.
"Thore B. Karlsen" <s...@6581.com> wrote in message
news:k8qk0vgj47fa5dqqf...@4ax.com...
Thore B. Karlsen
<sae...@woh.rr.com> wrote:
>Well, since I don't have the watches here to check, I'll take your word for
>it. It would be a first, even mechanical chronometers are only rated for
>about +/- 4 seconds per day, not 1 second a week. I don't mean to belittle
>or agitate you here, but such statements may lead ALL who read this news
>group to believe that ALL mechanical watches should be that accurate. Such
>things just aren't the norm.
No, absolutely not. I've just been lucky. On the opposite end of the
spectrum, my JLC is about 10 seconds fast a day. Actually I'm not sure
exactly how inaccurate it is, because quite frankly it's so inaccurate
that I haven't even bothered measuring it since the last overhaul..
But anyhow, you are of course aware that even if a watch is only
guaranteed to perform within a certain range, that's not to say it can't
do better. Based on what I've heard from other people, while it isn't
the norm for mechanical watches to be this accurate, it's by no means
unheard of.
--
Be seeing you.
John E. Golden
It is not a matter of accuracy one needs, rather accuracy one wants and
thinks one is paying for.
I had a Seiko Perpetual Calendar Quartz Watch guaranteed accurate to
within 20 seconds per year. At first it was only accurate to within 30
seconds per year. I sent it back and whatever they did made it accurate
to within one second for the following year (as compared with the Naval
Observatory).
Regards,
John E. Golden
Jack Denver
the manufacturer has actually promised. In your case, the manufacturer
promised 20 sec/yr, so you were entitled to it. In this man's case, even
though he paid more than you and thinks he is entitled to super accuracy,
the manufacturer made no such promise to him and he is entitled to nothing
more than what he already has - an overpriced watch that runs within 1/2
sec/day.
"John E. Golden" <john....@NOSPAMatt.net> wrote in message
news:Xns92F023CE63...@204.127.36.1...
Jack Denver
wrist because the positional and temperature variations somehow cancel each
other out for a particular user and wear patterns. On a timing machine, such
a watch would show normal variation between positions, but some will be
slightly + and others slightly -. To the user, it seems like he has found
the impossible mechanical watch that is dead on, but in reality all he is
doing is benefitting from the law of averages.
"Scott A. Ekleberry" <sae...@woh.rr.com> wrote in message
news:vCwO9.19491$%3.54...@twister.neo.rr.com...
Clyde R. Shappee
It wasn't until yesterday I learned of the 1/2s per day spec... and as the watch
is sitting right now at 2s per week it is in spec.
At least now I know the expectations...
Yes, I did buy an expensive watch, but I am happy with it and wouldn't trade it
for anything.... I like the look, and the features.
The thread above about ETA movements in fake watches was an eye opener.
Clyde
Richard J. Sexton (At work)
>
>I have a Chrono Colt Automatic and a Colt SuperOcean, both of which perform
>miserably, in spite of regular 'Breitling maintenance'.
>
>My CCA has recently taken to stopping while on my wrist (it only comes off
>to shower), I don't even wear the SO anymore as it is completely unreliable.
>I am currently composing a letter to Breitling. Others have told me this is
>pointless, but I will contact them anyway.
>
>Caveat emptor.
Caveat: I loathe Breitlings, with a passion.
A friend of mine bought a Chronomat last summer. He has
3 requirements for a watch:
1) 100M water resistance
2) Tritium
3) 1s/day accuray out of the box (sure, anybody can tweak
a watch to get there but...)
While there are a few things to not love about this
watch (sloppy typical 7750 hand setting being the worst
thing) he is impressed at the out of the box 1S/day accuracy.
--
Richard Sexton | Mercedes Parts: http://parts.mbz.org
http://www.mbz.org Mailing lists: http://lists.mbz.org
W108, W126 Mercedes Classifieds: http://ads.mbz.org
** new --> Watch list: http://watches.list.mbz.org
Doru Roll
ALL watches which are "0 gainers" on the wrist are ALWAYS "gainers" off the
wrist. I'm not going to explain why; just take it on faith.
Happy Kwanza!
Doru Roll
"Jack Denver" <nunu...@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:XoGcnadhf-1...@comcast.com...
Jack Denver
down off the wrist. As they run down they lose amplitude and gain time...is
this what you were referring to?
But few people wear their watches 24/7, so they tend to end up with slight
gains overnight. These can be modified somewhat by choosing the night
storage position that gives you the best overall results.
"Doru Roll" <doru...@optonline.net> wrote in message
news:ZQIO9.159483$a8.1...@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net...
Jack Denver
that the watch was 1s/ day on his wrist was just a matter of luck that his
wear pattern happened to match the factory timing. If he sold the watch to
me and I wore it on my right wrist and had a different activity level, sleep
pattern, kept the watch in a different position at night, etc. it might be
6s off /day without touching the regulator. In other words, this means
exactly nothing - your friends good luck and this poor fellows bad luck are
each samples of one and convey no useful information about the quality or
reliability of the Breitling brand.
BTW, your friend could have met his criteria with a Luminox starting at
about $125.
"Richard J. Sexton (At work)" <ric...@vrx.news> wrote in message
news:H7qJB...@T-FCN.Net...
Doru Roll
ALL watches: manual wind, automatics (even on the automatic winder) and (I
know this will start a new flame, so let's fan it) quartz.
Te traihles baxtalo,
Doru Roll
"Jack Denver" <nunu...@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:BtScnb7xKYg...@comcast.com...
John Miller
> ALL watches which are "0 gainers" on the wrist are ALWAYS "gainers" off
> the wrist. I'm not going to explain why; just take it on faith.
Hi, Doru --
Don't you know that all generalizations are always false? :-)
I know where you're coming from with *your* generalization, but many
mechanical watches will have a position (one of the six) that's slower than
when being worn.
--
John Miller, N4VU
"At least they're ___________ EXPERIENCED incompetents"
Doru Roll
Yeah. You obviously did not read the thread.
This is not *my* generalization. It is the way *ALL* watches labeled
"ADJUSTED" are regulated at the factory. Quartz watches, although almost
always are labeled "UNADJUSTED", also follow this "rule": +0.2sec/day at
25°C ±1°C as indicated by the timing machine.
This is an "average" setting, if timed in more than one position, or the
average of "dial up" (adjusted) and "crown down" (just measured).
Please consult ISO 3159:1976 (mechanical) and ISO/TR 10553:1995 (quartz) for
further information. If everyone here did their research beforehand, a lot
less andwidth would be wasted.
Lacho drom,
Doru Roll
"John Miller" <NOS...@n4vu.com> wrote in message
news:1dMO9.1657$982....@tornadotest1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
John Miller
> Yeah. You obviously did not read the thread.
Nothing obvious about it. Of course I read the thread.
> This is not my generalization. It is the way ALL watches labeled
> "ADJUSTED" are regulated at the factory. Quartz watches, although almost
> always are labeled "UNADJUSTED", also follow this "rule": +0.2sec/day at
> 25C 1C as indicated by the timing machine.
Yeah, but YOUR generalization was, and I quote,
"ALL watches which are "0 gainers" on the wrist are ALWAYS "gainers"
off he wrist."
Obviously false.
--
John Miller, N4VU
The main problem I have with cats is, they're not dogs.
-- Kevin Cowherd
Doru Roll
I got my license in 1974. I did not renew it since 1995. Too many no-code
EXTRAs out there. All running kW+ A3. All not knowing what they're talking
about. And all having an opinion.
SK N4VU DE ***** CL,
Doru Roll
Jack Denver
Nothing requires a watch factory in say China or Russia to adhere to ISO
standards anyway.
I'd love to read the ISOs but they appear to be some kind of state secret
that you have to pay $25 to see...shameful in the age of
internet...information wants to be free.
"Doru Roll" <doru...@optonline.net> wrote in message
news:0FMO9.161757$a8.1...@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net...
Doru Roll
I agree with your sentiments. Having to pay or "subscribe" to get any
"public" document (ISO standard, US patent, etc.) is ridiculous. But that's
the way it is. And it benefits only the "Beltway Bandits" and their like.
Regards,
Doru Roll
"Jack Denver" <nunu...@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:MSCdnSU-S6K...@comcast.com...
Doru Roll
It is +23° ±1°C, not 25°! But what's 1° amongst friends.
Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa.
Doru Roll
"Doru Roll" <doru...@optonline.net> wrote in message
news:0FMO9.161757$a8.1...@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net...
Jack Forster
>From: Thore B. Karlsen s...@6581.com
>Date: 12/25/2002 9:36 PM Eastern Standard Time
>Message-id: <k8qk0vgj47fa5dqqf...@4ax.com>
Thore, I think we have to kill you now. You have too many nice watches, they
run better than any mortal deserves, and you seem far too serene about life in
general for the tempest-in-a-teapot kaffeklatsch that is alt.horology.
:-)
Jack Forster
NYS Licensed Acupuncturist
www.haelth.com
Clyde R. Shappee
I am fueling that fire.
Patents are free online.... I have not figured out how to get figures yet (it's
me). But at $3 per copy printed, mailed to me, I cannot complain.
Clyde
Richard J. Sexton (At work)
Jack Denver <nunu...@netscape.net> wrote:
>As you say, almost any watch can be regulated to keep better time. The fact
>that the watch was 1s/ day on his wrist was just a matter of luck that his
>wear pattern happened to match the factory timing. If he sold the watch to
>me and I wore it on my right wrist and had a different activity level, sleep
>pattern, kept the watch in a different position at night, etc. it might be
>6s off /day without touching the regulator. In other words, this means
>exactly nothing - your friends good luck and this poor fellows bad luck are
>each samples of one and convey no useful information about the quality or
>reliability of the Breitling brand.
Maybe, maybe not.
>
>BTW, your friend could have met his criteria with a Luminox starting at
Not with a 7750.
Jack Denver
is what you are looking for, what difference does the caliber of the
movement make?