![]() |
August 07, 2012 04:02PM |
![]() ![]() |
Caveman001 | 783 | August 07, 2012 04:02PM |
![]() It should be the standard, not the exception. Quartz oscillates at such a
high frequency, it should really not gain or lose any time in 5 weeks,
in my opinion. What strikes me funny is that it has done this despite
the fact that it has not been on your wrist much. You see, without being
thermo-compensated, they still know the approximate temperature the
watch will be running at when it is on one's wrist.
This makes me believe that if you WORE it for 5 weeks, it would not run as well. --> Designed to be a safe queen. That, or you're wrong, and it IS thermo-compensated. ![]() |
Smaug | 38 | August 07, 2012 08:31PM |
![]() ![]() Wrong?
![]() Surely you jest! ![]() There is a thermo-compensated version of that module, but it carries a different caliber number (251.232). BTW are you aware that the addition of thermo-compensation carries a significant penalty in power consumption? 'tis so. It can range from 5% to more than 20% depending on the specific movement.
Ahhhh.. I've worn it quite a lot, actually. At least a week straight when I first got it, and several times a week since.
Doesn't necessarily follow.
Thermo-compensation is quite a subtle thing in operation. It's not
intended for gross calibration of the movement, but to optimize in the
last few percentage points. Seiko 8F3* movements will go ± 20 sec/year,
for instance, and they're not thermo-compensated. Same deal for the
Bulova Precisionist movements, though by some reports their accuracy
specs are.. well, "optimistic" let's say.
![]() ![]() |
Caveman001 | 57 | August 08, 2012 08:12AM |
![]() |
jackrobinson | 44 | August 08, 2012 12:08AM |
![]() ![]() |
James T. Kirk© | 40 | August 08, 2012 01:50AM |
![]() |
JY | 35 | August 08, 2012 02:56AM |
![]() While I admit I've never actually tried one..
![]() ..they just look wrong to me, somehow. ![]()
"Smitten" is not too strong a term.
![]() ![]() ![]() |
Caveman001 | 35 | August 08, 2012 05:32AM |
![]() ![]() |
JY | 40 | August 08, 2012 05:48AM |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Perhaps I'll try on after all... ![]() |
Caveman001 | 32 | August 08, 2012 07:54AM |