No, it doesn't. A $10 quartz watch is far more accurate. If you read TimeZone.com, the various discussion forums, you'll see that the interest in mechanical watches, or horology in general, is all about craftsmanship.
In Seattle some years ago I attended a local gathering of TimeZone people - we all had our watches on the table, distributed among our dinner plates. One amusing comment that was made was "not a single one of us knew or cared what time it was."
With mechanical watches, the appeal and the expense is mostly in the "complications". - mechanical functions that go beyond indicating simple hour, minute, second. Things like diamonds and other bling don't mean squat to enthusiasts. For example, back in 1999 I wanted the Ulysse Nardin GMT Perpetual. Imagine a watch that not only gave you 24-hour time, but gave you a *mechanical* perpetual calendar that accounted for days of the month plus correct leap year calculations. Not only that, suppose it is Dec. 31, 1999 at 23:00 hours - with "Dec", "31", and "99" displayed in individual windows. Now press the "+" pusher once and the windows show "Jan", "01", and "00" - it's advanced properly to the next hour, day, month, and year, all mechanically. Pressing the "-" pusher undoes this. This feature is mostly for readjusting the time for DST, geographic region, or just resetting a stopped watch, but the mechanics to do a true perpetual calendar are amazing. I can write code to do that on a microprocessor easily and the watch would cost $20, but who cares? There are all sorts of complications, all sorts of internal designs, and that's what makes the hobby fascinating, enjoyable,and worthwhile. BTW, the UN GMT Perpetual back then was only $27,000. There are far more complex and expensive watches.
EDIT: more info here,
http://www.timezone.com/2002/09/17/the-ulysse-nardin-gmt-perpetual-limited-edition/
No, it doesn't. A $10 quartz watch is far more accurate. If you read TimeZone.com, the various discussion forums, you'll see that the interest in mechanical watches, or horology in general, is all about craftsmanship.
In Seattle some years ago I attended a local gathering of TimeZone people - we all had our watches on the table, distributed among our dinner plates. One amusing comment that was made was "not a single one of us knew or cared what time it was."
With mechanical watches, the appeal and the expense is mostly in the "complications". - mechanical functions that go beyond indicating simple hour, minute, second. Things like diamonds and other bling don't mean squat to enthusiasts. For example, back in 1999 I wanted the Ulysse Nardin GMT Perpetual. Imagine a watch that not only gave you 24-hour time, but gave you a *mechanical* perpetual calendar that accounted for days of the month plus correct leap year calculations. Not only that, suppose it is Dec. 31, 1999 at 23:00 hours - with "Dec", "31", and "99" displayed in individual windows. Now press the "+" pusher once and the windows show "Jan", "01", and "00" - it's advanced properly to the next hour, day, month, and year, all mechanically. Pressing the "-" pusher undoes this. This feature is mostly for readjusting the time for DST, geographic region, or just resetting a stopped watch, but the mechanics to do a true perpetual calendar are amazing. I can write code to do that on a microprocessor easily and the watch would cost $20, but who cares? There are all sorts of complications, all sorts of internal designs, and that's what makes the hobby fascinating, enjoyable,and worthwhile. BTW, the UN GMT Perpetual back then was only $27,000. There are far more complex and expensive watches.
EDIT: more info here,
http://www.timezone.com/2002/09/17/the-ulysse-nardin-gmt-perpetual-limited-edition/
I don't know about the Omega mechanical watch but I know about accuracy of quartz watch. Most of the $10 quartz watch can keep time to about 1 sec a day or better. I read some where that a well adjusted mechanical watch accuracy is about 5 secs a day ...
In the 1960s I had need for time accurate to a second or two. The National Bureau of Standards broadcasts from WWV and WWVH were often available, but a watch would have been more convenient. A Bulova Accutron sounded ideal. In practice it was unreliable and too inaccurate.
Five seconds is good. The better mechanical watches are submitted by their manufacturer for COSC Certification,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COSC
That is a good link that describes the process and standards.
The rate at which a watch will gain or lose time also depends on its position (dial up, down, etc., while being worn).
To counteract position variation, an extremely expensive complication is the tourbillon - whereby the entire escapement mechanism rotates through 360 degrees. To see one of these operate in real life is almost magical.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tourbillon
I have a number of HP calculators but I had the 41C which was stolen. I replaced it with a 41CV with the time module. I have a number of 41CX with Opt 001. I sold them all but one. After fine tuning the 41 clock I could get it accurate to something like 2 seconds a year.
Me too. Love the RB67!Theo Sulphate, you use an RB67 for street photography!?! You must be very fit.
They're cheap; what's stopping you?I want one!
I want one!
I constantly need to meter bees ...
They're cheap; what's stopping you?
Flavio81,my Nikkormats with Nikkor lenses will outshoot your RB67 any day, and unlike you, I do not have a hernia...
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?