On 7/10/2011 4:10 PM, Hal Murray wrote:
omni...@gmail.com said:
Then there is this little number...
http://forums.watchnet.com/index.php?t=tree&goto=415170&rid=0
> From their web page:
The power reserve is 52 hours, and the watch is actually very accurate
at about plus or minus 4 seconds a day.
4 seconds per day? I'd expected better from a very expensive watch. Are
belts nasty when it comes to keeping good time?
I wear a $50 watch that is a radio controlled "atomic" watch. Less than
1/2 a second off at any time, it's plenty good enough for normal human
affairs. It's the only watch (so far) that I found to be satisfyingly
accurate. I use it as my "ship's chronometer" when I drive and
potentially have to use one of Chicago's parking pay boxes or to
deliberately time my arrival into a free parking spot that depends on
timing to get. (i.e. the school zone parking tactic)
4 seconds off a day? If it's a Rolex, I'd (understandably) be PISSED!!!
I'd expect a watch that damn expensive to be off less than the 5
milliseconds to grab the WWVB signal! After all, isn't the whole purpose
of a watch is to keep time? Unless, I suppose, you really want the bling
factor... (and I'm not into bling)
_______________________________________________
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.
