# New HAQ from Wempe



## Tom-HK (Jan 6, 2015)

I see that the quartz version of the new Wempe Iron Walker has an ETA E64.111.

Not a bad looking watch, though I am wondering if this is the best ETA movement they could have sourced for a $2,000 watch. How do the contenders stack up? I'm not all that up-to-date with the latest ETA movements.

https://www2.wempe.com/en/watches/b...a/iron-walker/wi000006_iron-walker-quartz-men


----------



## watchcrank_tx (Sep 1, 2012)

Tom-HK said:


> I see that the quartz version of the new Wempe Iron Walker has am ETA E64.111.
> 
> Not a bad looking watch, though I am wondering if this is the best ETA movement they could have sourced for a $2,000 watch. How do the contenders stack up? I'm not all that up-to-date with the latest ETA movements.
> 
> https://www2.wempe.com/en/watches/b...a/iron-walker/wi000006_iron-walker-quartz-men


Available in both 36mm and 40mm, in blue, black, or white dials. They look rather sensational IMO, and if they have the quality typical of recent Wempe watches, they will be worth the price, more for the overall package than for being HAQ. There are better HAQs for less money of course.


----------



## gangrel (Jun 25, 2015)

Mmm...glad you reminded me, I wanted to check these out.

E64 is a Flatline, which are their high-end movements. Brass, 8 jewels, < 2 mm thick, so Wempe is getting 100m WR in less than a 10 mm case. BTW, it's the same movement in both sizes, 40 and 36, and the 36 uses basically the same design. So if you have a smaller wrist, like me, the 36 is a very tempting choice.

WatchBase shows that Sinn's also using it in their 434 ladies' quartz models.

Wouldn't surprise me that, yes, this is the best ETA would sell them.


----------



## chris01 (Jan 5, 2011)

Tom-HK said:


> I see that the quartz version of the new Wempe Iron Walker has am ETA E64.111.
> 
> Not a bad looking watch, though I am wondering if this is the best ETA movement they could have sourced for a $2,000 watch. How do the contenders stack up? I'm not all that up-to-date with the latest ETA movements.
> 
> https://www2.wempe.com/en/watches/b...a/iron-walker/wi000006_iron-walker-quartz-men


ETA 64.111 is available in PreciDrive and non-PreciDrive versions. No indication so far which it is. No IAHH, of course.

https://shopb2b.eta.ch/technical_documents/index/pdf/id/2177/


----------



## Tom-HK (Jan 6, 2015)

Does its being a certified quartz chronometer not suggest that it is the PreciDrive version? Or am I being a bit dim?

(Yes, shame about the lack of IAHH, but it's slim pickings, these days)


----------



## Barbababa (Jan 6, 2019)

chris01 said:


> ETA 64.111 is available in PreciDrive and non-PreciDrive versions. No indication so far which it is. No IAHH, of course.
> 
> https://shopb2b.eta.ch/technical_documents/index/pdf/id/2177/


I am pretty sure it´s the precidrive, same as in my Longines La Grande Presence. And just like the Zeitmeister Quarz that was chronometer certified, I think this one is to. So it most likely is precidrive. And I think the E64.111 that´s NOT precidrive is lacking date (or was it seconds hand?)


----------



## Barbababa (Jan 6, 2019)

I have contacted them to get a price and some specs. If everything is what I think I will get the 36mm version. I have traded the Zeitmeister I had, but that was a very nice watch, I´m sure this is to


----------



## ronalddheld (May 5, 2005)

No money for those watches. I am curious what the owners will think of them.


----------



## watchcrank_tx (Sep 1, 2012)

Barbababa said:


> I have contacted them to get a price and some specs. If everything is what I think I will get the 36mm version. I have traded the Zeitmeister I had, but that was a very nice watch, I´m sure this is to
> View attachment 15155059


Please keep up apprised of the answers and your journey forward if you take it. I find this watch - in fact the entire family aside from the chronograph - rather intriguing.


----------



## gangrel (Jun 25, 2015)

There's a fair bit of criticism WRT the bracelet over on the German Watch forum...limited adjustability appears to be the case. And it's not strap-friendly, which is certainly understandable when the whole point is "integrated steel sports watch that still looks great with a suit." 

And if you can fiddle the length to what works for you...I suspect it'd wear beautifully. The L2L is only 46, so it should ride very nicely.

Well.

The good news is...I'm not particularly tempted without being able to try it on. And that's going to have to wait until I get to New York. Well, there's a first for anything, right?


----------



## tomchicago (Feb 15, 2010)

You can buy that movement for $55 USD here: ETA E64.111 Watch Movement

It's from ETA's Flatline range.

I had a horrendous experience at Wempe on 5th Ave once which leaves me very leery of all that they do.


----------



## Barbababa (Jan 6, 2019)

gangrel said:


> There's a fair bit of criticism WRT the bracelet over on the German Watch forum...limited adjustability appears to be the case. And it's not strap-friendly, which is certainly understandable when the whole point is "integrated steel sports watch that still looks great with a suit."
> 
> And if you can fiddle the length to what works for you...I suspect it'd wear beautifully. The L2L is only 46, so it should ride very nicely.
> 
> ...


It´s almost always the same with new releases, if it´s not the size it´s the strap ability or the bracelet/lack of micro adjustment ;-)
I for one think that you sometimes need to look at a watch for what it is and not always what you want. There have not been a serious quartz contender with integrated bracelet in this category for a long time. The Maurice Lacroix Aikon did not have the same finish as the automatic and it was housing a Ronda. And it is way to big. WEMPE is authorized to work on all the "big three" and even had a branded Patek, so quality is going to be good. In my watch-box this Iron Walker could relive my Chronomaster CTQ57-0853 from the worries of every day carry 
I will post what WEMPE says in our conversation if it´s anything useful.


----------



## OutOfSpec (Mar 11, 2018)

tomchicago said:


> You can buy that movement for $55 USD here: ETA E64.111 Watch Movement
> 
> It's from ETA's Flatline range.
> 
> I had a horrendous experience at Wempe on 5th Ave once which leaves me very leery of all that they do.


I'd be curious to understand what your experience was. I had a few pleasant interactions there - just bracelet resizing, but they were nice about it.

As to the major differential between price of the movement and the price of the watch, I'd expect that to be pretty normal.


----------



## OutOfSpec (Mar 11, 2018)

tomchicago said:


> You can buy that movement for $55 USD here: ETA E64.111 Watch Movement
> 
> It's from ETA's Flatline range.
> 
> I had a horrendous experience at Wempe on 5th Ave once which leaves me very leery of all that they do.


I'd be curious to understand what your experience was. I had a few pleasant interactions there - just bracelet resizing, but they were nice about it.

As to the major differential between price of the movement and the price of the watch, I'd expect that to be pretty normal.


----------



## ronalddheld (May 5, 2005)

tomchicago said:


> You can buy that movement for $55 USD here: ETA E64.111 Watch Movement
> 
> It's from ETA's Flatline range.
> 
> I had a horrendous experience at Wempe on 5th Ave once which leaves me very leery of all that they do.


I may not Go to the 5 the avenue store based on your experience


----------



## ronalddheld (May 5, 2005)

tomchicago said:


> You can buy that movement for $55 USD here: ETA E64.111 Watch Movement
> 
> It's from ETA's Flatline range.
> 
> I had a horrendous experience at Wempe on 5th Ave once which leaves me very leery of all that they do.


I may not Go to the 5 the avenue store based on your experience


----------



## tomchicago (Feb 15, 2010)

Your mileage may vary. I went in there to look at a Calatrava and a Day Date. The German saleslady was absolutely furious that I hadn't already made up my mind before entering the store. One of the Calatravas had a sub dial and I asked if it was ok to wind it to see it tick. She snapped the watch out of my hand and proceeded to wind it so aggressively to the point that I was afraid it would break. Then she went on to set the time in the same manner. There was no way I would have bought that watch even at half price after witnessing that. I wouldn't be surprised if gear teeth had been damaged. It left me so creeped out that I've never returned to the store and wince every time I see the name Wempe. I ended up buying a Day Date from another dealer. In retrospect, I think she was fuming because there was a group of customers from the Middle East in the store and she marked me as a local loser waste of time relative to them.

That said-- I'm glad to see the ETA Flatlines being put into watches. It's a very good looking watch except for the extra large crown.



ronalddheld said:


> I may not Go to the 5 the avenue store based on your experience


----------



## Barbababa (Jan 6, 2019)

@tomchicago That really sucks, but it was their loss I guess. You should have sent the head office i Germany an angry mail with that salespersons name...
I have been in contact with Hamburg and they are sending my (Iron Walker) watch as soon as they have the funds in their account. The last time I spoke on the phone with them, and this time I had mail converstions with the same lady. Very helpful and super nice. And ready to make a deal with a returning customer ;-)


----------



## Mr.Jones82 (Jul 15, 2018)

Barbababa said:


> @tomchicago That really sucks, but it was their loss I guess. You should have sent the head office i Germany an angry mail with that salespersons name...
> I have been in contact with Hamburg and they are sending my (Iron Walker) watch as soon as they have the funds in their account. The last time I spoke on the phone with them, and this time I had mail converstions with the same lady. Very helpful and super nice. And ready to make a deal with a returning customer ;-)


Wow, congrats! I hope you do a a review and give us some photos! I'm really interested in it. To be,honest, there really isn't room in my collection for it and I already have too much redundancy, but this is one of the first HAQs I've been excited about in a while.


----------



## ronalddheld (May 5, 2005)

tomchicago said:


> Your mileage may vary. I went in there to look at a Calatrava and a Day Date. The German saleslady was absolutely furious that I hadn't already made up my mind before entering the store. One of the Calatravas had a sub dial and I asked if it was ok to wind it to see it tick. She snapped the watch out of my hand and proceeded to wind it so aggressively to the point that I was afraid it would break. Then she went on to set the time in the same manner. There was no way I would have bought that watch even at half price after witnessing that. I wouldn't be surprised if gear teeth had been damaged. It left me so creeped out that I've never returned to the store and wince every time I see the name Wempe. I ended up buying a Day Date from another dealer. In retrospect, I think she was fuming because there was a group of customers from the Middle East in the store and she marked me as a local loser waste of time relative to them.
> 
> That said-- I'm glad to see the ETA Flatlines being put into watches. It's a very good looking watch except for the extra large crown.


This is more discouraging. However, by the time it is safe to go to NYC, I might not remember about this incident.


----------



## Barbababa (Jan 6, 2019)

Mr.Jones82 said:


> Wow, congrats! I hope you do a a review and give us some photos! I'm really interested in it. To be,honest, there really isn't room in my collection for it and I already have too much redundancy, but this is one of the first HAQs I've been excited about in a while.


I will try to do a review when it arrives and have been worn a day or two 
I still have a few modern automatics in my collection that I am selling off. I want to keep the "modern" box quartz only, while the vintage box may contain some mechanical ;-)


----------



## OutOfSpec (Mar 11, 2018)

tomchicago said:


> Your mileage may vary. I went in there to look at a Calatrava and a Day Date. The German saleslady was absolutely furious that I hadn't already made up my mind before entering the store. One of the Calatravas had a sub dial and I asked if it was ok to wind it to see it tick. She snapped the watch out of my hand and proceeded to wind it so aggressively to the point that I was afraid it would break. Then she went on to set the time in the same manner. There was no way I would have bought that watch even at half price after witnessing that. I wouldn't be surprised if gear teeth had been damaged. It left me so creeped out that I've never returned to the store and wince every time I see the name Wempe. I ended up buying a Day Date from another dealer. In retrospect, I think she was fuming because there was a group of customers from the Middle East in the store and she marked me as a local loser waste of time relative to them.
> 
> That said-- I'm glad to see the ETA Flatlines being put into watches. It's a very good looking watch except for the extra large crown.


Wow. That's terrible. Customer service is so important in these type of sales, and how could she know that you didn't have intention to buy? Also, this is a good reason not to buy the display watch from the store!

Anyhow, I wouldn't expect Wempe on 5th Avenue to be open for quite some time.


----------



## OutOfSpec (Mar 11, 2018)

Barbababa said:


> I will try to do a review when it arrives and have been worn a day or two
> I still have a few modern automatics in my collection that I am selling off. I want to keep the "modern" box quartz only, while the vintage box may contain some mechanical ;-)


Congratulations! Looking forward to your review. This looks like a really nice HAQ.


----------



## gangrel (Jun 25, 2015)

No argument it was terrible customer service but it was also one sales person. Who may no longer be there...even without considerations of the current difficulties.


----------



## wbird (Feb 25, 2015)

Just curious how does the movement in this watch compare to the F06.411 found in a Certina. The Wempe is an attractive watch and no doubt has superior finish and dial work to the three hand chronometer grade DS Action Certina that goes for under $300 dollars on a bracelet, but is there more to it.


----------



## tomchicago (Feb 15, 2010)

The Flatline movement in the Wempe is of higher quality than the Trendline F06.411, but they're both good movements. Wempe should downsize that crown imo.



wbird said:


> Just curious how does the movement in this watch compare to the F06.411 found in a Certina. The Wempe is an attractive watch and no doubt has superior finish and dial work to the three hand chronometer grade DS Action Certina that goes for under $300 dollars on a bracelet, but is there more to it.


----------



## OutOfSpec (Mar 11, 2018)

tomchicago said:


> The Flatline movement in the Wempe is of higher quality than the Trendline F06.411, but they're both good movements. Wempe should downsize that crown imo.


Will the seconds hand on the Wempe hit the markers dead on?!! To be determined...


----------



## Barbababa (Jan 6, 2019)

OutOfSpec said:


> Will the seconds hand on the Wempe hit the markers dead on?!! To be determined...


Short answer, Yes! But probably not in the way you mean, so I say No ;-)

All *mechanical* quartz movements have a little play in the seconds hand. That means that the seconds hand will hit each marker when moving forward if the hand is positioned right from beginning, but it also means that there is a backlash play that the hand can fall back to. If you take your average quartz watch (or any mechanical quartz like the E64.111) and lay it flat on the table you will probably not notice any play. But if you rise the dial and watch the seconds hand you will se how it will rest ahead or behind the marker when stepping forward depending on how you turn the watch. Anti backlash or a break like on 9f prevents this. Engine driven movements like the VHP or the Chronomaster does not need that (or most RC calibers).

If you would have the Iron Walker on your arm while sitting and watching the seconds hand walking around the dial it will not stand on each marker, but it will move 60 steps in 60 seconds.


----------



## Barbababa (Jan 6, 2019)

OutOfSpec said:


> Will the seconds hand on the Wempe hit the markers dead on?!! To be determined...


Short answer, Yes! But probably not in the way you mean, so I say No ;-)

All *mechanical* quartz movements have a little play in the seconds hand. That means that the seconds hand will hit each marker when moving forward if the hand is positioned right from beginning, but it also means that there is a backlash play that the hand can fall back to. If you take your average quartz watch (or any mechanical quartz like the E64.111) and lay it flat on the table you will probably not notice any play. But if you rise the dial and watch the seconds hand you will se how it will rest ahead or behind the marker when stepping forward depending on how you turn the watch. Anti backlash or a break like on 9f prevents this. Engine driven movements like the VHP or the Chronomaster does not need that (or most RC calibers).

If you would have the Iron Walker on your arm while sitting and watching the seconds hand walking around the dial it will not stand on each marker, but it will move 60 steps in 60 seconds.


----------



## Nokie (Jul 4, 2011)

Looking forward to pictures and your thoughts. 

Sounds like another great Wempe watch, IMHO.


----------



## TJ Boogie (May 14, 2015)

A cool Genta-esque design, thin and looks well-finished. 2k for a HAQ chronometer that looks like that? I say yes.


----------



## blueoracle (Jan 10, 2019)

Reminds me of the blue IWC Ingenieur, but with a date window that blends in better, and an awesome HAQ movement.


----------



## Barbababa (Jan 6, 2019)

I kind of see it as a modern interpetation of the old OQ. Different bracelet design and with crownguards.
Got mail from FedEx that it will arrive tomorrow around 18:00


----------



## tomchicago (Feb 15, 2010)

The whole "big watch" trend is on the backslide for a while now. Wempe should ditch that huge crown it looks like it belongs on a different watch.



Barbababa said:


> View attachment 15161049
> 
> I kind of see it as a modern interpetation of the old OQ. Different bracelet design and with crownguards.
> Got mail from FedEx that it will arrive tomorrow around 18:00


----------



## Barbababa (Jan 6, 2019)

tomchicago said:


> The whole "big watch" trend is on the backslide for a while now. Wempe should ditch that huge crown it looks like it belongs on a different watch.


You don´t need a big crown on a quartz, and rarely on a automatic eather, I agree. But I think they did just like last time, two identical watches but one says quarz on the dial. The Zeitmeister I had was identical to the automatic i every detail but the seconds hand. Tag´s Aquaracer quartz also have the big crown for no other use than design, along with quite a few others like Citizen eco-drive divers. Probably some "tool" design some one decided on...


----------



## gangrel (Jun 25, 2015)

Barbababa said:


> You don´t need a big crown on a quartz, and rarely on a automatic eather, I agree. But I think they did just like last time, two identical watches but one says quarz on the dial. The Zeitmeister I had was identical to the automatic i every detail but the seconds hand. Tag´s Aquaracer quartz also have the big crown for no other use than design, along with quite a few others like Citizen eco-drive divers. Probably some "tool" design some one decided on...


There may be an internal difference, in the quartz having a spacer. The E64 and 2892 are listed as the same diameter, but slightly different height.

Otherwise, yes, both the 40 and 36 sizes are very likely the same. It'd be a pointless manufacturing complication to do otherwise.

I think the similarity to the OQ is also intentional...because the mechanical is very similar to a Rolex OP 39.


----------



## OutOfSpec (Mar 11, 2018)

Barbababa said:


> Short answer, Yes! But probably not in the way you mean, so I say No ;-)
> 
> All *mechanical* quartz movements have a little play in the seconds hand. That means that the seconds hand will hit each marker when moving forward if the hand is positioned right from beginning, but it also means that there is a backlash play that the hand can fall back to. If you take your average quartz watch (or any mechanical quartz like the E64.111) and lay it flat on the table you will probably not notice any play. But if you rise the dial and watch the seconds hand you will se how it will rest ahead or behind the marker when stepping forward depending on how you turn the watch. Anti backlash or a break like on 9f prevents this. Engine driven movements like the VHP or the Chronomaster does not need that (or most RC calibers).
> 
> *If you would have the Iron Walker on your arm while sitting and watching the seconds hand walking around the dial it will not stand on each marker, but it will move 60 steps in 60 seconds.*


Perhaps you can make a video of this so we can see for ourselves!


----------



## Barbababa (Jan 6, 2019)

36mm workt like a glove on my 18cm wrist


----------



## Covenant (Apr 22, 2009)

Barbababa said:


> 36mm workt like a glove on my 18cm wrist


That's gorgeous, congrats! Could you post some pics of the clasp? Any comments on how it feels on the wrist?


----------



## OutOfSpec (Mar 11, 2018)

Barbababa said:


> View attachment 15167805
> View attachment 15167807
> View attachment 15167811
> 
> 36mm workt like a glove on my 18cm wrist


Looks great and has real presence! I definitely see the resemblance to the Oyster Quartz. Does it wear bigger than you other similarly sized watches? Looking forward to a full review!


----------



## Barbababa (Jan 6, 2019)

It´s a fold over with push-lock. A small knick and a small stud followed by a sefety clasp. Does it´s job and build a minimum. The inside of the clasp is smoothen out on the edges that meets the skin, nice detail. The safety clasp has a sharp edge on the underside on the sides and on the upper longside. I have already smoothen that of, but I think they overlooked that. Or maybe it´s a QC?


----------



## Barbababa (Jan 6, 2019)

No, It wears true to size and very comfortable. The crown guards however make it _look_ a little larger along with all the steel. A white dial would probably also shange the perception of size to the bigger. I prefer the legibility with black and the over all small retro look.


----------



## tomchicago (Feb 15, 2010)

Barbababa can you please post some more distanced photos? Thank you. Nice piece!



Barbababa said:


> No, It wears true to size and very comfortable. The crown guards however make it _look_ a little larger along with all the steel. A white dial would probably also shange the perception of size to the bigger. I prefer the legibility with black and the over all small retro look.


----------



## ronalddheld (May 5, 2005)

Looks like the crown guard and integrated bracelet are more reasons to pass on it.


----------



## Covenant (Apr 22, 2009)

ronalddheld said:


> Looks like the crown guard and integrated bracelet are more reasons to pass on it.


I'm not against either integrated bracelets in general, but that clasp would irritate me, and not being able to swap out to a strap means you'd just have to live with it. So personally I think I'll pass on this one, attractive as it is.


----------



## Barbababa (Jan 6, 2019)

@tomchicago here are a few more


----------



## OutOfSpec (Mar 11, 2018)

Barbababa said:


> No, It wears true to size and very comfortable. The crown guards however make it _look_ a little larger along with all the steel. A white dial would probably also shange the perception of size to the bigger. I prefer the legibility with black and the over all small retro look.


Do most find that white dials make watches look bigger?


----------



## Barbababa (Jan 6, 2019)

I think you are right, if you want the option of strap, don´t go with this. I would have prefered a regular clasp with push buttons over this push - pull action, but once on the wrist I don´t think about it.


----------



## Barbababa (Jan 6, 2019)

yes


----------



## ronalddheld (May 5, 2005)

Barbababa said:


> yes


Is this a duplicate of incomplete post?


----------



## ronalddheld (May 5, 2005)

Barbababa said:


> yes


Is this a duplicate of incomplete post?


----------



## Barbababa (Jan 6, 2019)

ronalddheld said:


> Is this a duplicate of incomplete post?


It was an answer to "Do most find that white dials make watches look bigger? "


----------



## Barbababa (Jan 6, 2019)

I have just start looking at the details of the colour adapted date-window. Very nicely executed. No index next to it and sits in the right place. Lined with the inside of the indices. On the 40mm version it´s not as nice, and you can tell the caliber it not adapted to the case size. 36 vs 40 1-0


----------



## Josh R. (Dec 30, 2012)

Nice watch, and I appreciate the HAQ offering from Wempe I just wish they made it in grade 5 titanium with a hardness of at least 1000 Vickers!

Three questions for Elmero: (1) how's the glare off the glossy black dial? (2) how effective is the AR coating on the crystal? (3) how nicely are the dial indices finished, as well as the hands (i.e,, Grand Seiko vs. the rest)? Thanks.


----------



## Barbababa (Jan 6, 2019)

Josh R. said:


> Nice watch, and I appreciate the HAQ offering from Wempe I just wish they made it in grade 5 titanium with a hardness of at least 1000 Vickers!
> 
> Three questions for Elmero: (1) how's the glare off the glossy black dial? (2) how effective is the AR coating on the crystal? (3) how nicely are the dial indices finished, as well as the hands (i.e,, Grand Seiko vs. the rest)? Thanks.


1) It´s not glossy black, it´s sunburst black/graphite. There are pictures in the thread ;-)
2) AR is very good.
3) They are exelent, but there is only one Grand Seiko.


----------



## Devro (Jun 2, 2020)

Hi Barbababa, have you had any second thoughts on choosing the 36 over the 40 or happy with your decision? All the detail you've put on here has been really helpful. I'm getting in touch with their London branch to hopefully pull the trigger, just worrying 36 or 40. I have the same wrist size as you, which helps (18cm / 7")... Covid makes trying them on to compare tricky, so I may wait til things ease.


----------



## Barbababa (Jan 6, 2019)

Devro said:


> Hi Barbababa, have you had any second thoughts on choosing the 36 over the 40 or happy with your decision? All the detail you've put on here has been really helpful. I'm getting in touch with their London branch to hopefully pull the trigger, just worrying 36 or 40. I have the same wrist size as you, which helps (18cm / 7")... Covid makes trying them on to compare tricky, so I may wait til things ease.


The 36mm was my only choise, ticking all the boxes of a modern Oyster Quartz in my book. I am absolutly sure the 40mm will wear perfect to, but it would be a different watch all together with that bigger size. Nothing wrong with that, but for me it was not what I was looking for with this buy. I have plenty of other watches between 38-46mm to choose from when I want that  If you feel comfortable wearing a Rolex DJ 36mm or a Rolex Oyster Quartz, this WEMPE will be perfect in 36mm. Something I have notised is that the fold over clasp is rather short, that makes for a comfortable wear while on the wrist, but can be a bit tight to get on if you have big hands. Just something to consider if it´s a comon problem one has when it comes to bracelets


----------



## goyoneuff (Dec 9, 2007)

Where do you buy this watch from ? I tried online and cannot understand where ! 

Cheers. 

G.


----------



## goyoneuff (Dec 9, 2007)

Is this one thermocompensated? It this HAQ ?

Cheers.



tomchicago said:


> You can buy that movement for $55 USD here: ETA E64.111 Watch Movement
> 
> It's from ETA's Flatline range.
> 
> I had a horrendous experience at Wempe on 5th Ave once which leaves me very leery of all that they do.


----------



## Barbababa (Jan 6, 2019)

goyoneuff said:


> Is this one thermocompensated? It this HAQ ?
> 
> Cheers.


Yes it´s thermocompensated. As I understand it there is a webshop if you log on to the .DE sight. I contacted them and made my deal.


----------



## wbird (Feb 25, 2015)

goyoneuff said:


> Is this one thermocompensated? It this HAQ ?
> 
> Cheers.


Just for clarity, if it is quartz and has Chronometer on the dial it is a TC movement.


----------



## gaijin (Oct 29, 2007)

wbird said:


> Just for clarity, if it is quartz and has Chronometer on the dial it is a TC movement.


If one goes to the Wempe site: https://www2.wempe.com/en/the-company-wempe/the-family-company/wempe-glashuette/testing-facility one can see their testing criteria for quartz and mechanical watches.

They do not mention thermocompensation as a requirement for their quartz watches.

Further, the performance specs seem quite broader than even COSC - I read them to be -0.3 - +0.1 sec/day. That translates to from -109.6 - +36.5 sec/year.

So... in answer to the question as to whether the Wempe Iron Walker Quartz Chronometer is HAQ, it does not look like it meets the +10 sec/year HAQ requirement.

Honestly, I'd be happy to be proven wrong. Does anyone have any sources that support +10 sec/year performance for this watch?

HTH


----------



## Tom-HK (Jan 6, 2015)

gaijin said:


> If one goes to the Wempe site: https://www2.wempe.com/en/the-company-wempe/the-family-company/wempe-glashuette/testing-facility one can see their testing criteria for quartz and mechanical watches.
> 
> They do not mention thermocompensation as a requirement for their quartz watches.
> 
> ...


As Chris01 pointed out, the movement is available in two forms - PreciDrive (thermocompensated) or non-PreciDrive. For the non-PreciDrive version, I believe the factory spec. is +/- 15 seconds per month, whereas ETA's factory spec for their PreciDrive movements is +/-10 SPY. Wempe's quartz chronometer spec may not be as tight as COSC's, but since they cannot meet their chronometer spec with the non-PreciDrive variant of the movement then it stands to reason that they must be using the thermocompensated version.

EDIT - There was some discussion on the topic of German testing standards a while ago, but I don't think anything was resolved.


----------



## Barbababa (Jan 6, 2019)

gaijin said:


> If one goes to the Wempe site: https://www2.wempe.com/en/the-company-wempe/the-family-company/wempe-glashuette/testing-facility one can see their testing criteria for quartz and mechanical watches.
> *
> They do not mention thermocompensation as a requirement for their quartz watches*.
> 
> ...


Does any manufacturer mention that? I think thermocompensation is more of a aid in meeting the criteria that is set. than a criteria in it self.
You could always get in touch with WEMPE and ask, but I think being chronometer certified by them is good enough. And like @Tom-HK mentioned, the caliber is already specified to +/-10spy by ETA


----------



## gaijin (Oct 29, 2007)

Barbababa said:


> Does any manufacturer mention that? I think thermocompensation is more of a aid in meeting the criteria that is set. than a criteria in it self.
> You could always get in touch with WEMPE and ask, but I think being chronometer certified by them is good enough. And like @Tom-HK mentioned, the caliber is already specified to +/-10spy by ETA


In fact, for COSC certification, thermo-compensation is indeed one of the test criteria - no thermo-compensation, no certification. See all the criteria here: https://www.cosc.swiss/en/certification/quartz-movements

The sentence that makes my point from that link is:

"To acquire the COSC label, a quartz instrument must benefit from thermo-compensation and rigorous encapsulation."

And, as an aside, just because a watch gains COSC certification, does NOT mean it is also HAQ.

So... yes. Manufacturers indicate in their marketing materials when a quartz watch has a thermo-compensated movement (e.g. Breitling and Omega for two) and it is a testing criterion for COSC certification.

I can find no information from Wempe on either point - no specification including thermo-compensation and no test procedure requiring thermo-compensation for in-house certification. Other than the assumption that they are using a thermo-compensated PreciDrive movement - which is probably a valid assumption - can anyone show any proof that the Wempe Ironwalker quartz performs to +10 sec/year?

HTH


----------



## Barbababa (Jan 6, 2019)

gaijin said:


> In fact, for COSC certification, thermo-compensation is indeed one of the test criteria - no thermo-compensation, no certification. See all the criteria here: https://www.cosc.swiss/en/certification/quartz-movements
> 
> The sentence that makes my point from that link is:
> 
> ...


It´s not an assumption, it is a thermocompensated Precidrive E64.111 that is inside  As you are aware, there is no official HAQ requirement other than what we stated here. Therefore meeting COSC or Chronometer criteria (or exceed) is good enough for them I guess. If you don´t think a thermocompensated E64.111 meets those criterias there is not that much to say about it. Like I said in earlier post, if you are really that interested you can always ask WEMPE






They seem to mention temperature, I´m not sure how to read all critereas...


----------



## gaijin (Oct 29, 2007)

Barbababa said:


> It´s not an assumption, it is a thermocompensated Precidrive E64.111 that is inside  As you are aware, there is no official HAQ requirement other than what we stated here. Therefore meeting COSC or Chronometer criteria (or exceed) is good enough for them I guess. If you don´t think a thermocompensated E64.111 meets those criterias there is not that much to say about it. Like I said in earlier post, if you are really that interested you can always ask WEMPE
> View attachment 15190171
> They seem to mention temperature, I´m not sure how to read all critereas...


OK. Let me see if I understand what you are saying.

- Our requirement for a finished watch to enjoy HAQ status is performance to +10 sec/year.
- The ETA thermo-compensated Precidrive E64.111 has an ETA spec of +10 sec/year.
- Ergo, the Wempe IronWalker Quartz is an HAQ watch.

I guess what I am struggling with is the idea that we should rubber stamp as HAQ any watch that has an "HAQ" movement.

When Seiko and Citizen specify the performance of certain models as having an accuracy of +10 sec/year, +5 sec/year, or even +1 sec/year, I have no problem classifying those models as HAQ. Our HAQ performance requirement of +10 sec/year is backed up by the watch manufacturer's specification of +10 sec/year or better.

When a "Swiss Made" watch carries a COSC certification for the enclosed movement, that strongly implies the finished watch will perform to the COSC specifications. Generally, the COSC specifications are +0.07 sec/day (+25.6 sec/year) @ 23 DegC, and +0.20 sec/day (+73.0 sec/year) @ 8 and 38 DegC. Since these specifications do not meet our HAQ performance requirement of +10 sec/year, we must test these watches to establish whether they meet HAQ performance requirements. COSC certification of a watch's movement alone does not make a finished watch HAQ.

I would suggest we are looking at a similar situation with the Wempe watch in question.

To Wempe's credit, they are testing the performance of their finished watches, not just the enclosed movement. Based on other reading of the DIN spec that drives Wempe's specs, I am led to believe that Wempe also tests to 3 temperatures - most probably the same as COSC temperatures of 23, 8 and 38 DegC. All good so far. I read the Wempe "Average Daily Rate" specification as the average of all measured rates over 13 days at all 3 temperatures. The Wempe spec for this is -0.1 / +0.3 sec/day (-36.5 / +109.6 sec/year) which is, in principle, the same as the COSC +0.2 sec/day (+73.0 sec/year) specification for the high and low extremes of the test temperatures.

For sake of discussion, I'll take as a given that the Wempe watch would pass COSC performance criteria.

So... what are we left with?

We have a new watch offering from Wempe where the only performance specification published by the watch's manufacturer is -36.5 / +109.6 sec/year.

My question is simply, should we be rubber stamping this Wempe watch as HAQ based only on the rather vague ETA specification (i.e. +10 sec/year with no mention of testing temperature(s))?

I don't know what you want me to ask Wempe. We already know what their performance specification is: -36.5 / +109.6 sec/year.

I'm just throwing the question out to the forum as to whether we should blindly accept this watch as HAQ without any specification from Wempe that comes even close to our HAQ performance requirement of +10 sec/year.

HTH


----------



## Barbababa (Jan 6, 2019)

From what I have seen on the forum I´m the only owner so far, and I don´thave the equipment to mesure the watch in a proper way, and I´m quite content with it being Chronometer certified. That would leave you with asking WEMPE if they have any mesurements of the actual performance or if they are content with the certification. Or, you can just dismiss it as a HAQ in lack of written evidence of a performance within 10spy. Maybe take it up with moderator if you want the thread removed?


----------



## DaveM (Aug 9, 2008)

gaijin said:


> OK. Let me see if I understand what you are saying.
> 
> - Our requirement for a finished watch to enjoy HAQ status is performance to +10 sec/year.
> - The ETA thermo-compensated Precidrive E64.111 has an ETA spec of +10 sec/year.
> ...


*I was also curious to about the Wempe chronometer-test .*
I managed to get a copy of the DIN standard used by Wempe.

*To gain DIN8319 chronometer certification*
Run the watch for 14 days. Measure the rate (in seconds per day) every day
Temperature is 23C for days 1-10
Temperature is 8C on day 11
Temperature is 38C on day 12
Temperature is 23C for days 13 & 14

*Test 1 :- Average daily rate*
Calculate the average rate from 12 readings at 23C (ie days 1-10, 13 & 14).
Because temperature is always 23C (tolerance +/- 1C) the time-keeping should be very good !
To pass the test the rate must be between -110 and 36.5 seconds per year
COSC test for a total of 13 days, their limits are -26 to 26 seconds per year.

*Test 2 :- Standard deviation of daily rate*
This is also calculated from 12 readings at 23C. To pass the test it must be less than 18 spy.
A watch that was 17 spy faster than its average rate on the first day, 17 spy slower on the second, 17spy faster on the third - and so on during the 12-day test would just pass the test.

COSC limit the difference between maximum and minimum rates to 18 spy.
A watch that was 8.9 spy faster than its average rate on the first day, 8.9 spy slower on the second, 8.9 spy faster on the third - and so on during the ? day test would just pass the COSC test .

*Test 3 :- Rate of change of rate*
Rate of change of rate must less than 1.1 spy per day.
This is calculated by subtracting the average rate on days 1 and 2 from the average rate on days 13 and 14 . Wempe would fail a 'drifter' if its rate changed by more than 13spy.
COSC will fail a watch if the difference between maximum and minimum rates is more than 18 spy.

*Test 4: Rate when cold*
The rate is measured at 8C .
The watch will pass so long as the change of rate between 8 and 23C is -712 to 219 spy (ie 219 gives a thermal coefficient of 14.6spy/degree C). 
COSC only allow -73 to 73 spy

*Test 5: Rate when hot*
The rate is measured at 38C .
The watch will pass so long as the change of rate between 38 and 23C is -329 to 219 spy. 
COSC only allow -73 to 73 spy

*Several 'type tests' are also included*
A 10-off sample of the calibre must pass design-checks for :-
Extended temperature limits (-5 and 50C)
High humidity with the movement uncased
Low battery-volts
Battery life
Magnetic field
Shock

*Any well-made quartz-watch would pass the tests, no need for thermocompensation.*
As suggested by Bruce Reding this document is dated December 1978 and possibly mirrors the original 'easy' COSC specification. It is actually good set of tests, its just that the pass-levels are 40-years too easy !


----------



## gaijin (Oct 29, 2007)

Barbababa said:


> From what I have seen on the forum I´m the only owner so far, and I don´thave the equipment to mesure the watch in a proper way, and I´m quite content with it being Chronometer certified.


Good, I'm glad you like your new watch. It is a very nice watch.



Barbababa said:


> That would leave you with asking WEMPE if they have any mesurements of the actual performance or if they are content with the certification.


I believe Wempe have already answered that question by in-house certification as a Chronometer. I think it would be fruitless (and silly) to ask them if they kept records of the actual performance of your particular watch. So, I don't think anything would be gained by my contacting Wempe. Perhaps if YOU were to contact Wempe about the actual test results for your specific watch, they might be able to help you.



Barbababa said:


> Or, you can just dismiss it as a HAQ in lack of written evidence of a performance within 10spy.


That's just not logical. With lack of evidence to support performance within the +10 sec/year HAQ spec, the logical thing to do would be to dismiss it as NOT HAQ - which is where I stand on it. Until evidence to the contrary, I'm not satisfied the Wempe watch can demonstrate performance to the HAQ requirement of +10 sec/year.



Barbababa said:


> Maybe take it up with moderator if you want the thread removed?


Obviously, that's entirely up to Mr. Moderator; but I would much rather see this thread stay open in the hope that there will be other owners who do have the capability to accurately measure the performance of their watches.

It seems perfectly acceptable to me that both our positions can co-exist:

You assume your watch is HAQ until evidence is presented to the contrary.

I assume your watch is NOT HAQ until evidence is presented to the contrary.

We should both be happy with our positions until further data are presented.

In any event, enjoy your Wempe IronWalker - it is a stunning watch.

HTH


----------



## Barbababa (Jan 6, 2019)

gaijin said:


> Good, I'm glad you like your new watch. It is a very nice watch.
> 
> I believe Wempe have already answered that question by in-house certification as a Chronometer. I think it would be fruitless (and silly) to ask them if they kept records of the actual performance of your particular watch. So, I don't think anything would be gained by my contacting Wempe. Perhaps if YOU were to contact Wempe about the actual test results for your specific watch, they might be able to help you.
> 
> ...


I´m sorry, english is not my first language. When i wrote "dismiss it as a HAQ" I meant that you may say it´s NOT HAQ in lack of written evidence of a performance within 10spy. I don´t really think of it as a HAQ in that way, more like a nice made watch with good performance quartz caliber. I did not start the thread


----------



## watchcrank_tx (Sep 1, 2012)

Barbababa said:


> I´m sorry, english is not my first language. When i wrote "dismiss it as a HAQ" I meant that you may say it´s NOT HAQ in lack of written evidence of a performance within 10spy.


Your English was correct.

Re. the "10 spy must be proven for new models" thing, what are we to think of models that are rated by their manufacturers as <= 10spy but which don't manage to live up to that figure? Several on this forum have had Citizens fail to meet their specs (including if I'm not mistaken one of the posters in this thread). If we reduce this forum to only what we know for certain, then the same five or ten posters will talk about the same ten or twenty unique examples of the watches they themselves own, and we cannot draw any wider conclusions, even about other examples of those very same watches. That seems extreme, and leading to the total death of this already moribund forum.

The movement is rated by the manufacturer as 10 spy. That is good enough for me in the absence of proof to the contrary. These are not mechanical movements which in casing can be bumped out of regulation or clamped such that their gears experience more friction.


----------



## gaijin (Oct 29, 2007)

watchcrank_tx said:


> The movement is rated by the manufacturer as 10 spy. That is good enough for me in the absence of proof to the contrary.


Actually... the Precidrive version specifications are as follows:

@23 DegC: Specification is +26 sec/year, but typically +10 sec/year is possible
@8 DegC: Specification is +73 sec/year, but typically +35 sec/year is possible
@38 DegC: Specification is +73 sec/year, but typically +35 sec/year is possible

So... for a movement to pass testing at ETA and make it into the hands of a watch manufacturer, performance at between 22 and 24 DegC only has to be +26 sec/year.

Manufacturing specifications can be found on page 4 here: https://shopb2b.eta.ch/technical_documents/index/pdf/id/2177/

In light of this, it is my opinion that it is a bit of a stretch to say that these specifications can be used as the basis to qualify a finished watch containing this movement to have +10 sec/year performance.

HTH


----------



## watchcrank_tx (Sep 1, 2012)

gaijin said:


> Actually... the Precidrive version specifications are as follows:
> 
> @23 DegC: Specification is +26 sec/year, but typically +10 sec/year is possible
> @8 DegC: Specification is +73 sec/year, but typically +35 sec/year is possible
> ...


Yes, that did help.

Thank you for the elaboration. Point taken. Last time I found the public-facing Precidrive documents, they were decidedly less specific. The document you posted is similar to the waffling that Citizen and GS do, but a good bit more extreme.

At this point though, the Cal 0100 is the only one I would trust to stay within 10 spy, but that's simply because that's an order of magnitude worse than the specifications and a bigger miss than Citizen have been shown to make before.


----------



## PetWatch (Nov 24, 2016)

gaijin said:


> In fact, for COSC certification, thermo-compensation is indeed one of the test criteria - no thermo-compensation, no certification. See all the criteria here: https://www.cosc.swiss/en/certification/quartz-movements
> 
> The sentence that makes my point from that link is:
> 
> ...


COSC says nothing about HAQ, as noted. It certifies quartz chronometers according to their definition, whose parameters fall outside of this forum's definition of HAQ of +/- 10SPY, thus irrelevant for determining HAQ standards in this forum.

"In reality, quartz is more inconstant, because it is very sensitive to temperature and humidity, which can significantly alter its operational regularity. High quality quartz is therefore equipped to adjust automatically to the frequency of the oscillator according to the ambient conditions."

"To take into account the technological characteristics of these products, the COSC has adapted its tests and the precision requirements. To acquire the COSC label, a quartz instrument must benefit from thermo-compensation and rigorous encapsulation."

Based on the information available in the link provided and their known testing criteria, can it be conclusively determined that a watch is themo-compensated? Given that crystal cut and very high frequency oscillators improve accuracy without thermo-compensation, such as the Citizen Crystron Mega that I believe does not have thermo-compesation, rather it is thermo-desensitized, the unknown quality of the Bulova 262khz, the Citizen 0100 that under my assumption can probably meet HAQ status and almost certainly COSC certification without thermo-compensation, thus, are they accepting manufacturer's claims, and/or assuming thermo-compensation based on passing their tests?

In keeping with the thread's theme, nice watch.


----------



## Don Draper (Sep 19, 2017)

Very nice quartz chronometer you got there. 

Sent from my Nokia 7.1 using Tapatalk


----------



## OutOfSpec (Mar 11, 2018)

Regarding the ETA E64.111 in this watch, I can only find the version that says it's a "prescidrive." I understand that there is a non-prescidrive version? Does anyone have more information on that?


----------



## gaijin (Oct 29, 2007)

OutOfSpec said:


> Regarding the ETA E64.111 in this watch, I can only find the version that says it's a "prescidrive." I understand that there is a non-prescidrive version? Does anyone have more information on that?





gaijin said:


> Actually... the Precidrive version specifications are as follows:
> 
> @23 DegC: Specification is +26 sec/year, but typically +10 sec/year is possible
> @8 DegC: Specification is +73 sec/year, but typically +35 sec/year is possible
> ...


Same link. Info for both the Precidrive and non-Precidrive versions is included.

Basically, the non-Precidrive version is rated to -0.3/+0.5 sec/day or approximately -110/+183 sec/year @25 DegC.

HTH


----------



## OutOfSpec (Mar 11, 2018)

gaijin said:


> Same link. Info for both the Precidrive and non-Precidrive versions is included.
> 
> Basically, the non-Precidrive version is rated to -0.3/+0.5 sec/day or approximately -110/+183 sec/year @25 DegC.
> 
> HTH


Thanks. So, I had some interest in learning more about this watch. I contacted Wempe Germany. The only piece of info I could get from them is that the movement is thermocompensated. This is why, they tell me, the movement is is COSC spec. I didn't read through that ETA technical file. Assuming the non-HAQ version of this movement is not thermocompensated, that can only mean that the Iron Walker Quartz is HAQ.


----------



## gaijin (Oct 29, 2007)

OutOfSpec said:


> Thanks. So, I had some interest in learning more about this watch. I contacted Wempe Germany. The only piece of info I could get from them is that the movement is thermocompensated. This is why, they tell me, the movement is is COSC spec. I didn't read through that ETA technical file. Assuming the non-HAQ version of this movement is not thermocompensated, *that can only mean that the Iron Walker Quartz is HAQ.*


I don't see where you can support performance to the HAQ spec of +10 sec/year based on any of the available information.

ETA specification for the thermo-compensated Precidrive version of the movement is +26 sec/year between 22 and 24 DegC - definitely NOT HAQ.

As I posted earlier:

_To Wempe's credit, they are testing the performance of their finished watches, not just the enclosed movement. Based on other reading of the DIN spec that drives Wempe's specs, I am led to believe that Wempe also tests to 3 temperatures - most probably the same as COSC temperatures of 23, 8 and 38 DegC. All good so far. I read the Wempe "Average Daily Rate" specification as the average of all measured rates over 13 days at all 3 temperatures. The Wempe spec for this is -0.1 / +0.3 sec/day (-36.5 / +109.6 sec/year) which is, in principle, the same as the COSC +0.2 sec/day (+73.0 sec/year) specification for the high and low extremes of the test temperatures._

So... Wempe's spec is +73 sec/year - definitely NOT HAQ.

So... where are you finding support for your claim that, "...the Iron Walker Quartz is HAQ?" Where is it documented that the IronWalker Quartz can perform to +10 sec/year?

I would really like to know. BTW, COSC certification alone does not mean a watch is HAQ.


----------



## OutOfSpec (Mar 11, 2018)

gaijin said:


> I don't see where you can support performance to the HAQ spec of +10 sec/year based on any of the available information.
> 
> ETA specification for the thermo-compensated Precidrive version of the movement is +26 sec/year between 22 and 24 DegC - definitely NOT HAQ.
> 
> ...


My statement, made with qualifications, relies on my understanding of Precidrive. I thought that all Precidrive movements were HAQ, e.g. I would have thought that all Certinas that have "Precidrive" are HAQ. Then, if only the "Precidrive" version of the E64.111 is thermo-compensated and the Wempe uses the thermo-compensated version, it must be using the Precidrive, so it is HAQ. I readily admit that if my understanding and assumptions of Precidrive are incorrect, then the conclusions about the Wempe may be incorrect.


----------



## gaijin (Oct 29, 2007)

OutOfSpec said:


> My statement, made with qualifications, relies on my understanding of Precidrive. I thought that all Precidrive movements were HAQ, e.g. I would have thought that all Certinas that have "Precidrive" are HAQ. Then, if only the "Precidrive" version of the E64.111 is thermo-compensated and the Wempe uses the thermo-compensated version, it must be using the Precidrive, so it is HAQ. I readily admit that if my understanding and assumptions of Precidrive are incorrect, then the conclusions about the Wempe may be incorrect.


You are correct - your conclusions are incorrect.

Nice chat.


----------



## OutOfSpec (Mar 11, 2018)

gaijin said:


> You are correct - your conclusions are incorrect.
> 
> Nice chat.


Well, I don't think I'll succeed in getting more specificity from Wempe, so the mystery will remain...at least for now.


----------



## wbird (Feb 25, 2015)

OutOfSpec said:


> Well, I don't think I'll succeed in getting more specificity from Wempe, so the mystery will remain...at least for now.


No need to. Wempe is using probably the most accurate quartz movement available to them. Is it HAQ based on 10spy requirement here nope, but based on this criteria the only new watches that are, come from Citizen, Grand Seiko, Longines, and maybe Morgenwerk and Apple.

Current offerings from Certina, Breitling, Omega, and Bulova may meet the criteria but aren't specd to. For the most part they are specd to 8X better than standard 15spm quartz, or essentially COSC.

All that aside, I find it weird that Wempe and the German definition for quartz chronometer is wider than COSC. If you are ordering a chronometer grade movement from the Swiss it will meet COSC requirements. They didn't widen the German chronometer requirements for mechanical pieces so why do it for quartz?

Bottom line the Wempe will perform better than all but a select few watches on the market for accuracy, if it doesn't belong here, than the only Swiss movement that does is in a Longines.


----------



## Barbababa (Jan 6, 2019)

wbird said:


> No need to. Wempe is using probably the most accurate quartz movement available to them. Is it HAQ based on 10spy requirement here nope, but based on this criteria the only new watches that are, come from Citizen, Grand Seiko, Longines, and maybe Morgenwerk and Apple.
> 
> Current offerings from Certina, Breitling, Omega, and Bulova may meet the criteria but aren't specd to. For the most part they are specd to 8X better than standard 15spm quartz, or essentially COSC.
> 
> ...


I am starting to agree with @watchcrank_tx, maybe it´s time to leave this part of the forum and let it fall asleep, as nothing new will fit the criterias. I´m in to high quality quartz watches. Chronometer, COSC or RC/GPS does not matter that much to me, as long as the watch is above average in finish and performance. HAQ being one of OUR own criterias, not being supported by the manufacturers, means that there will be very few watches to discuss. On top of that, very few of those who like to immediately dismiss models that does not fit our HAQ criteria adds anything new to the table in the discussions or post pics of watches. Maybe a quartz COSC, or high level quartzwatches, could be a new subforum that can generate something positive


----------



## gangrel (Jun 25, 2015)

Rather than leave, I simply ignore gaijin's insistence on the 10 SPY requirement, because it is too narrow. He's pretty much the only one who complains if we talk about quartz COSC at this point.


----------



## gaijin (Oct 29, 2007)

gangrel said:


> Rather than leave, I simply ignore gaijin's insistence on the 10 SPY requirement, because it is too narrow. He's pretty much the only one who complains if we talk about quartz COSC at this point.


Me?

I would refer you to the Sticky thread at the top of the forum: https://www.watchuseek.com/f9/what-haq-forum-about-5039357.html

The Moderator of this forum has set the rules. If you don't like them, play somewhere else.

There are many other Brand, Function, Style and Type forums to post about watches; but this is the ONLY forum dedicated to leading edge precision quartz watches.

Seems pretty simple to me.

HTH


----------



## DaveM (Aug 9, 2008)

gangrel said:


> Rather than leave, I simply ignore gaijin's insistence on the 10 SPY requirement, because it is too narrow. He's pretty much the only one who complains if we talk about quartz COSC at this point.


My understanding is that we only discuss watches which are better than 10spy, but define the requirement in a permissive way.
Within 10spy when worn most of the timeis acceptable​Innovative legacy watches ( ie Oysterquartz)are acceptable​New watches which cannot be expected to pass the COSC quartz-testare not acceptable​
If we require a maximum error of 10spy between 8C and 38C we are asking for performance about *7 times* better than COSC.
I guess that the Citizen 0100 would pass !


----------



## gaijin (Oct 29, 2007)

DaveM said:


> If we require a maximum error of 10spy between 8C and 38C we are asking for performance about *7 times* better than COSC.
> I guess that the Citizen 0100 would pass !


Come on, you're being far too pessimistic.

I believe there are several thermo-compensated quartz models extant that if the owners would invest a little time in testing would find they do qualify for HAQ.

In the sticky, the first sentence is, "The primary focus of the HAQ forum is intrinsic accuracy. A modern HAQ is a watch that who's offset is no worse than 10 s/y, *based on measurements(referenced to atomic standards)*."[Emphasis mine]

What I have observed throughout this forum, for some time, is the apparent attitude that one should be able to simply "buy in" to the forum. Establish what is an "acceptable" watch to the group, buy it, and voila - instant HAQ status for the owner. I believe the real idea behind the forum is that we should actually measure the performance of our watches and determine whether they do indeed measure up to +10 spy performance. In the past, there were many excellent threads about testing and comparing performance of many models - some made it, some didn't. It was fun. Where are those threads now?

I think the HAQ requirement established in the sticky is really quite forgiving, "A 32KHz movement almost certainly has a form of Digital Thermocompensation method. A higher frequency movement may not, but still has to demonstrate it does not deviate by no more than +- 10 s/y."

Nowhere is it stated that the +10 spy must be over a wide temperature range, in fact, nowhere is it stated that the watch must be COSC certified.

So... it takes a little sweat equity to gain entrance to the HAQ club. Test and evaluate.

I did it:










+10 spy from 8 DegC to 38 DegC.

If one were to cut the high and low temp testing periods down to one day each, and extend the testing at 23 Deg C to 10 days in the beginning and one day at the end (to strictly conform to COSC protocol), the entire test could be done in 13 days. No big deal.

Failing that, whether for lack of precision measurement equipment or environmental control capability, just track your watch's performance for a year and see where it winds up. +10 spy? Welcome aboard!

HTH


----------



## kiwi.bloke (May 8, 2013)

Howdy, to bring the discussion back to the original post... Nice watch, really interested in a 40mm version, given I've been unable to get a Citizen AQ1030 at a reasonable price yet. I have one question regarding the Wempe, can the purchaser of the Iron Walker (Barbababa) anyone else, tell me if the crown is screw down / screw in to achieve the 100m WR or it is the standard pull push style?


----------



## watchcrank_tx (Sep 1, 2012)

As I said before, we have seen a number of cases where watches rated by manufacturers failed to meet their specs, so if the only acceptable topic on this forum are watches that are _*proven*_ to be +-10 spy, then we cannot talk about the Citizen Chronomaster or the Seiko 9f or the Cal 0100 or any new or promising movement or technology; we can *only* talk about _*individual examples*_ of such models which have proven themselves, and this forum will descend into no more than navel gazing by a handful of posters. (A very small handful, since I notice fewer and fewer folk posting detailed tracking in recent yerars.) A pity, since this was once a dynamic place, and there was once a lot to learn here.

(I suppose the HAQ clock folk are no longer welcome here either, since few of early historical thermocompensated marine chronometers will make 10 spy today if they ever did, and I only recall one owner of such a collection posting detailed accuracy tracking. Again, a pity. Those were my favorite threads.)

A long-time member with an opposing point of view - that it was the technology that defined HAQ, not the performance against an arbitrary yardstick - was banned a few months ago, and while I welcomed the ban simply for his attitude to his fellow posters here and his endless negativity, attack-posts, and threadcrapping, when I see the point of view he opposed displayed in all of its ultimate glory, I wonder if he didn't have a pretty good point underneath all of that bad attitude.


----------



## gaijin (Oct 29, 2007)

watchcrank_tx said:


> As I said before, we have seen a number of cases where watches rated by manufacturers failed to meet their specs, so if the only acceptable topic on this forum are watches that are _*proven*_ to be +-10 spy, then we cannot talk about the Citizen Chronomaster or the Seiko 9f or the Cal 0100 or any new or promising movement or technology; we can *only* talk about _*individual examples*_ of such models which have proven themselves, and this forum will descend into no more than navel gazing by a handful of posters. (A very small handful, since I notice fewer and fewer folk posting detailed tracking in recent yerars.) A pity, since this was once a dynamic place, and there was once a lot to learn here.


I either badly misstated my position, or you totally missed my point.

Why suggest we are stuck in a prison of two ideas? If a finished watch is spec'd by its manufacturer to perform to +10 spy or better, then welcome aboard the HAQ train - no problem. Discuss to your heart's content. Hopefully, there will be an owner or two who will actually test their examples, but in any event, we will be discussing them. If they prove not to live up to the manufacturer's specs, then there will probably be even more discussion. In other words, if there are published specs that meet HAQ requirements, then they are automatically in. So... The Citizen, Seiko 9F's, Cal 0100, Jeam Marcel, Bulova Precisionist (maybe, wish we had more testing and discussion about these), etc. all are welcome with open arms.

Models that are candidates for further discussion and shared test data would be models that possess the requisite technology to be considered; i.e. thermo-compensated quartz with intrinsic accuracy potential. Make the case and discuss/test all you want. This is like where we are now with this Wempe Quartz IronWalker - absolutely no manufacturer's spec to support +10 spy performance, but looks like it has potential. Until there are sufficient test data to clearly indicate HAQ performance, we will continue to discuss.

Sounds to me like we are a far cry from "navel gazing."


----------



## watchcrank_tx (Sep 1, 2012)

gaijin said:


> I either badly misstated my position, or you totally missed my point.
> 
> Why suggest we are stuck in a prison of two ideas? If a finished watch is spec'd by its manufacturer to perform to +10 spy or better, then welcome aboard the HAQ train - no problem.


My point is that your faith in manufacturers' specifications rests on ground so shaky as to bring the whole house down. Many a Bulova has run outside of spec. A few Citizens. At least one GS that I recall. Maybe not any VHPs or 0100s yet, but if all other manufacturers' specs are fallible why would you have faith in those?

And if "10 spy" - rather than "technology allowing vastly better than typical and closing very close in on perfection" - is the accuracy standard, manufacturers' specifications _cannot_ be replied upon, and you only have individual examples to discuss. All ten or twenty of them in this forum. Out of the millions examples of thermocompensated watches produced that cleave very closely to our ideal, many of them well inside of it, but not _proven_ to be.

I am interested in the technology that makes for very accurate watches, but the current tendency in this forum is to ignore all of the interesting bits of actual horology and chronometry and replace them with an arbitrary yardstick. When that yardstick is thrown out the window based on the word of a corporate entity who have been proven fallible before, it looks less like a yardstick and more like new clothes for an emperor.


----------



## wbird (Feb 25, 2015)

I must say all that testing was not all that helpful or interesting. All it said is that a user had a decent performing watch, like one user who tested the crap out of his Certina and it performed incredibly well, while the majority of Certina owners never achieved 10spy results with their watches. Or even that Omega with the 1666 movement that is no longer sold, is exceptional, but a new X33 comes with the COSC rated 5619. Not very helpful to someone looking for a new watch.

That Wempe is probably never going to achieve 10spy, neither are most of the current Sinn, Omega, Breitling, Bulova, or Certina's. They are not specd to. But I'm okay knowing that those watches will be better than 99% of the watches on the market. But if this forum wants to exclude them, and the only way to participate here is to put in "sweat equity" so be it.

When I buy a dive watch I expect it to work at the depth it is specd to. If it is an ISO certified dive watch it has to meet a higher standard, and the dive forum is not making graphs and charts to prove it. Just like an ISO dive watch, a COSC watch represents 1000's of independently tested movements, a watch tested here represents a ridiculously small sample size.

On the upside, the 10spy requirement does make recomending a new HAQ watch easy, want a chronograph Longines, a GMT GS or Longines, Moonphase nothing, ani-digital Morgenwerk(but really they haven't made a watch in years so good luck with that), if you don't want sword hands and stick markers well Japan has virtually nothing for you, dive watch again nothing.

In research we encounter "highly focused" specialist, the saying goes they know more and more, about less and less, till they know everything about nothing. It seems were on that path, discussing three brands and maybe eight or nine current movements, along with 2 or 3 vintage watches.


----------



## DaveM (Aug 9, 2008)

wbird said:


> In research we encounter "highly focused" specialist, the saying goes they know more and more, about less and less, till they know everything about nothing. It seems were on that path, discussing three brands and maybe eight or nine current movements, along with 2 or 3 vintage watches.


I agree, accuracy per-se is becoming less of an issue. My earlier post was meant to say 'be flexible', if we must have hard barriers the COSC spec is a well defined but very forgiving document.
A previous post by Gaijin said 'Nowhere is it stated that the +10 spy must be over a wide temperature range.'
So just about any rate-adjustable ( !?) watch can meet the current requirements of this forum so long as it is worn in an air-conditioned environment.
I do not have a big problem with that, but rather than boring everybody with arguments about the definition of HAQ perhaps we should re-launch the forum as 'High Performance Quartz' ?


----------



## Barbababa (Jan 6, 2019)

kiwi.bloke said:


> Howdy, to bring the discussion back to the original post... Nice watch, really interested in a 40mm version, given I've been unable to get a Citizen AQ1030 at a reasonable price yet. I have one question regarding the Wempe, can the purchaser of the Iron Walker (Barbababa) anyone else, tell me if the crown is screw down / screw in to achieve the 100m WR or it is the standard pull push style?


It´s a screw down crown (not really nessesary for the 10atm WR)


----------



## Josh R. (Dec 30, 2012)

Dear Wempe -- Please make these straps as an accessory to the Iron Walker (especially the rubber one).


----------



## Barbababa (Jan 6, 2019)

Josh R. said:


> Dear Wempe -- Please make these straps as an accessory to the Iron Walker (especially the rubber one).









The VC Quartz is a beautiful watch (and the above), why don´t you just get that one instead?


----------



## DaveM (Aug 9, 2008)

Barbababa said:


> View attachment 15231493
> The VC Quartz is a beautiful watch (and the above), why don´t you just get that one instead?


Just wasted an hour searching the web & these forums, but cannot find any info on VC overseas with a COSC quartz movement.
Does anybody know anything about it ?


----------



## Barbababa (Jan 6, 2019)

DaveM said:


> Just wasted an hour searching the web & these forums, but cannot find any info on VC overseas with a COSC quartz movement.
> Does anybody know anything about it ?


It´s a caliber based on the Girard Perregauxs cal.1320. Only 10% of the Overseas was quartz. First generation Overseas was made between 1996-2004


----------



## wbird (Feb 25, 2015)

DaveM said:


> Just wasted an hour searching the web & these forums, but cannot find any info on VC overseas with a COSC quartz movement.
> Does anybody know anything about it ?


The only watch I found of that model was white faced, 30mm, and 15 years old. How big is the one shown? Granted VC hasn't made a mens quartz watch in years, and when they did unlike todays VC watches they were small.


----------



## Barbababa (Jan 6, 2019)

wbird said:


> The only watch I found of that model was white faced, 30mm, and 15 years old. How big is the one shown? Granted VC hasn't made a mens quartz watch in years, and when they did unlike todays VC watches they were small.


you need to practice you google skills ;-)
I´t´s 37mm


----------



## wbird (Feb 25, 2015)

Figured I’d take your advice and work on my search skills and found one on Chronosect. Not sure what the site language is maybe Polish?

But they have a model from 2002, and list it at 36mm. Still bigger than 30, and for all I know they may have it wrong and it really is 37mm.

The thing is wouldn’t these be chronometer based on the old, and really wide COSC specs for quartz?

I think they were revised in 2003


----------



## DaveM (Aug 9, 2008)

wbird said:


> Figured I'd take your advice and work on my search skills and found one on Chronosect. Not sure what the site language is maybe Polish?
> 
> But they have a model from 2002, and list it at 36mm. Still bigger than 30, and for all I know they may have it wrong and it really is 37mm.
> 
> ...


I found this one :-
https://www.zeitauktion.com/en/vach...teel-quartz-men-s-watch-42040-72040-1-1901984

Good description and plenty of pictures -- even one of the engine-room
I guess that you are right about the Chronometer certification, I would guess that it is not thermo-compensated


----------



## brianinCA (Jan 13, 2014)

Looks good to me, but then again I love the IWC Ingenieur 3239 that this looks very similar to.


----------



## daveya (Nov 21, 2009)

Ok rebirth

Over the many ETA64.111 threads has it ever been decided whether this movement in the Zeitmeister line is HAQ by definition rather than just a claim? Or indeed which version of the movement they actually used .

Also of it's thermocompensated

I am looking at the Wempe Zeitmeister, it's a handsome watch, just no idea what movement they actually use . As I underated it they could get to their version of chronometer testing without it being HAQ +/- 10.or TC, and their website doesn't make claims to actually accuracy that I can is.

Yes I've searched and yes I've read all the various threads, doesn't seem to be a definitive answer


----------



## DaveM (Aug 9, 2008)

daveya said:


> I am looking at the Wempe Zeitmeister, it's a handsome watch, just no idea what movement they actually use . As I underated it they could get to their version of chronometer testing without it being HAQ +/- 10.or TC, and their website doesn't make claims to actually accuracy that I can is.


*The Wempe web-site is confusing !*
I found this watch :-








ETA 955.652 is a nice movement, 10spy with 10-year lithium battery -- but I thought that ETA no longer made it

But when I moved down the page I found








I think that this is the truth, *E64.111 is a current movement.

Assuming that they are using the Precidrive version *









The Wempe website states :-








I do not think that the basic version would meet the chronometer standard.
*I think that they are Precidrive, and accurate enough for us to consider as HAQ !*


----------



## ronalddheld (May 5, 2005)

I cannot recall whether anyone here owns one and has tested it.


----------



## gaijin (Oct 29, 2007)

DaveM said:


> *The Wempe web-site is confusing !*
> I found this watch :-
> View attachment 16116652
> 
> ...


I agree. The Wempe watch is most probably using the Precidrive version of the E64.111 movement.

However, if one looks at the entire page you cited (found here: ETA Technical Performance Specifications), scroll to page 5 and you will find the following:










It's important to note the column headings - MIN (Minimum) TYP (Typical) and MAX (Maximum).

When a movement is tested, performance between MIN and MAX is acceptable and will be passed. Really, it makes no difference what the TYP value is, during manufacture it is not required to make a movement that meets the TYP value. The manufacturing specification is between MIN and MAX.

So... in the case of the E64.111 Precidrive movement, even at a constant 23 DegC, consumer expected performance could be anywhere between +26 Sec/Year, and between +73 Sec/Year if one expands the temperature parameters.

*I think they are Precidrive, but not accurate enough for us to consider HAQ without performance testing!*

HTH


----------



## DaveM (Aug 9, 2008)

gaijin said:


> I agree. The Wempe watch is most probably using the Precidrive version of the E64.111 movement.
> 
> However, if one looks at the entire page you cited (found here: ETA Technical Performance Specifications), scroll to page 5 and you will find the following:
> 
> ...


*We have discussed this many times before.*
I think that 'Precidrive/COSC' is accurate enough for us to consider a watch-design worthy of discussion on this forum.
But not accurate enough for us to consider an example HAQ without performance testing!

*To be HAQ an example must be within 10spy over a range of temperatures.*
I think that 8 to 38C is too big a range and believe that only a few of the Citizens would pass.
I think that 13Cto 33C is a big enough range to cover 99% of a 'median HAQ watch' life !


----------



## gaijin (Oct 29, 2007)

DaveM said:


> *We have discussed this many times before.*
> I think that 'Precidrive/COSC' is accurate enough for us to consider a watch-design worthy of discussion on this forum.
> But not accurate enough for us to consider an example HAQ without performance testing!


I agree absolutely.



DaveM said:


> *To be HAQ an example must be within 10spy over a range of temperatures.*
> I think that 8 to 38C is too big a range and believe that only a few of the Citizens would pass.
> I think that 13Cto 33C is a big enough range to cover 99% of a 'median HAQ watch' life !


I agree with this also. I would, however, encourage testing @ 8 and 38 DegC so a comparison could be made to COSC test results which use those temperature limits. However, as you posit, no watch which performs to the HAQ +10 Sec/Year target @ 13 - 33 DegC should be excluded from HAQ discussions.

HTH


----------



## viisari (12 mo ago)

Hi there!

I have been silently following the HAQ forum for a while. Doing watches as a hobby for roughly two decaded, mostly mechanical, recently more quartz. I just love all watches  
Out of current experience with a Wempe Quartz-Chronometer I think I can add some content to the picture which led me to sign up to the forum.

I recently bought a Wempe Zeitmeister Quartz-Chronometer. Not a lot of information on the web, but I came to the conclusion that it has the thermocompensated ETA955.652. Much to my disappointment, I found an ETA255.112 when I opened the case, which is not thermocompensated. This led me to do research on the certification process at Wempe/Glashütte and therefore DIN8319-2 which they are following.

















DaveM from this forum has looked into the DIN8319-2 and ha nailed the issue: the test for thermal deviation is more than relaxed. Basically there are 10 measurements taken at 23°C, one at 8°C and one at 38°C. Then these 12 measurments are averaged to form the average rate, which has a limit of -0,3...0,1 s/d. This is there it substantially deviates from COSC, because the averaging process reduces the impact of lacking thermal compensation dramatically.

I measured the case, there is roughly one millimeter missing to actually fit the ETA955.652 (4,5mm thick), so it's unlikely that I have an odd model. So I assume it might be an misconception triggered by a temporary false declaration on the Wempe website and it has alway been the 255.112. This is underlined by their old website stating the ETA255.111 as a base movement.
By the way: Can anybody point out the difference between ETA255.111 and 255.112?

















Here is the rate measured at four different temperatures with a parabolic trendline. Looks like a base uncompensated quartz to me (0,030ppm/°C²), a nicely regulated on I have to admit. Given, that the watch is from 2012 there seems not to be to much aging of the crystal/oscillatory circuit going on compared what we see from the Seiko 8F32/8F35.

Just for fun I entered the values of the curve into the formulas given by the DIN8319-2 and it passed with an average daily rate (Gd) of -0,072s/d an temperature coefficients C1=0,045 and C2=-0,033. The spec for DIN8319-2 you can see in the table above.

Concluding from this, I would be extremely cautious assuming thermocompensation in a movement just because it is a certified based on DIN8319-2 (e.g. in the observatory in Glashütte). Regarding the posts above on the E64.111 in a Zeitmeister, the certification as a Chronometer at Glashütte does not require it to be a precidrive, so expect it not to be. To me it looks like almost all reasonable rate adjusted quartz movements should be able to pass this certification. As seen from the achieved values, there is (especially for thermal drift) still a lot of leeway of approx. a factor of two. So even a movement with twice the temperature coefficient of a standard tuning fork 32kHz, should pass. So for me, the tests of DIN8319-2 are irrelevant to evaluated the time keeping qualities of sophisticated quartz movement.

In the above I was only writing about quartz chronometer testing. The testing of mechanical movements at Glashütte is much more in line with COSC testing.

*Addendum:*

I find the discussion about the HAQ status of a watch interesting. My opinion is, that without defining a temperature range, this specification is meaningless. Two example below to illustrate the dilemma:
1. The above movement will likely perform within 10s/y on the wrist, if it is stored above 20°C. On the wrist temperature is typically 30°C, depending a bit on the strap (e.g. nato). So from the figure, which is an enlargement of the ETA255.112 data of the Wempe Zeitmeister, I would think with a wear pattern of 50-70% this should be within +-10s/y. This is basically what Seiko did with the 8Fxx movements (slightly better temperature performance), by obligating the user to >50% wrist time.










2. The ETA252.611, which is well accepted as an HAQ, has a temperature coefficient of approximately 0,9s/y/°C (own measurements). That means, storing it 11°C below or above nominal conditions will leave it outside of +-10s/y, even of properly adjusted.

What about thermocompensated watches lacking rate adjustability and whose rate has shifted over time? HAQ-status revoked? Is 10s/y the acceptable range for instantaneous rate (anytime within the life of the watch) or is it averaged over the whole year? It would be intriguing to establish that kind HAQ criteria. Unfortunately, lacking reliable data from most manufacturers, putting each movement through thermal cycling test would be necessary. I found a lot of good data on that in this forum, unfortunately often from >10 years ago.

I am happy to discuss, especially the data parts.

To all the owners of Wempe Zeitmeister Quartz Chronometers, I hope I did not spoil your view of your watch. It still is a handsome watch, finely made and properly sized. If in doubt, please open it up and post some pictures.

Take care!


----------



## ronalddheld (May 5, 2005)

viisari said:


> Hi there!
> 
> I have been silently following the HAQ forum for a while. Doing watches as a hobby for roughly two decaded, mostly mechanical, recently more quartz. I just love all watches
> Out of current experience with a Wempe Quartz-Chronometer I think I can add some content to the picture which led me to sign up to the forum.
> ...


Welcome, and thanks for an interesting first post.


----------



## Barbababa (Jan 6, 2019)

viisari said:


> Hi there!
> 
> I have been silently following the HAQ forum for a while. Doing watches as a hobby for roughly two decaded, mostly mechanical, recently more quartz. I just love all watches
> Out of current experience with a Wempe Quartz-Chronometer I think I can add some content to the picture which led me to sign up to the forum.
> ...


I no longer own the watch, but mine did contain the 955.652 with the 3V battery. I bought it from Wempe Hamburg 2019. My daughter have the Iron Walker with e64.111. I have opened both watches to do DNA marking inside, so I can confirm the calibers in these two watches. I can see now on their webpage it now houses the e64.111(Zeitmeister). If they change caliber for some reason over time, maybe yours was before they changed? 955.652 started production 2004
*in your picture the caliber looks like it´s not in brass but in steel?


----------



## tomchicago (Feb 15, 2010)

I had a terrible experience with Wempe on 5th ave in NY some years back. Let's just say I'm not surprised at your post and generally very greedy and rude behavior from Wempe. I simply won't do business with them at all, even though I was glad to see they put Precidrive HAQs in their latest Zeitmeister line. Did you buy that watch used?


----------



## viisari (12 mo ago)

Thanks for the welcome!

Barbababa, that's an interesting statement. Could you post pictures or could organize some to see how they fitted that movement?
I measured the case and on top of the movement there is 1,2mm and the case back is recessed by 0,3mm. That gives 1,5mm on top of the movement, which is 2mm thick. Total space is 3,5mm which is approximately, what is needed for the ETA2892, which also can be installed in the same case.
The case back is 1,8mm thick with a recess of 0,3mm, so remaining thickness of the back is 1,5mm. The 955.652 is 4,5mm, so in order to gain the needed 1 mm by hollowing out the case back, there would be 0,5mm remaining (minus Laser engraving). I guess it is possible, but a little marginal.
Total thickness of the my watch is 9,6mm most sources on the web, so no hint towards a beefed up case back.
Also the user manual is very very generic, not mentioning anything about the movement nor the battery.

The movement color is from Rhodium or a similar plating.

Tomchicago, yes it was used (originally sold in 2012) and comparably cheap, so not too much of a disappointment.


----------



## ronalddheld (May 5, 2005)

tomchicago said:


> I had a terrible experience with Wempe on 5th ave in NY some years back. Let's just say I'm not surprised at your post and generally very greedy and rude behavior from Wempe. I simply won't do business with them at all, even though I was glad to see they put Precidrive HAQs in their latest Zeitmeister line. Did you buy that watch used?


Thanks for the warning, should I decide to go into that store.


----------



## Barbababa (Jan 6, 2019)

viisari said:


> Thanks for the welcome!
> 
> Barbababa, that's an interesting statement. Could you post pictures or could organize some to see how they fitted that movement?
> I measured the case and on top of the movement there is 1,2mm and the case back is recessed by 0,3mm. That gives 1,5mm on top of the movement, which is 2mm thick. Total space is 3,5mm which is approximately, what is needed for the ETA2892, which also can be installed in the same case.
> ...


I was in contact with the buyer of my Zeitmeister yesterday, asking if he opened the back and if he had any pics of that. Like me, he did not have any pics of the caliber, but he never opened it anyway. Now he have sold it to a "private" person outside of the Swedish forum we both frequent.
I wrote a short review of the watch in february 2019, in that review I stated the size at 38mm / 48mm lug to lug and *10mm in hight including the crystal*. And I did use calipers when wrighting that. Is your profile like mine was?








I would not be surprised if Wempe did changes to fit a new caliber over the yaers.








There are more ways to fit a caliber than just on the back. Are your dial-ring the same hight as mine or is it thicker? Wery hard to tell, but looking at your pic and mine, it looks like your dial might sit slightly lower in the case?









Maybe you can go to a Wempe store and get information first hand?


----------



## viisari (12 mo ago)

Barbababa said:


> I was in contact with the buyer of my Zeitmeister yesterday, asking if he opened the back and if he had any pics of that. Like me, he did not have any pics of the caliber, but he never opened it anyway. Now he have sold it to a "private" person outside of the Swedish forum we both frequent.
> I wrote a short review of the watch in february 2019, in that review I stated the size at 38mm / 48mm lug to lug and *10mm in hight including the crystal*. And I did use calipers when wrighting that. Is your profile like mine was?
> 
> I would not be surprised if Wempe did changes to fit a new caliber over the yaers.
> ...


Hej Barbapappa,
I tried to get the same shot angle as you did. Not conclusive. But since you measured case thickness 10mm an I 9.5...9.6mm, there would be the missing gap. So you are probably right, they might have made very slight modifications to the case or caseback, that are not visible on first look.
As for going to a Wempe store: I somehow do not expect reliable information on this technical level about a movement from the past from a salesperson there.

Anyway, I will keep the watch for now since it's rather handsome on a Nato and will track timing over the week.


----------



## Barbababa (Jan 6, 2019)

viisari said:


> Hej Barbapappa,
> I tried to get the same shot angle as you did. Not conclusive. But since you measured case thickness 10mm an I 9.5...9.6mm, there would be the missing gap. So you are probably right, they might have made very slight modifications to the case or caseback, that are not visible on first look.
> As for going to a Wempe store: I somehow do not expect reliable information on this technical level about a movement from the past from a salesperson there.
> 
> ...


Or better yet, ask if you can have the latest e64.111 caliber installed 🤪


----------



## Barbababa (Jan 6, 2019)

viisari said:


> Hej Barbapappa,
> I tried to get the same shot angle as you did. Not conclusive. But since you measured case thickness 10mm an I 9.5...9.6mm, there would be the missing gap. So you are probably right, they might have made very slight modifications to the case or caseback, that are not visible on first look.
> As for going to a Wempe store: I somehow do not expect reliable information on this technical level about a movement from the past from a salesperson there.
> 
> ...


I asked a friend to measure his...








He does not have the tools to open it and take a picture of the caliber, but I would say it is a 955.652 inside his aswell as mine had


----------



## viisari (12 mo ago)

Barbababa said:


> I asked a friend to measure his...
> View attachment 16409789
> 
> He does not have the tools to open it and take a picture of the caliber, but I would say it is a 955.652 inside his aswell as mine had


Hej Barbapappa, thanks for having it checked. But that measurement basically clears up my original question, so there is the missing 0,5mm to make room for the larger movement. Its good when things add up.


----------



## viisari (12 mo ago)

Just to give feedback on the accuracy of my Zeitmeister specimen powered by an ETA 255.112.

On wrist: -24 ... -27 s/y (on a nato)
Off wrist: +1 ... -7 s/y (19°C-20°C)

So nicely adjusted, a bit slow, but not really HAQ material by this forums standards.


----------



## DaveM (Aug 9, 2008)

viisari said:


> Just to give feedback on the accuracy of my Zeitmeister specimen powered by an ETA 255.112.
> 
> On wrist: -24 ... -27 s/y (on a nato)
> Off wrist: +1 ... -7 s/y (19°C-20°C)
> ...


Interesting !
*Good to see a post that tells us the temperature at which accuracy was measured.*
I looked at the 'Thermocompensation:Methods' sticky.
For a normal 32Khz 'tuning fork' xtal with :-

a 'sweet spot' at about 26C (on the wrist)
-0.035ppm/c2 temperature drift
It predicts that the watch will run about 40spy *slower *at 20C than at 26C
But I think that Viisari is saying that his runs faster !

*Am I missing something ?*


----------



## viisari (12 mo ago)

DaveM said:


> Interesting !
> *Good to see a post that tells us the temperature at which accuracy was measured.*
> I looked at the 'Thermocompensation:Methods' sticky.
> For a normal 32Khz 'tuning fork' xtal with :-
> ...


Hi Dave,

not sure what you are refering to by "sweet spot". I think this movement is not behaving any different from the rest of the 32kHz crowd.
A few posts back I presented the fitted temperature dependency of that movement. Here is the same curve zoomed in and in s/y units.









Maximum of the curve is at 24,7°C. From there we have a loss of approx. 22 s/y by going from the turning point towards 20°C. What can be seen from the curve is, that the maximum lies nicely between storage temperature and wrist temperature (~30°C), this allows for lowest possible variation between those two conditions. Where it all falls apart for an non-thermocompensated movement is the if temperatures near the maximum (25°C) or below 19°C or above 30°C occur. 
So for this particular movement, I would call 20°C and 29°C a sweet spot, since the rate is close to zero. Another positive aspect of having the maximum of the temperature-dependence-cure well centered between storage temperature and wrist temperature is, that annual temperature changes cancel out partially, since storage and wrist temperature go up or down simultaneously.









This point of maximum rate at the turning point cannot be adjusted and is mainly a property of the quartz crystal. In a rate adjustable watch the whole cure can be shifted up or down.In my experience this maximum/turning point is lower in most uncompensated watches, typically 21-23°C. Sometimes even as low as 18°C (some 8Fxx) which makes them behave rate wise much worse since it is losing rate the warmer it gets, no cancelling out of seasonal warming. In that case no 196kHz can help much.


----------



## DaveM (Aug 9, 2008)

viisari said:


> Hi Dave,
> 
> not sure what you are refering to by "sweet spot". I think this movement is not behaving any different from the rest of the 32kHz crowd.
> A few posts back I presented the fitted temperature dependency of that movement. Here is the same curve zoomed in and in s/y units.
> ...


Thanks, that makes a lot of sense.
What I called 'sweet spot' you call 'turning point' -- your name is much better & I will use in future.

I assumed a turning-point of 26C and 26C on the wrist.
Measuring rates relative to the turning-point 

40spy slow at 20C (off the wrist)
zero spy at 26C ( on a cold wrist)
I thought that the watch would run slower off the wrist

You found a turning-point of 24.7 C and assumed 30C on the wrist

22 spy slow at 20C (off the wrist)
32 spy slow at 30C ( on a hot wrist)
You found that the watch ran faster off the wrist

I am still a bit surprised by 30C on the wrist, when I put a probe between my wrist & watch, it shows 27C. 
But the turning-point makes such a big difference, if I use 23C instead of 24.7 C I calculate

10 spy slow at 20C (off the wrist)
28 spy slow at 28C (on a medium wrist)

It all goes to show that achieving 10spy ( 1 part in 3 million) over as little as +/- 10C needs carefully designed TC !


----------



## ronalddheld (May 5, 2005)

DaveM said:


> Thanks, that makes a lot of sense.
> What I called 'sweet spot' you call 'turning point' -- your name is much better & I will use in future.
> 
> I assumed a turning-point of 26C and 26C on the wrist.
> ...


Did you want two 26C in paragraph 2?


----------



## DaveM (Aug 9, 2008)

ronalddheld said:


> Did you want two 26C in paragraph 2?


*Yes, I was trying to say something simple, but did it in a confusing way !*
I meant that my previous assumption was that both 'turning point' and 'on the wrist' temperatures were typically 26C.


----------



## viisari (12 mo ago)

DaveM said:


> I am still a bit surprised by 30C on the wrist, when I put a probe between my wrist & watch, it shows 27C.


I admit wrist temperature is not easily accessible, since the watch is located in this steep temperature gradient from body surface temperature to ambient temperature and the watches coupling to the wrist might vary due to materials with low thermal conductance in the path (NATO, hair). So there is probably a lot of variation to it (sleeve up/down), I measured at several occasions 29-31°C, so that's why I assume 30°C. 
Also we cannot measure at the exact location of the quartz. If one were to use an empty watch case and feed a temperature sensor through the crown tube, one would probably get more realistic values. But that is very geeky and I do not want to be caught in the act of measuring 😅.


----------

