# What about the UHF accuracy



## wbird

It seems my 9B210 is the only Bulova meeting the 10s/yr accuracy on the HAQ thread, am I alone?

What are all you owners of Bulova percussionist movements seeing? Post some numbers or pics I can't believe I have the only watch meeting specs.


----------



## Watch Carefully

Not sure what the HAQ thread is, but I'll be interested to hear of others' results..and to see the accuracy of my Accutron II Telluride, bought nearly a month ago, over the span of a year. Unfortunately, I will be required to stop the watch in order to make time zone/daylight changes throughout the year, so anything more than an educated (and hopefully not wishfully optimistic) guess at annual accuracy is unlikely.


----------



## Tomas472

Mine was set to NIST just over two months ago and is about a quarter of a second off with 24/7 wear at this point. Only been off the wrist about once a week for cleaning the case and strap...


----------



## moneysworth

I have two Langford Precisionists. One a B2, the other a B3. They run side by side in my box. I set my automatics by them because they keep time almost perfectly. Though its hard to tell what would happen in a whole years time because of the daylight savings and back adjustment. They have never gotten even +/- 5 seconds off my atomic clock at anytime during the last two years. Quite impressive.


----------



## wbird

Just a quick update, I measure and set my 98b210 against NIST each time I have to deal with DST.

Well it's been running a full year and is 7s fast. A nice watch with pretty impressive performance.


----------



## oztech

My 96B158 was spot on when DST was set so not bad since Christmas.


----------



## DaveK12

Reviving an old thread, but it is something that I was curious about. I didn't want to exclude anything that's UHF, so this goes for Precisionists, Curvs, and Accutron IIs.

I synced several watches to atomic time on 3/12, and the Accutron II is the only one which still agrees to the second. It's only two weeks, but all 3 other quartz watches are already noticeably off. I'd like to hear more discussion about Bulova UHF accuracy, and the HAQ forum seems to have decided that the Bulovas are not quite HAQ, but most of the discussion was around whether 2011 and 2012 built ones are different in what to expect. We're now in 2017, and many new models are out and new movements have debuted. My Accutron II, a black 2015 Alpha, is impressively accurate so far. I only got it a week before the time change, and I noticed that it hadn't crept away from true in that week. I'm going to keep track of it and not reset it until the next time change, after which I do want to have the inside of the crystal cleaned as it never looks quite clear in bright light and I think it might have a partial fingerprint on the inside.

If Bulova can make a market for itself based on some cool retro style and accuracy, I would love that. I hope that they make a tuning fork case like the '75 Spaceview next. My grandfather wore a railroad Accutron until he passed, and I wouldn't mind seeing that done as well. The 96B215 case would be perfect for a railroad face and hands.


----------



## simpletreasures

Supposedly they are set to release a re-vamp of the chronograph, aka the "Stars and Stripes" pretty soon.


----------



## DaveK12

I would like to see them do a Spaceview version of most of their shapes as a hallmark of the new Accutron. I've worn an automatic for years and just feel like I need to daily wear a quartz just to be accurate enough to go weeks without resetting. I'm really surprised and happy with the Accutron II's accuracy. If Bulova can exploit this, I think that it's a right-time product that they have a more accurate watch with some unique designs is how Accutron was back in the 60s. All their quartz should be UHF, and pretty carfully timed at that. They can carve out a market of some cool updated designs like the Alpha, but I think that green 96B215 is a more retro case than anyone realizes, and would look great with its face turned into a chapter ring and with the movement prettied up like the Alpha was. The surveyor would like nice with a navy blue/silver version of the asymmetrical diamond Accuquartz dial. They have so much potential for some special editions that would be Mad Men cool.

I do want to know, though, is whether everyone else's UHFs are holding up to that level of accuracy. To hear some of the HAQ comments, it's not seen as favorably as some of the classic Japanese HAQs which often had temperature compensation like Grand Seiko or The Citizen. It sounds like newer ones may be better than the first ones, and the poorest performer is still much more accurate than most quartz would be, but is kind of frowned upon there for being off by 25 SPY. Better than Spring Drive and better than most 32 kHz quartz in accuracy, and a few are in single digit seconds per year. I'm curious to know more if anyone else has kept up with one for a while to see how far off it got.


----------



## DaveK12

I may post a pic to show, but the Accutron II is still not visibly off. Every other quartz is off already by seconds. Two out of the three automatics are already more than 2 minutes slow. I like the accuracy.


----------



## lvt

I think UHF doesn't relate to accuracy. UHF is used for the smoothness of the second hand's movement. An UHF watch still can run faster or slower than the specs in quartz domain.


----------



## DaveK12

lvt said:


> I think UHF doesn't relate to accuracy. UHF is used for the smoothness of the second hand's movement. An UHF watch still can run faster or slower than the specs in quartz domain.


It does. It started with the Precisionist. They don't claim 10 SPY like they did before, but my Accutron II is so much more accurate than my other quartz watches that I wouldn't doubt that this one would do what people struggled to get from the early Precisionists. The 1 Hz tick of quartz is an artifact of the 1969 technology of the Seiko Astron, which also makes sense in a lot of ways. There's nothing about the 16 Hz tick of the Accutron II which couldn't also be done with a 32 kHz crystal. 32,768 divides evenly by 16 just as 262,144 does. Spring Drive has a stepless sweep and uses a 32 kHz crystal. Seiko and Citizen make very accurate 32 kHz models, but having a high-frequency movement is actually a cheaper way to keep it thermo-stable without the additional electronics they use. Bulova's image in the 60s and 70s was based on a Bulova being accurate, and I hope they pick that back up.


----------



## DaveK12

Part of why I bought an Accutron II in the first place was because I wanted to see if it was noticeably more accurate than other quartz watches. I would call this verified so far. Now I'm really interested in the results at the next time change. It's worth mentioning that the Orient in the video had roughly twice the error that would be permitted from a Rolex or original Accutron I in the same circumstances. By 1960s standards, that watch would've been remarkably accurate.


----------



## wbird

If you go over to the HAQ forum, "this bulova meets specs" been measuring mine for 2 years and it is right around 10 spy and others have seen good results.

Actually been doing better than a lot of TC Certina's including mine.


----------



## DaveK12

wbird said:


> If you go over to the HAQ forum, "this bulova meets specs" been measuring mine for 2 years and it is right around 10 spy and others have seen good results.
> 
> Actually been doing better than a lot of TC Certina's including mine.


I had seen that thread, and even left a comment there with what I had observed so far. I have not posted anything else about Bulovas to the HAQ forum because it's pretty clear that most of the folks there consider a UHF Bulova to be either HAQ Lite or HAQ phony, and aren't discussing them much there. When a thread had suggestions for HAQs under 300 euro, nobody mentioned Bulova UHF, and instead suggested some which I was unable to find for sale in the US for any less than $375 (well over 300 euro). None were available in the selection of styles offered by Bulova, either. After reading the (mostly old) threads in HAQ portraying Precisionists as no more accurate than standard quartz, I actually had pretty low expectations of the Accutron II. It was said to have been "slowed down" to save battery, though it's still 262 kHz and 16 Hz ticking so I'm not sure what "slowed down," but it's apparently never been promised to be better than 5 seconds per month. Mine looks likely to complete the first month without any difference, so count me impressed. It was made in 2015 and was a store display, so it might actually be nearing time for a battery.


----------



## wbird

Folks over in the HAQ can be a bit unwelcoming to Bulova, but data rules. It seems that as more data comes in those Bulova's are performing as well as or better than the sub forum darling Certina. I want to say I have and like both, but Bulova got a bad rap from a couple of members way back when, and Certina got a lotta of love. Hard to change perception.

You can be assured I'll be interested in seeing your results.


----------



## tmathes

wbird said:


> If you go over to the HAQ forum, "this bulova meets specs" been measuring mine for 2 years and it is right around 10 spy and others have seen good results.
> 
> Actually been doing better than a lot of TC Certina's including mine.


Agreed. Both of my Bulovas (Surveyor and Moon Watch) are running around 6-10 sec/yr, compared to 15-25 sec./yr. for my two Certina TC quartz watches.


----------



## Sevenmack

wbird said:


> *Folks over in the HAQ can be a bit unwelcoming to Bulova, but data rules. *It seems that as more data comes in those Bulova's are performing as well as or better than the sub forum darling Certina. I want to say I have and like both, but Bulova got a bad rap from a couple of members way back when, and Certina got a lotta of love. Hard to change perception.
> 
> You can be assured I'll be interested in seeing your results.


There are two big issues HAQ folks have with Precisionist/Accutron II/UHF. The first, which is the most-important, is that it isn't thermocompensated. That is the definition of high-accuracy quartz that has been accepted by those collectors for a long time, even though Seiko did put out the 8F quartz series which also lacked thermocompensation and used the high beat rate approach that Bulova now uses with Precisionist. [Other HAQs fall into the same situation.]

The second issue is that early on, Bulova was a lot more aggressive than now in stating that the movements are accurate to five-to-10 seconds a year; these days, Bulova says the +/- is five seconds a month, which is more conservative than the 5-to-10 seconds a year many experience in the real world. The fact that one longtime F9 denizen had a particular accuracy problem with his Precisionist effectively turned the rest of the crew against Bulova.

As far as the F9 folks are concerned: Little will change their mind. The Precisionist movements aren't HAQ and are barely worthy in their eyes. But for other collectors and casual watch buyers, the smooth sweeping second hand and the high accuracy of the movements make them worth collecting. And honestly, since there are more of them anyway, Bulova is focusing on them in its marketing and sales.


----------



## tmathes

Well stated Sevenmack. I frequent the F9 forum and figured out what you said ages ago. My two Bulovas (Surveyor and Moon Watch) are within 10 sec/yr where as the two T/C Certinas are not (more like 15 sec for one, 25 for the other). All are fine watches though.


----------



## wbird

All valid points about the F9, but really not that much different than the other sub forums and a lot of the brand forums. Some folks live in these niche places and tend to try and dominate the threads. I'll continue to post my results there, looking to just put the evidence on the table. If you have data you know where to post it, gets lonely defending Bulova there sometimes.

Should note there are two different high frequency movements the one used in the Accutrons II's and the one in the Precisionist. The Accutrons are thinner and supposedly not as accurate, they are obviously used in the moon watch.


----------



## Brandon Hobbs

Checked the Curv the other day and it was dead on still after a few months of sync. I just don't even worry about it anymore after owning the watch after about 6 months - it's never been perceivably off.


----------



## Stayclassycliff

Is the whole appeal of buying an UHF the accuracy?


----------



## wbird

Pat of the appeal for sure. Just like knowing a Rolex or Breitling is Chronometer grade. But you have the sweep second hand, long history of precision and accuracy with NASA, and most importantly the way they look and work.


----------



## Tseg

My 96B230 UHF Military is about a year old and remains within a couple 10ths accuracy... understanding I've had to stop the watch twice to reset for DST. I had been obsessive about accuracy with my other watches but after having got this one it broke the spell, as I now know I will never get a more accurate watch. My next question is how long will the battery last, as the accelerated sweeping hand is known to consume battery?


----------



## DaveK12

I absolutely believe that special editions may get special crystals. I thought my Alpha had finally crept fast today because it wasn't in sync with another clock I had trusted, but when I got home and refreshed the sync of my atomic clock to its home signal, the Accutron II was actually still in sync with my original source of NIST, 43 days later. Even with the discrepancy I thought was there, I had calculated down to 8 seconds per year. I'm going to say I have to be impressed even if the error had been true. Maybe they're all like that <10 SPY, maybe just because it's an Alpha.


----------



## yankeexpress

Stayclassycliff said:


> Is the whole appeal of buying an UHF the accuracy?


Accuracy and smooth sweep second hands on 3-hand models of Accutron II. 
At 16 beats per second, they are smoother than any automatic at any price.

Surveyor










Lobster


----------



## Elkins45

I bought my moon watch in November and when the DST change came it was off by 3 seconds. That leads me to believe it will easily come in at under 10 sec/year. It may not be a HAQ but it's a highly accurate quartz watch!


----------



## DaveK12

It turns out that I was right the first time: the Accutron II is now off by one second. Now that its error is measurable, I did a full update of every watch being tested this time around. Next closest one also has a movement made by Citizen.


----------



## Sevenmack

Stayclassycliff said:


> Is the whole appeal of buying an UHF the accuracy?


For accuracy freaks? Certainly. For everyone else, it's the smooth sweeping second hand that is the selling point.


----------



## Sevenmack

Tseg said:


> My 96B230 UHF Military is about a year old and remains within a couple 10ths accuracy... understanding I've had to stop the watch twice to reset for DST. I had been obsessive about accuracy with my other watches but after having got this one it broke the spell, as I now know I will never get a more accurate watch. My next question is how long will the battery last, as the accelerated sweeping hand is known to consume battery?


The battery is supposed to last two years versus three for the traditional quartz. But that varies. My Bulova Precisionist Wilton, which I bought in 2015 (and was originally bought by ChiefWahoo a year earlier), is still on its original battery.


----------



## tayloreuph

Sevenmack said:


> The battery is supposed to last two years versus three for the traditional quartz. But that varies. My Bulova Precisionist Wilton, which I bought in 2015 (and was originally bought by ChiefWahoo a year earlier), is still on its original battery.


I've also got the Wilton, and that battery has lasted at least that long, if not longer.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## DaveK12

For anybody who's ever been tempted by the easy $125 97A111, you can do this with it: go green. Finish it off with a real gator or croc for a perfect lizard effect, but a cheaper embossed leather is pretty nice. I think they could even sell the white banded ones with a pulsometer on the inside of the crystal as a nurses' watch. This one, BTW, is much closer to the promised 5 SPM. In 33 days, it's gained 3 seconds. I gave it to mom, who wears it. I can't think of anything in her habit that should affect the accuracy, so that one's just not as lucky a draw as the black one. Also has fresh battery because it was made in 2014. I replaced the battery and gave it to her. It really brings the 97A111 head to life.

Edit: somebody should photoshop a Latin pulsometer inscription using the same font as "Accutron II" only not as stretched.


----------



## DaveK12

My Accutron II keeps on trucking. 73 days in and still only 1 second off. It's probably another third or half beyond where it was on day 43, but not a whole second yet. I know that some G-Shocks have a timing adjustment, but the AMW-320 doesn't.


----------



## Badfish179

I love the accuracy of these watches. What a history!


----------



## arogle1stus

wbird:
Both my 96B232 and 231 have been used on a day on and day off basis since I bought them.
Both are running +2 seconds in last 6 mos.(Jan to Jun 17) So I extrapolate the accuracy will
be + 4 secs in 2017.
Hype is HF's accuracy is + or - 6 secs per year. Or 60 secs one way or the other in 10 years.
Waaay better than any Rollie or Omega I've ever owned. In fact BETTER than some of my
Multiband 6 Casios.

I contacted Bulova and they predicted a battery shelf life of the HFs at or better than 2 years. 

This is accuracy on Steroids IMHO!

X Traindriver Art


----------



## oztech

It is the most accurate watch I have ever owned plus the second hand has a nice fluid motion that even a 36000 bph can not compete with.


----------



## wbird

arogle1stus your watches are hitting it out of the park with their performance. Nice to see others are seeing the watches performing as advertised, and Bulova getting back to its roots as a maker of super accurate time pieces.


----------



## DaveK12

I just did another update video, the Accutron II was off by 2 seconds after 115 days. That works out to about 6.3 SPY. WOW!


----------



## topol2

Have 2 Bulova UHF watches, a SeaMaster and a Moon watch. Set both at start of DST (March 12)/ As of today the SeaMaster is 4 seconds slow (=12 seconds per year) and the Moon watch is 1 second fast ( = 3 seconds per year). Very pleased with those stats.


----------



## Tomc1944

My Accutron ll Alpha is +3.1 seconds in 5 months. Great watch and movement.


----------



## DaveK12

I checked Mom's today, and it's gained 9 seconds in the same amount of time as my two others have had about 2 seconds of drift. That would put her's no more accurate than the Miyota 0S10 in my old Fossil, but the other two Accuton IIs I've got have had much less drift.


----------



## tmathes

DaveK12 said:


> I checked Mom's today, and it's gained 9 seconds in the same amount of time as my two others have had about 2 seconds of drift. That would put her's no more accurate than the Miyota 0S10 in my old Fossil, but the other two Accuton IIs I've got have had much less drift.


If it's a ladies' watch then it does not have an Accutron II nor Precisionist movement, those two movements are limited to men's models.

What is the model number and is it branded "Accutron II" or "Precisionist"? If it doesn't say "Accutron II" nor "Precisionist" then it's a regular quartz movement and is well within the parameters of a regular quartz watch (and is unlikely to match your Accutron II's).


----------



## DaveK12

It's the 97A111 pictured with a green band earlier in the thread. It's the only Accutron II that I'm familiar with which has even been off by a full second after a month. It's not quite HAQ, all the others are.


----------



## tmathes

DaveK12 said:


> It's the 97A111 pictured with a green band earlier in the thread. It's the only Accutron II that I'm familiar with which has even been off by a full second after a month. It's not quite HAQ, all the others are.


My apologies, I stand corrected. If it's under warranty and it concerns her send it back to Bulova, telling them it doesn't remotely meet their claims. Don't bother contacting them, you'll only get a reply of 'send it in for evaluation'.


----------



## DaveK12

They only promise 5 SPM now, and it's within that. The rose/white Alpha was really for ladies anyway, and I didn't like the white band. They should throw a pulsometer on it and sell it as a nurse's watch. I put the prettier green band on, and I found a service manual online that appears to be the correct service manual and mentions an "NL10" version of the movement for ladies watches quoting a size of 22.6mm(20.9)x4.18mm thick, men's is 28.0mm(26.9). Search for Citizen NM10 and you'll find the manual quickly. Proving in my suspicions that there doesn't appear to be much difference between the Precisionist and the Accutron II. The cutaway includes the date complication, but I can see the cut out formations that I know from my Alpha on the cutaways. Maybe they test worse, but look good.


----------



## Elkins45

My field watch is on the desk in front of me as I type this. It has gained two seconds since the time change back in the spring.


----------



## tmathes

DaveK12 said:


> They only promise 5 SPM now, and it's within that. The rose/white Alpha was really for ladies anyway, and I didn't like the white band. They should throw a pulsometer on it and sell it as a nurse's watch. I put the prettier green band on, and I found a service manual online that appears to be the correct service manual and mentions an "NL10" version of the movement for ladies watches quoting a size of 22.6mm(20.9)x4.18mm thick, men's is 28.0mm(26.9). Search for Citizen NM10 and you'll find the manual quickly. Proving in my suspicions that there doesn't appear to be much difference between the Precisionist and the Accutron II. The cutaway includes the date complication, but I can see the cut out formations that I know from my Alpha on the cutaways. Maybe they test worse, but look good.


Thanks for the pointer on how to find the service manual!


----------



## tayloreuph

FYI, my Precisionist needed a new battery, after about 4 years


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## cfmcmillan

For those who may be interested in a different approach to measuring the Bulova UHF 262 accuracy, the posts below may prove interesting.

Acutron II: Citizen Accutron II and 262Khz - Page 6
Moon Watch: Citizen Accutron II and 262Khz - Page 6
Moon Watch: https://www.watchuseek.com/f9/citizen-accutron-ii-262khz-2977770-6.html#post43874957

In both cases, the measurements against a GPS PPS pulse indicate that the watches are operating in a manner that is consistent with Bulova's advertized accuracy.


----------



## DaveK12

Day 163 since the DST change in March, and I did another update in the watches I've been tracking. The black Accutron II Alpha continues to prove its accuracy, and is only off by about 3 seconds now. It's not the most expensive watch in the test, but it's the most accurate. Even without thermal compensation, it's still less than 7 SPY for its rate. The Bulova UHF isn't a joke. I have two others, and also gave one to my mom, and mom's is the only one which hasn't been HAQ/chronometer accurate. They should advertise it more, but I'm afraid that the current Bulova website would appear to have no Accutron IIs, and doesn't play up the UHF at all. Even the newest CURV darlings don't talk much about it, and the newest (Latin Grammy) special editions aren't even UHF. Maybe 2016 was peak UHF.


----------



## tmathes

I wonder why they yanked the entire Accutron II line from their site. It seemed to be one of their biggest lines. And of course some of their ugliest designs still linger.

Glad I got mine when I did.


----------



## DaveK12

tmathes said:


> I wonder why they yanked the entire Accutron II line from their site. It seemed to be one of their biggest lines. And of course some of their ugliest designs still linger.
> 
> Glad I got mine when I did.


You bet. When it came to Accutron IIs, if it said that, I probably wanted it or a variant of the same case with different dial or band. If it all goes "Archive Collection" but stays around, count me IN! Change to the classic lettering, tuning fork logos, more Spaceviews, more classic designs in modern sizes, flourished by that beautiful second hand. Painted crystals, applied letters, pulsometers, 666, Railroaders, 1975 Spaceview homage, ahem. The CURV movement tries to normalize the UHF a little too much. I know they had to do it to stop using the big lithiums in a power-hungry 16Hz stepper motor with the smaller battery. I love the display back, but I like the 16Hz more than the glass back. If this is the end of the Accutron II, I'll be sad, because it made me like a quartz watch again.


----------



## wbird

Well happened to have this watch on today, and considering it's been 6 months since I set it for DST in March and a little over a year in since the prior DST last year, figured I would see how it was doing. Bottom line it's performing close to 10 s/yr the actual difference is about 5.5 s/6mo or 11 s/y in line with the year total of 11 s/yr. Granted this watch initially performed around 7 s/yr the first year, but it got a whole lot more wrist time. So I have to conclude that sitting in my watch box for most of the six months a Bulova may run at 11 s/yr not 10, and be out of spec. 

Battery is still fine.


----------



## topol2

My Sea King accuracy report: https://www.watchuseek.com/f705/sea-king-accuracy-report-4533347.html


----------



## arogle1stus

WUSers:
Would you not agree the greatest thing that has happened to Bulova in it's history has been being
acquired by Citizen/Miyota in 2009?
IMO Bulova had it's feet mired in mud til they released the HF 262 khrtz movement. The sweep sec
hand is simply mesmerizing to a WISer.
What say Ye?

X Traindriver Art


----------



## topol2

arogle1stus said:


> WUSers:
> Would you not agree the greatest thing that has happened to Bulova in it's history has been being
> acquired by Citizen/Miyota in 2009?
> IMO Bulova had it's feet mired in mud til they released the HF 262 khrtz movement. The sweep sec
> hand is simply mesmerizing to a WISer.
> What say Ye?
> 
> X Traindriver Art


I just wonder why Citizen does not use the 262 movement in it's offerings as it would give it a big leg up over arch rival Seiko.


----------



## topol2

wbird said:


> ....Bulova may run at 11 s/yr not 10, and be out of spec.


Your worried about a *second per year*! That's about the length of good sneeze. I hope you are jesting.


----------



## wbird

Long story topol2, and yeah the 1 second sort of bums me out a little. The short version is that Bulova took a pounding for years over on the High Accuracy Quartz forum here, where precision is king. When a couple guys over there bought them and they performed poorly. I looked at the data and bought this watch and have been tracking it for a couple of years, and low and behold it's been meeting the magical less than 10 s/yr spec, till this time.

The thing is for awhile I was the lone voice over there praising Bulova, and saying I think it will perform as well as certain forum darlings over. Now things are a little different and there are quite a few other owners here, and there, that are seeing and posting how impressive these watches are, and they are gaining the respect they deserve. 

You want the long version pop over to the HAQ forum and search Bulova.


----------



## topol2

wbird said:


> You want the long version pop over to the HAQ forum and search Bulova.


Had my first look at the HAQ forum posts. First impression, they should rename it the "obsessive/compulsive" forum. Second impression, I did not understand a lot of it. Third impression, somebody over there was actually fretting over a leap second (whatever that is) screwing up his calibration or something. Fourth impression, just checked my Bulova moon watch and since DST set (6+ months) running 5 seconds slow.....good enough for me.


----------



## wbird

topol2 can't argue with any of your impressions, they seem pretty spot on. But, at one time when Bulova introduced the Accutron it was hands down the most accurate wristwatch on the planet. Bulova is no longer the standard bearer, but that's not to say their not good, just everybody has their own idea of what's good enough. The folks over there kind of keep up a long tradition of trying to find the best. In this case the most precise or accurate watch you can buy today.

Bulova is in the conversation, might be the most precise watch for the dollar on the planet.


----------



## odd_and_vintage_fan

wbird said:


> You want the long version pop over to the HAQ forum and search Bulova.


Yeah, I'm once bitten, twice shy with that forum. I posted about the accuracy of my Moon Watch along with my non-HAQ quartzes for comparison and regretted it. Just a put-down from a member and indifference from a moderator.


----------



## topol2

This should be of interest to all the O/C watch people: Swiss Physical Society - Time, Frequency and Atomic Clocks (7)

Also, an atomic clock (little large for your wrist) seems to be the holy grail of accuracy. A continuous cold caesium fountain atomic clock in Switzerland, started operating in 2004 at an uncertainty of *one second in 30 million years*.


----------



## wbird

Might want to look up Hoptroff over there, or on the web. You can get an atomic clock that will fit on your wrist. Just a bit pricey.


----------



## topol2

Looked at the Hoptroff site and the first word that comes to mind is *FUGLY.* They look like something designed for a character in a Disney cartoon movie. The second thing I notice is a battery charge only lasts 3 months. Also, though not fully explained they seem to require assistance to operate as evidenced by this:

It is the most accurate wristwatch in the world. In full atomic mode, it keeps time to 1 second per thousand years. In atomic resonator mode, it is still accurate to one second per hundred years. *Requires an iPhone or Android phone.

*And what about that pesky leap second (whatever that is). But I guess it's the grail of the O/C crowd.

Just looked at the Moon watch on my wrist and realized if I don't adjust my prep time I'm going to be* 5 seconds *late for a lunch appointment!


----------



## DaveK12

My black Alpha was off by 5 seconds at the time change. That's 7.67 seconds per year. Wow.


----------



## wbird

Well with the DST thing the measurement came in at at 7.6s, or around 11 s/yr. Pretty much doing exactly the same as the last measurement a few months back. Not meeting the 10 s/yr requirement but I'm not wearing it a lot either so maybe sitting in a usually 68 F temp is costing it a second. But not bad for a 3 year old watch with the original battery.


----------



## mystic nerd

Very nice work.

Yesterday after setting my watches, I photographed several, each one along side my Casio "atomic" radio controlled watch. I plan to take matching photos again before the spring DST changeover to see how they did.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## tmathes

wbird said:


> Well with the DST thing the measurement came in at at 7.6s, or around 11 s/yr. Pretty much doing exactly the same as the last measurement a few months back. Not meeting the 10 s/yr requirement but I'm not wearing it a lot either so maybe sitting in a usually 68 F temp is costing it a second. But not bad for a 3 year old watch with the original battery.


Wbird, don't you have some examples in your collection of the Precidrives too? If so, how to they stack up? So far my Bulovas are at or better than the Precidrives.


----------



## wbird

tmathes said:


> Wbird, don't you have some examples in your collection of the Precidrives too? If so, how to they stack up? So far my Bulovas are at or better than the Precidrives.


Yep, I also have a Certina DS Action Diver with the Precidrive. Always post those results over on the thread that Dicioccio started over on the HAQ thread. Don't want to beat up on Certina or Tissot over on the Bulova subforum. 

But since you asked. That one clocked in at 11s or 16 s/yr. Not as good as the Bulova, in fact it never tested better than the Bulova in the 2 years, I've had it. But, I think the Certina is specd to meet COSC for quartz, 0.07 s/d or 25 s/yr. So at least it meets their specs, unlike a lot of the the DS2's that are supposed to be 10 s/yr, and perform about the same as the Bulova or worse.

Honestly their all nice watches, for their price points, not looking to add another Bulova or any watch soon but that DS-8 is interesting.


----------



## wbird

Since I set it only a couple of times a year for dst, figured I'd keep tracking this watch here. It clocked in at almost 4s or about 12 s/yr. Still running on the same battery for over 3 years. Overall pretty impressed with the performance.


----------



## mystic nerd

mystic nerd said:


> Very nice work.
> 
> Yesterday after setting my watches, I photographed several, each one along side my Casio "atomic" radio controlled watch. I plan to take matching photos again before the spring DST changeover to see how they did.


One lost 2.2 seconds, one gained 3.2 seconds. Details in my recent post in this forum "Four month accuracy check... ".


----------



## wbird

Set my watch for DST been tracking for 3 1/2 years. Clocked in at 8 s or about 12 spy. Not bad, no complaints, and still running on the same battery


----------



## odd_and_vintage_fan

Repeat of post on HAQ thread. From fall 2017 to fall 2018, my Moonwatch is at -4 spy. Was -9 spy from fall 2016 to fall 2017.

I bought it because it looked good. The accuracy is just the cherry on top.


----------



## tmathes

wbird said:


> Set my watch for DST been tracking for 3 1/2 years. Clocked in at 8 s or about 12 spy. Not bad, no complaints, and still running on the same battery


My four UHF Bulovas track similar to yours and one is much better (the lunar pilot). As far as I'm concerned these UHF movements are as accurate as any of the supposed Swiss HAQ watches at a much lower price point (they're better than either of my Precidrives by a good margin).


----------



## Lawrence_S

Just changed the time and over the last six months my B7 Alpha II had gained 3 seconds. We'll see how the winter period goes.


----------



## Lawrence_S

odd_and_vintage_fan said:


> Yeah, I'm once bitten, twice shy with that forum. I posted about the accuracy of my Moon Watch along with my non-HAQ quartzes for comparison and regretted it. Just a put-down from a member and indifference from a moderator.


I concur. I'll let the Big Boys have their fun over there.


----------



## sertse

I usually keep track of my Bulovas in the HAQ forum, but I haven't recorded any formal data since switching to DST a month ago and I don't feel I met the requirements over there until I have.

Informally:

Bulova Accutron II Surveyor (B4/2014 Old model before "262khz" branding) - 10.5 seconds from May until Oct. 3 seconds since since DST just over a month ago. It estimates to somewhere between 25-30 seconds a year.
Bulova Lobster Chronograph (B6/2016 Which has "262khz" branding). Less than 1 sec since DST change a month ago. Estimated to be at around 10 sec/year. 

Any negative Bulova reports I have read, including my own, seem to be on Watches before "262khz". I would be confident on any recent Bulova.


----------



## tmathes

odd_and_vintage_fan said:


> Yeah, I'm once bitten, twice shy with that forum. I posted about the accuracy of my Moon Watch along with my non-HAQ quartzes for comparison and regretted it. Just a put-down from a member and indifference from a moderator.


Yeah, I've seen that too, I hear ya. What irritates me is many of them think just because a movement is temp compensated it'll be HAQ. Bul****t.

The Swiss do a lousy job of trimming, I have two glaring examples of it in my watch case. The Japanese watch makers do a vastly better job of it, so as far as I'm concerned Precidrive is not HAQ since the factory cannot trim them consistently. NEITHER of my Certinas come remotely close to 10 sec/yr, more like 2x to 2.5x that. It's a joke that Precidrives gets called HAQ just due to TC but the UHF movement, which iwhen new was likely not trimmed properly, still gets skewered. The latest examples of it seem to be just as good as the Precidrives but at a vastly lower price point. It's also why I won't bother with the Longines VHP, if they can't get the Precidrives trimmed properly there's no chance they can get that one to their claimed spec.

The Swiss make some gorgeous designs but their attention to quality (hands aligned, proper regulation for example) is mediocre at best. I just wish the Japanese had some better designs, especially Bulova. The 262kHz movement is going into some hideous cases, especially the Precisionist movement.


----------



## wbird

Well my Bulova continues to run at about 1 second/month. Gained 4 seconds since the last time I set it for DST in November, or 12 seconds per year.

I'm really curious how long the battery will last. I doubt I will see any interesting accuracy changes or crazy crystal ageing things, so now I want to see how long the battery will last considering the second hand only moves or is on, is when I feel like looking at it or when I use the chronograph.

Right now the battery is at least 4 years old.


----------



## 20nickels

Have 4 different models and all are 12 sec or below per year....close enough.


----------



## ObiWonWD40

wbird said:


> Well my Bulova continues to run at about 1 second/month. Gained 4 seconds since the last time I set it for DST in November, or 12 seconds per year.
> 
> I'm really curious how long the battery will last. I doubt I will see any interesting accuracy changes or crazy crystal ageing things, so now I want to see how long the battery will last considering the second hand only moves or is on, is when I feel like looking at it or when I use the chronograph.
> 
> Right now the battery is at least 4 years old.


I am guessing, but I think you should be getting a spare battery any time now, as I think you may be needing one soon. If the watch had some form of EoL I am thinking it would be signalling like mad about now. But as the Bulova's I have seen don't have that feature, there comes the day when it just Stops! No great disaster, but I find it annoying!

Best regards,
Jim
_
I won't say that I am OCD, but the first thing I do when I get a new quartz watch, is find out what battery it takes and how to change it. My research so far is that most of the 262kHz movements take a CR2016 battery and the Lunar Pilot, aka Moonwatch takes a SR972W. If anybody has any different or contradicting information please say so. In most cases, apart from unscrewing the back, the battery is held in by a small spring clip on the side and will pop out if you release the tension. To replace, push the battery against the spring and push it into place. Use non-conductive tweezers not your "pinkies" as grease off your fingers could cause corrosion! As far as I am aware, they are no AC or all-clear contacts you need to short with the battery + terminal to reset the IC._


----------



## ObiWonWD40

Over the past Weekend, or 0200 Sunday Morning, the UK moved from GMT to BST. So Summer is here then :-s Must be why it is damn cold and Raining this morning!

But back to the reason for this post, changing time gives a great opportunity to check the accuracy of my watches.

My most recent acquisition Bulova Precisionist Men's 96B252 UHF, is as far as I can measure still bang on, but then again I only set it on the 7th March, so I would be unhappy had it drifted already ;-)

But my Lunar Pilot, last set when the clocks went back to GMT is showing around 3secs + which is about as accurate as I can measure checking it against a Radio Corrected Digital Clock.

So far so good then my two Bulova's seem to be keeping time within spec so far. Had I seen any change in the 96B252 I would have thought that maybe something was adrift? But then I set the watch by pushing the crown in as the seconds tick over, so how accurate my reactions are is a moot point.

Best regards,
Jim


----------



## BillSWPA

My Sea King 262 kHz keeps +14 to +18 sec./year. I never have to adjust the time except for battery changes and daylight savings time. I am very happy, and would like to see Bulova offer more watches with this movement.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## odd_and_vintage_fan

Update for the US changeover for my 2016 Moonwatch, still on the original battery.

In the Spring, it was -2 seconds from the previous Fall. Today in the Fall, it was +5 seconds. 3 spy.

I lost my file with Fall 2016 results for the first few months, so since the Fall 2016 reset, it has lost 10 seconds. The crystal was running at -9 spy initially, but has since aged into nearly perfect.

The HAQ forum does not deem this sufficient performance. b-)


----------



## ObiWonWD40

odd_and_vintage_fan said:


> Update for the US changeover for my 2016 Moonwatch, still on the original battery.
> 
> In the Spring, it was -2 seconds from the previous Fall. Today in the Fall, it was +5 seconds. 3 spy.
> 
> I lost my file with Fall 2016 results for the first few months, so since the Fall 2016 reset, it has lost 10 seconds. The crystal was running at -9 spy initially, but has since aged into nearly perfect.
> 
> The HAQ forum does not deem this sufficient performance. b-)


Bulova IMHO do not seem to trumpet their performance greatly, much to the annoyance of some of their employees who work for the Satellite Offices, from my experience. But after great expense and probable risk to life and limb, I have come up with a working theory.
*
The most probable cause for a Bulova Precisionist not performing to the 10SPY spec over a period of years is down to the lack of an EOL indicator on the battery in my opinion.*

Once the battery drops below a critical voltage level, the watch will continue to function, but at the expense of accuracy! I have not tested sufficiently to determine just what the voltage drops to before it still continues to function but in-accurately but I am of the opinion these days that I am going to note the date when the battery goes in and after two years change it as soon a I can! I am going to note the Voltage of the battery as it goes in and where it is once I remove it, as for a good quality battery I am not expecting it to be dead, but as a new battery is going to cost me less than £2.

OK, one of the first things I determined I would learn how to do was to change batteries on most of my Quartz watches. 95% of my watches I have found to be pretty much straight forward, and none of my Bulovas are in the 5% that are a Pig's Breakfast of various types! The biggest issue I have with the Bulova watches is the lack of decent instructions and manuals, but in no way are they the worst! On balance £20 worth of tools should enable most people to change the battery on most watches. Even making sure that you maintain Water Resistance is not beyond the capability of most hobby watch repairers. If you have a watch that is critical that your make sure is water resistant, then only a good repair shop is going to be able to do that anyway and from my experience, most of those guys are reasonable and will pressure test a watch for a few quid so you can find out if you did it properly!

So this will take a while to verify, but if I am right then this is the best way to keep your Precisionist Watch running to it legendary accuracy. I have seen it here on this forum, most guys are very happy to run their watches on until the battery finally turns it toes up and the watch stops. But what I advocate, is change the battery more by the calendar than the failure of the power source. There is another benefit to this too, a Lithium battery can leak, but this is more prevalent once the battery is very near to running out of power. So this is another reason why I am happy to change the batteries more frequently, so they never get near to that point where they are more prone to leaking. A battery leaking in your watch is certainly not going to be an event that makes your day! <| Unless you want an excuse to buy a new watch that is :-s

So that is my latest comment. Having first bought a Lunar Pilot around 18 months ago, I have got hooked on this type of Bulova Watch and three more have joined it. Two I bought as Bulova Factory refurbished, and one thing I noticed was although the watches were around six to twelve months old at the time, Bulova stressed that the batteries had been replaced before the watches were shipped. OK that proves very little, except that on a Belt & Braces basis, the engineers replaced a potential trouble point before it could cause an issue. Which to the engineer in me strikes a cord but to most people probably means not a lot.

Very best regards,
Jim


----------



## wbird

Well still around 12 spy and on the same now at least 4 1/2 year old battery. Gotta say at this point I'm more interested to see how long the battery last than the accuracy.


----------



## ObiWonWD40

wbird said:


> Well still around 12 spy and on the same now at least 4 1/2 year old battery. Gotta say at this point I'm more interested to see how long the battery last than the accuracy.


All batteries are not born equal. You can but two batteries from the same maker but with different batch numbers and you will find they are markedly different! Yes this is a right Pain In The Rear End, but the explanation is quite simple, not all the brands make their own batteries! They get them made to a broad spec by a number of actual manufacturers and they can be a real difference between makers and batteries. Also the problem these days is most get made to a price rather than a quality.

So you can get a great one that lasts for ever, but then replace it with one of the same make and it dies within months. Trying to prove that the battery is actually made of the chemical composition is expensive, so the wholesalers/retailers tend more to rely on reputation. But the margins on batteries are really minuscule so it can end up being a lottery.

However, assuming the battery you have in a watch was put in by a manufacturer or a good repair company, rather than some guy in a back street shop that is here one week and gone the next, you have a better chance that they will have a good source and the battery will last.

Batteries that are of an Alkaline Chemical Composition are good in that their characteristic is to deliver a fairly constant power curve throughout their life, but drop like a stone once they get near to being exhausted. So great that your battery has lasted 4.5 years, but be aware that once it fails it could go quite suddenly and as the Bulova has no Eol circuitry to help, the first you may be aware of it is when it dies. Which may or may not be a risk point for the battery to leak or weep. Some types or makes of 2016 batteries have been known to start to weep as they get older and likely to fail. My research and experience comes not from Watch Battery use, but in memory backup systems for computer servers, where the 2016 and 2032 batteries are used to maintain the clock time and the setup in the computer boards. Therefore on a service we cleaned the filters and changed the batteries as they only cost a few pence and changing was cheaper than having them fail!

To be fair failure was rare, in fact the computers often got changed before the batteries failed in many cases, but once you had the downtime cost of a server failure, the battery cost for a change was peanuts in comparison.

Best regards,
Jim


----------



## wbird

Well I'm still driving this watch like a new car on a test drive, how far will it go. Right now it is at around 5 years, and still running around 12spy. Pretty consistant and impressive performance through the years.

I know it will drop like a rock when the battery eventually dies. That's okay, more curious about when that happens, than concerned about battery leaking. When it stops working i'll notice it and change it quickly.

Than I'll find out if I can pop it open using a rubber ball.


----------



## odd_and_vintage_fan

My Moonwatch was in for a battery, but it's re-synched for the next cycle. I'm curious to see how the new battery will affect timekeeping. Will it match the first year (timekeeping dependent on voltage) or the most recent year (crystal aging)?

I'll see you in the Fall, wbird!


----------



## Chilli Peppers

Hello all! Might I say, it was quite cool to read through a full four years of posts. It appears that unlike in some other not-to-be-mentioned forums, the vast majority of you have observed amazing accuracy with your uhf watches! I will(should) be receiving my precisionist (96b257) within the next couple of days. Was thinking of running it against a Seiko solar chronograph that I have, which has been reasonably accurate. Very much looking forward to the test! It was very cool to see how, eventually, most of you just altogether stopped worrying about keeping track of your watches accuracy. If you did check on it, it seemed it was primarily just to see -exactly- how accurate your watch was (after years you already knew it was incredibly accurate). Either way, I shall be adding to a forum that has managed to stay refreshingly positive and very consistent! Cheers! On a side note...be safe, and socially distance!


----------



## inner_romeo

My experience with my Snorkel has been consistent accuracy within 10 SPY.


----------



## wbird

Well still rolling along on that 5 1/2 plus year old battery and getting 12 spy accuracy. Pretty impresive watch.


----------



## Wolfsatz

wbird said:


> Well still rolling along on that 5 1/2 plus year old battery and getting 12 spy accuracy. Pretty impressive watch.


Let me put one big (Yeah Right) on a UHF Bulova lasting past 3.5 years.... when it dies please let me know if it comes out of space. perhaps you are one of those that pull the crown when not being worn?

I put fresh batts on the square chrono circa 2008 not UHF and my Beige UHF Military. I am expecting that the Lunar Pilot may need replacing sometime this year.

I'll be back on March DST to check on these. 

Bulova Moon Pilot Presicionist323.563/8/20Quick SetSync'd 11/1/2020Bulova Snorkel Presicionist101.113/8/20Quick SetSync'd 11/1/2020Bulova Lobster Presicionist 101.113/8/20Quick SetSync'd 11/1/2020Bulova Beige Military Presicionist 283.113/8/20Quick SetSync'd 11/1/2020Bulova Marine Star Multi-Function13-1.443/8/20Quick SetSync'd 11/1/2020Bulova Blue Square Chrono102.503/8/20Sync'd 11/1/2020


----------



## Wolfsatz

I just realized that I forgot to sync one ticker last week.. it is currently 1 second off... but I can't recall when was the last time I sync'd it.

Technology to the rescue. This one has kept to 1 second from last DST change in March. Which also explains why it is on the correct time. I last sync'd a year ago on DST Nov 2019. For 9 months it stayed one hour off. So pretty darn impressive.

Bulova Presicionist by Wolfsatz, on Flickr



Date and Time (Original) - 2020:03:24 10:45:55"


Precisionist by Wolfsatz, on Flickr



Date and Time (Digitized) - 2020:06:26 10:18:02

Precisionist by Wolfsatz, on Flickr


----------



## Wolfsatz

So... repeating the experiment for another year.... did not mess the time.. just changed the date. and updated my spreadsheet.

Presicionist by Wolfsatz, on Flickr


Bulova Moon Pilot Precisionist323.563/8/20Quick SetSync'd 11/1/2020Bulova Snorkel Precisionist 101.113/8/20Quick SetSync'd 11/1/2020Bulova Lobster Preci101.113/8/20Quick SetSync'd 11/1/2020Bulova Beige Military Precisionist 283.113/8/20Quick SetSync'd 11/1/2020Bulova Marine Star Multi-Function13-1.443/8/20Quick SetSync'd 11/1/2020Bulova Blue Square Chrono102.503/8/20Sync'd 11/1/2020Bulova 3 Hander Precisionist 10.0811/2/19Quick SetNot Sync'd


----------



## Zedd88

Too early to tell on my Accutron II Alpha:










But my Lunar Pilot has been so far impressive in a span of almost a year:









The Alpha is surprisingly my current favorite watch and getting more wrist time than my other automatic watches.


----------



## 1SPY

My Accutron II Surveyor, bought in 2015, is accurate to about +8spy, worn occasionally. It seems to have a negative temperature coefficient as I notice it gains when not worn, especially in winter. I'm now going to wear it more and see if it achieves even greater accuracy. 
If it wasn't a sub 10spy watch I wouldn't be happy with it though: I hate the sloppiness of the minute hand. It's extremely difficult to adjust so that it agrees with the seconds position. Also it's just a bit too chunky for me and is prone to getting knocked. 
I'm now on the lookout for something smaller with similar accuracy at an affordable price.


----------



## wbird

Well, that now 6 year old battery, is still going, and the watch is still running at 11 spy since I last synched it. Clearly rarely turning on the second hand or use of the chronograph is extending the battery life.
Really nothing mysterious about battery life, anyone with a two hand quartz watch like a Movado will attest to the battery life on those watches, wife has two and the batteries on those watches last well over 5 years. Assuming you use a reputable battery brand.


----------



## Hodari D.

Just took receipt of this Bulova Precisionist 96B257. Beautiful blue dial. I love the smooth seconds hand. It's a bit large for my taste but I really wanted the smooth sweep and the accuracy. The black leather band is surprisingly comfortable although it's a bit large for me. I had one of these precisionist watches a few years ago when they were readily available but it was too big so I sold it off. I kind of regretted that and I'm glad that I was able to pick this one up at a fairly reasonable price.


----------

