# Solar vs. Seiko Kinetic vs. Battery?



## Shel (Feb 5, 2010)

Just received my first solar watch. Actually, I purchased two solar watches in the last two weeks, one for me and another for my son.

It got me thinking about the different ways watch manufacturers use to power their devices.

My watch, an MTG1000-9, came completely dead, and required that I put it under the light... a reading light, to be specific, for about five hours, until the hands finally came to life! My son's AWG100 came fully charged.

What attracted me to solar is the belief (hope?) that I won't have to bother replacing the battery for a long, long time (rechargeable batteries will eventually lose their ability to hold a charge, but I'd figure that will be much further off into the future then if I simply had a regular battery which needed replacement when it went dead)

I was browsing in the Seiko forums, and noticed some posts from people with Kinetic watches, who were having issues with the watch. If they didn't wear it much of the time, or if they left it in a drawer, it would go dead. Some of them said they'd wear it to recharge it, while watching t.v., and shake their wrist. Others were looking into self winding boxes, but I read those won't work on Seiko Kinetic watches, as the movement is different then automatic watches....

So... if you need to go to additional hassles to keep the watch working, while using a Kinetic watch, doesn't that kind of defeat the purpose?

For that matter, have any of you, with solar watches, found that you've needed to go to extra lengths, to keep the solar watch going, where you wouldn't have needed to if it was a simple battery powered watch?

For that matter, while I LOVE technology and the "wow" factor, is it really that much easier then simply taking your watch every two, three years and putting a new battery in it? (My Tag Heuer lasted over TEN YEARS with the same battery!)

Just wondering what other people's thoughts are... solar? kinetic? automatic? or stick with a simple replaceable battery?

Are these mostly sales gimmicks?

Thanks!


----------



## cal..45 (Jun 4, 2006)

since a protrek PRG-80YT with CTL1616 solar battery (found on most modern casio solar watches) died on me for no obvious reason, i am sceptical about the whole solar thing.

i think solar *IS* an improvement in "regular" watches (no ABC type) over those mini-silver-oxide battery cells which require every two years or so a change.

in my opinion solar *IS NOT* an improvement on watches which already run on a CR2016, CR2025, CR2032 or even bigger 3 volt lithium battery, that will last for many, many years (in "regular" watches). i also came to the conclusion, that solar batteries are simply out of place in ABC watches where is lots of power required and a quick battery change might be necessary. I know there are lots of people who think otherwise but this based on my experience and my opinion.

i can't tell anything about kinetic watches, since i don't have one. if i am not mistaken, the power is stored in a capacitor, rather than a battery. i don't know if one technique is better over the other but one thing is for sure: with a kinetic watch, one is even more autarkic - all whats needed is movement of the arm.

cheers


----------



## Swordman (Jan 10, 2009)

For me, solar is best, as I just leave it by the wondow sill when I'm not wearing it. That, and I can have guiltless use of the illuminator.

Battery powered ones are good if you're lazy and store your watches away. The fact they are so maintennence free has quite an appeal, but alas the battery will die someday and will need replacing sooner than the solar rechargeable ones.

Automatics are nice to have. Just be prepared to readjust them if they are off your wrist for more than a few days. They will also come in handy when there's an EMP or if you're orbiting the earth. So, Tuesday, then.

I think seiko kinetic is a nice idea if it's your only watch. The last thing you want with something with a rechargeable battery is to let the battery run down completely.


----------



## Nessism (Dec 3, 2009)

Generally speaking I think solar or Kenitic is a good idea, although on many ABC watches the power draw is quite low so the battery lasts a good long while. My old $15 Casio LCD watch battery lasted about 10 years which was nice but a quartz Seiko received as a gift would go though a battery in less than 2 years which was a major hassle (back before I started changing my own batteries). Guess it just depends although personally I'll pay extra for solar because it appeals to my inner tech'y side.


----------



## Shel (Feb 5, 2010)

Nessism said:


> . Guess it just depends although personally I'll pay extra for solar because it appeals to my inner tech'y side.


Yeah, I wonder how much I purchased a solar watch because I "wanted a techy watch" and how much of it was really feeling that it would be less hassle then needing to replace the batteries every couple of years.


----------



## G-Junkie (Jan 29, 2010)

There's a really uneven balance between technology and convenience. People also mistake technology for convenience when in actuality its just to opposite.

I personally think they're gimmicks. Solar/atomic watches, while being fantastic technology, many people tend to go out of their way to make sure they're fully charged or that they received their nightly signal. They get the feeling that if see that M on the charge indicator or if don't see that RCVD, the watch is flawed and they'll do what it takes to make it optimal again. the result is less actual convenience while a regular battery can be changed in 30 minutes tops every 10 years.

Kinetics aren't that new and very technological, but they're very complex and meticulously engineered pieces of machinery. As you've already mentioned, people wear it and go out of the way just to keep them running. and if they don't wear them for a while, they have to readjust it every time they pick it up. And every few years, you have to take it out to a regularly scheduled service like you would a car.

Typical cases of being owned by the machine instead of the other way around as its intended to be. Some people don't mind it, and some do.

The watch you want depends on how well you can balance your love of complex engineering or technology and your need for convenience.


----------



## BenL (Oct 1, 2008)

Well, to be honest, I _do_ treat my solar watches slight differently: I keep them by the window, or make sure they are on the top shelf of my watch box with the display top so that they get a healthy dose of light each day.

While I do agree with you that the Kinetics do require a bit more work, my understanding is that they do have a lengthy power reserve (something like 6 months, just like the Casio solars), and that they are quickly recharged when you wear them. It's not like you have to wear them to the gym every day to keep them charged up.


----------



## Kabong30 (Jan 24, 2010)

I like solar, I like automatics. Battery powered watches are OK, but I have a harder time feeling that they are "dependable" but that has more to do with my personal hang-ups than anything with the watch.


----------



## ggyy1276 (May 21, 2006)

As long as you wear it frequently it will be fine, 
and a quick run will surely charge it to full or close to full.
In general, winders are less efficient with Kinetics, 
so if you own more than a couple, a Kinetic charger is the way to go.
I think Kinetics are simply better suited with those
more "faithful" one-watch owners :-d

Solars are relatively less work, but I still find myself
checking the power reserve needlessly from time to time.
However, I'll be more irritated if there is no reserve indicator :-d.


----------



## G-Junkie (Jan 29, 2010)

BenL said:


> Well, to be honest, I _do_ treat my solar watches slight differently: I keep them by the window, or make sure they are on the top shelf of my watch box with the display top so that they get a healthy dose of light each day.
> 
> While I do agree with you that the Kinetics do require a bit more work, my understanding is that they do have a lengthy power reserve (something like 6 months, just like the Casio solars), and that they are quickly recharged when you wear them. It's not like you have to wear them to the gym every day to keep them charged up.


Do you also try to wear short sleeved shirts or roll up your sleeves or keep your wrist in the sunlight while driving? I know plenty of folks who do that when wearing a solar, myself included :-(


----------



## duke4c (Feb 12, 2006)

G-Junkie said:


> Do you also try to wear short sleeved shirts or roll up your sleeves or keep your wrist in the sunlight while driving? I know plenty of folks who do that when wearing a solar, myself included :-(


+1

Sadly I'm guilty as charged your honor. Mind you "couple of years" is at least 6 in Casio world if you don't use backlight and alarm. But there is also a question on cost... We pay 100 dollars or more in extra cash to avoid changing the battery when iin realaty it costs about a buck or two to purchase new battery... 
About the only bad thing about battery powered watch is wondering when the watch was made to try to guess how long the battery would last...
All beeing said I still pay more for solar... Sad I know...


----------



## Shel (Feb 5, 2010)

G-Junkie said:


> Do you also ... keep your wrist in the sunlight while driving? :-(


:roll:

oops... alright, yea, I DO sometimes move my left hand, while driving, so that it's in the sunlight, or tilt my wrist so that the sunlight strikes the face of my watch directly.

However, that is NOT quite the same as watching television with your Seiko Kinetic watch on, and moving your wrist for 30, 40 minutes to charge it back up, or going out and purchasing a watch winder or electric kinetic charger.

That just seems to defeat the entire purpose of Kinetic.. to eliminate the need to bother changing batteries! And no, I don't feel that simply leaving your solar watch on a window sill also defeats the purpose of solar... it's not THAT hard to simply place your watch for a few hours on a window sill to get sunlight.

Self winders, in their day, were actually pretty ingenious.

(NOT trying to start a battle between brands, or putting down Seiko... if people have had Seiko Kinetic watches, and love 'em, I'd love to hear about it.)


----------



## cal..45 (Jun 4, 2006)

the problem that i see with kinetic, as well with solar, as well with automatic watches is, that *WE* are collectors. all three are certainly fine techniques and carefree (well, more or less) if one is having only one or maybe two watches, which means they got worn all the time and therefore light/movement.

personally i have enough watches to wear every day another one through out a month and that is exactly were the non-carefree aspect chime in. as i wrote above, i don't have a kinetic but i have 5 solar powered casios and one automatic (seiko frankenmonster). i can let the seiko sit in it's watchcase or a drawer or where ever and if i want to wear it, i give it a two minutes shake, adjust time and date and that's about it. i can not simply put my solars in a case or drawer over a significant period of time without risking to damage the battery permanently (and even with poper "window sill care", one died as i wrote in post # 2). so in my opinion is an automatic ironically more carefree than a solar if not worn on a regular basis. same goes for a kinetic i presume, though i'm not sure if the capacitor suffers if it gets discharged often...:think: (maybe an electrician can give a proper answer to that?)

cheers


----------



## JERSTERCA (Apr 4, 2008)

I have one Kinetic the BFK Seiko SKA371 Its a large watch and I really like it the skeleton hands on it set it apart from other watches. Makes it unique :-! I have had it for a while now and have posted in threads in the Seiko forum. I like the idea but do not think the execution is that great. Its takes a lot of wearing / shaking to get it up to full power. Like cal said most here have lots of watches and I have to remember to wear it once a week to keep it charged up. The rotor does sound cool when charging the battery, the new ones do not use a capacitor. Changing the battery is also more complicated and requires removal and installing the rotor. I have seen the how to photos, more work than I want to do.I would be just as happy with a 10 year battery. My luminox came with a 10 year battery and is still going strong over 7 years. I think with new technologies batteries should last even longer  I don't think I would pay much more if I had the choice between a 10 year battery or solar, remember solar charges a battery and that will also need to be replaced. We don't really know how long the solar charged batteries will last.:think:


----------



## G-Junkie (Jan 29, 2010)

Seems like the more technology the gadget has, the more you have to cater to its needs, which defeats the purpose of it being supposedly more convenient. can't put a solar in the the drawer, it has to be by the window, and when you charge it, it has to charge for a good portion of the day if not over the next few days. A simple battery change will only cost you a couple dollars and only 15 minutes of sitting at the work bench, and this is once every 10 or so years.

Casio was smart to design their solars to look really good, otherwise I'd never have bought the 4 that I have right now. :-d


----------



## Geopro (Jan 19, 2008)

:-!I was wearing mostly Suuntos until Casio came out with solar and then added atomic. I wanted to try the solar technology to eliminate having to change a battery. My first atomic solar was a PAW1300-3v and I have not had any trouble from it. And when I wore it I wore it 24/7 (slept in it to, it'll sync while youre wearing it sleeping). I now own 5 Casio solar/atomics ( PAW2000T-7, GW-9200-1 Dragon Riseman, GW7900B-1, GW0M5600-1) and have not had any trouble with any of them. I am very satisfed with the way Casio has implemented these technologies. They efficientlybudget power even in th Pathfinder (ABC) line. I use the heck out of mine and don't have an issue with them staying charged. So I'm all about some solar Casios!!!:-!


----------



## Pelican (Mar 26, 2009)

I too was hesitant about the solar atomic technology for a while, as it has not yet proven itself over the long-term. However, after a little more thought, it occurred to me that it'll take another 10-15 years for us to be certain as to how these watches stand the test of time. If, as I think they will, they do prove themselves it would mean that I'd have missed out on a decade of hassle-free watch ownership and enjoyment just because of a little over-cautiousness on my account.
All G-Shocks, especially Solar Atomic models, are built to be used rather than kept in drawers - I use all of mine (about 10 or so now I think) and love them. If, by some bad luck, one should fail then they don't exactly cost the earth to replace - plus it would provide me with another excuse to buy yet another watch :-d.

Regarding other technologies, I have 2 Dakota 'Torch' watches that use electromagnetic induction to recharge the batteries. There are no cables - the watch simply rests on a stand and it charges automatically. These watches feature LED illumination and the brightest setting allows you to use the watch as a flashlight (a bit like the Victorinox Night Vision II - but 30% of the price and no batteries to worry about). You can use the illumination as much as you like (great for camping) and there's no worrries about getting enough sunlight. Here's a link to how it works:
http://www.ricohelemex.co.jp/en/products/req/
https://dakota.webfeatsecurity.com/chosenwatch.aspx?ProdID=81

I personally love this alternative approach.
(I have no affiliation with either company by the way)


----------



## mikeair (Sep 28, 2008)

I agree with Holger (cal..45)!

I have several Solar-G's but solar is not a must have IMO. I don't know how long the battery of my solar-watches will run but I have a lot of non-solar G's wich are 10 years and older and they are still running with the first battery!! :-d 

But what I like is the multiband and this option is as far as I know just avaiable with solar. :roll: That's the only reason why I bought my solar-watches. So if I would have the choice of two identical watches one with and the other without solar I would prefer the non-solar watch.

IMO there is also one big negativ point on solar-watches. I like the military style (like Holger also does! ;-)) That means for me a watch has to be matt. The solar pannels are unfortunately very shining and this purple color looks absolutely uncool! 

Mike


----------



## Shel (Feb 5, 2010)

G-Junkie said:


> Seems like the more technology the gadget has, the more you have to cater to its needs, which defeats the purpose of it being supposedly more convenient. can't put a solar in the the drawer, it has to be by the window, and when you charge it, it has to charge for a good portion of the day if not over the next few days. :-d


Actually, with Casio's power saving mode's, my watch can sit in a drawer for up to five months, with no sunlight, and will keep time accurately (well, no atomic sync, obviously, but within 20 sec +-). My son's watch manual claims his watch can sit in a drawer for up to seven months, without sunlight, and continue running.

I'd say that's a reasonable compromise. Needing to take your watch out of a drawer every two, three months seems reasonable for the benefits. By the way, some Solar watches can go a year with no light.

Not too bad...


----------



## sgtslice (Dec 27, 2008)

JERSTERCA said:


> I have one Kinetic the BFK Seiko SKA371 Its a large watch and I really like it the skeleton hands on it set it apart from other watches. Makes it unique :-! I have had it for a while now and have posted in threads in the Seiko forum. I like the idea but do not think the execution is that great. Its takes a lot of wearing / shaking to get it up to full power. Like cal said most here have lots of watches and I have to remember to wear it once a week to keep it charged up. The rotor does sound cool when charging the battery, the new ones do not use a capacitor. Changing the battery is also more complicated and requires removal and installing the rotor. I have seen the how to photos, more work than I want to do.I would be just as happy with a 10 year battery. My luminox came with a 10 year battery and is still going strong over 7 years. I think with new technologies batteries should last even longer  I don't think I would pay much more if I had the choice between a 10 year battery or solar, remember solar charges a battery and that will also need to be replaced. We don't really know how long the solar charged batteries will last.:think:


+1. "Kinetic" in Seiko watches and "Solar/Eco Drive" are simply two methods of recharging the battery. The bottom line is that either method obliges one to do something to keep the watch charged. A regular battery that will last 10 years or so is far more convenient and carefree. Further improvements on it would put the solar/eco drive to shame considering that you only have to change the battery when it runs out.. and that will take only 5 minutes or so. I think it's worth paying extra for a battery that lasts that long.b-)


----------



## Fantasy (Dec 28, 2008)

prob w/ kinetic is moving parts. once busted a kinetic by rollerblading w/ it on and swinging arm forcefully. movement snapped. yes, i'm a maniac when I exercise, but just letting you know.. On other hand (LOL), no one skates anymore! -f


----------



## cal..45 (Jun 4, 2006)

the following question always pops up my mind whenever we have this debate "solar vs. non-solar" or something similar:

if casio were so convinced about their solar technology as they claim to be, why do they put the "power save" feature on their solar watches in the first place?

why is it, that at least 80% of all solar watches have only a 1,5 seconds illumination time?

why is it not even possible to shut down the "power save" function in certain watches (GW-2000 series for instance) and why do they get into "sleep mode" after only one hour left in darkness?

the question can be also asked from the other way around:

why is there not even one non-solar watch (at least to my knowledge, please correct me if i'm wrong) that does have a "power save" function? can't be a technical problem can it?

why is it that lots (sadly, still not remotely enough) battery powered watches have 3, 5 seconds or even infinite (when light-button kept pressed) el-backlight?

it is certainly not a coincidence, that casio always recommend to put solar watches under a light source whenever it is possible. in my opinion they have a relative good marketing instrument developed with their solar/atomic scheme, which brings big cash and now they do everything to protect this scheme. nothing wrong with that, it's business as usual. but we should also be aware of the fact, that those necesarry steps serve one purpose and one purpose only: to overcome the limitations those low capacity solar batteries (CTL1616 18mah, CTL920 5.5 mah) provide, contrary to the high capacity of lithium cells (CR2025 with 170mah for instance). just in case anyone is interested or havn't seen it yet, i started a thread about this a few month ago:

https://www.watchuseek.com/showthread.php?t=328354&highlight=CTL1616+capacity

cheers


----------



## Modium (Jan 25, 2010)

I haven't had my solar all that long but after the initial charge during the day it was easy under my desk lamp...

It hasnt moved off of high charge - I avoid sunlight and spend almost all day indoors .. use the auto EL function with complete abandon and regularly do it for fun.

I wear the watch every day and sleep with it on (often lights up through the night) and don't go out of my way to charge it...

Yet with the small amount of sun it sees.. (without trying) it keep on high charge..

Personally - I am sold... I am sure if I sat there it would drop off to medium charge, but its a peace of mind knowing it is charged.

I do have power save turned on... but a flick of the wrist brings it out of save and turns the light on..

just my experience so far.. :-!


----------



## Shel (Feb 5, 2010)

cal..45 said:


> the following question always pops up my mind whenever we have this debate "solar vs. non-solar" or something similar:
> 
> if casio were so convinced about their solar technology as they claim to be, why do they put the "power save" feature on their solar watches in the first place?
> 
> ...


I'd say that Casio initiated the "Power Saver" mode to improve the abilities of their solar watches, NOT because they don't have faith in them!

ALL manufacturers are trying to improve their products.... car manufacturers come out with more powerful engines, new features... hardly PROVES they don't have faith in their products!

I happen to think that Casio's Power Saving features are brilliant!

My son's AWG100, for example, has two power saving modes.

The first mode, which the watch will go into when in total dark (but ONLY between the hours of 10pm and 6am... between 6am and 10pm it will NOT enter PS mode) turns off the LCD display.

After 6 or 7 days, the entire watch (beep tone, automatic solar syncing, analog timekeeping stopped at 12 midnight) shuts down, EXCEPT that it continues to keep accurate time (+-15sec/month) for UP TO SEVEN MONTHS!

Hey, if I can stick my solar powered watch in a drawer, and not worry about it for six months, and after that time simply remove it from the drawer and either put it in bright light, or tap a button, and the watch will turn on, and automatically move to the correct time... no pulling out the manual, no winding, no having to set it up all over again... I'm one happy camper!

And if Casio figures out a way, next year, in two, three years, to keep the watch working and keeping correct time for FIVE YEARS while stashed in a drawer, that hardly proves that they don't have confidence in their current models, it proves that they're always working to improve their product, which is what we want them to do!

Also, they acknowledge that frequent use of illumination will run down the battery, that's hardly news... and it also isn't a real issue for me. I use the illumination when in a movie theater, or while sleeping, and 1.5 seconds is basically enough time to see the time... the point of illumination! It's NOT to use it as a flashlight.

After a full charge, Casio states that eight minutes of exposure to sunlight will keep the watch fully charged. Pretty impressive!

If a solar watch will keep accurate time, and go longer without needing a battery change, while allowing me to use my watch as I normally would, I'd say it's worked to perfection! That does NOT mean it can't be improved (again, if I can stick it in a drawer for six months without needing to reset it, one year would be better)

If either of my solar watches stop working due to solar feature in a year, two years... three years... I'll certainly change my tune, and not like 'em.

Right now, working as they do, I think they're totally proven and work excellently!


----------



## stripe (May 20, 2009)

cal..45 said:


> why is there not even one non-solar watch (at least to my knowledge, please correct me if i'm wrong) that does have a "power save" function? can't be a technical problem can it?


Many do. Off the top of my head, both my Tissot T-Touch Expert and also my TAG Heuer Aquaracer Chronotimer have powersave features. They are both non-solar.


----------



## cal..45 (Jun 4, 2006)

@ stripe,

thanks for the clarification but actually i was refering only to casio watches.

cheers


----------



## narcosynthesis (Dec 28, 2009)

My old £40 analogue watch seemed to go through a battery every 1.5-2 years, which got annoying (especially when it goes flat at the start of a two week trip away camping...). When I went watch shopping for an upgrade for it the Citizen eco-drive won me over - no need to worry about the battery going flat suddenly, and since I don't need to swap the battery every so often, the case it built stronger and more solidly which is a bonus.

I got it charged (I think the shop charged it up for me) and in the few months I have been wearing it I haven't made any effort to charge it and I have yet to see the low battery warning appearing. Considering the last few months have been the darker ones where it is more likely to be hidden under a sleeve I am not too worried.

A digital watch on the other hand I am not so worried about - my old Timex Humvee was still running on the original battery ten years on (though display was getting a bit faint) - I swapped it for a new 2016 so it won't run out at an awkward moment and that should do me a few more years... 

Still wouldn't mind a GW-M5600 sometime soon though, as even if it isn't really much of an issue the solar power does remove one variable, and I like the radio timekeeping signal - in theory I can keep it in a drawer, and when I need it, leave it sitting in the sun a while and it will be charged at keeping perfect time.


----------



## fstshrk (Mar 29, 2007)

I own several Citizen Eco-Drives and several Casio solars. No issues with either brand.

Seiko Kinetic (and Swiss Auto-Quartz) had issues with earlier capacitor based designs, but now, they are also reliable.


----------



## Modium (Jan 25, 2010)

Oh yeah .. I forgot to add.. I use the countdown timer alarm all day every day.. along with the other alarms to remind me of events.

With an older DW5600? battery powered job... I needed to change the battery every year.

As stated.. my new solar watch stays charged - so for someone using all the features (heavy power user) the solar is perfect.


----------



## Sean779 (Jul 23, 2007)

G-Junkie said:


> Solar/atomic watches, while being fantastic technology, many people tend to go out of their way to make sure they're fully charged or that they received their nightly signal. They get the feeling that if see that M on the charge indicator or if don't see that RCVD, the watch is flawed and they'll do what it takes to make it optimal again. the result is less actual convenience while a regular battery can be changed in 30 minutes tops every 10 years.
> 
> Typical cases of being owned by the machine instead of the other way around as its intended to be. Some people don't mind it, and some do.
> 
> The watch you want depends on how well you can balance your love of complex engineering or technology and your need for convenience.


I think it's funny that when an automatic/mechanical watch needs-resetting or winding because it's not as accurate as a quartz, the effort is talked about as "getting closer to your watch" or the watch needs you and thus becomes more soulful less mechanical. But similar "effort" with a solar watch such as placing it in light from a window or synching with atomic time somehow doesn't foster the same "touchy feely" relationship?


----------



## NH102.22 (Nov 10, 2011)

I guess mechanical lovers feel the need to justify their spending large amounts of money on archaic, less accurate, less reliable technology. Poor souls.


----------



## xevious (Feb 1, 2008)

NH102.22 said:


> I guess mechanical lovers feel the need to justify their spending large amounts of money on archaic, less accurate, less reliable technology. Poor souls.


No, it's not that... not about accuracy. It's about the artistry of the mechanical movements and the time honored skill involved in the craftsmanship. It's pretty amazing how accurate they are, given that they're all mechanical with no electronic parts involved. You can bet that such a watch will still work after exposure to an EMP (electro-magnetic pulse--atomic shockwave) whereas the digital watch would be fried. Of course... in most cases, the human being wearing the watch would probably suffer serious damage and care less about the watch.

The real issue is that duplicating a mechanical movement is much more expensive than duplicating a quartz movement. You can stamp out digital watches to such a volume that makes it possible to have individual units cost you just $1 to make (reselling on the market for $10). As such, they proliferate and "devalue" the technology involved. This is why top brands like Brietling and Omega made only a few digital watches, and why quartz movement models are priced quite a bit lower than mechanical automatics.


----------



## Sedi (May 21, 2007)

cal..45 said:


> why is there not even one non-solar watch (at least to my knowledge, please correct me if i'm wrong) that does have a "power save" function? can't be a technical problem can it?


The problem is: how would the non-solar watch know when to go into power safe mode? On the solar watches the solar panels "know" when it gets dark and the watch can shut down (one reason why I disable "PS" on all my solars - just hate it when the watch shuts down while I watch a movie in the dimly lit living-room). The "Lungman" would habe probably been capable of that trick as it can use the infrared sensor to measure ambient light - to my knowledge the "Lungman" was also the only non-solar G-Shock that had "full auto EL" even with 4 levels of sensitivity. You could of course install a manual power safe mode. But in fact I think the PS is not really necessary at all while wearing the watch - how much power does the LCD use anyway? Only useful IMHO if you store the watch in the dark over longer periods of time.

cheers, Sedi


----------



## Jeff_C (Feb 11, 2006)

My only comment will be anti Kinetic. And I should state Im a REAL lover of Seiko watches and have quite a large Seiko collection. But I cannot for the life of me figure out Kinetic. I think its an answer to a question never asked. If you want the personality of an auto, get an auto. If you want the accuracy of a quartz, get a quartz. I have had a few Kinetics, and presently have one. (Seiko Boss). The watch ROCKS and maybe if it was my ONLY Watch it would charge up to full capacity. But I have never had it even close. So I wear it like an auto.  LOVE that watch by the way. 

I guess the thing you get is quartz accuracy with a winding rotor... but its just not the best option. I think Kinetic was a bit of a marketing attempt at a "next step". 

I will also say, that lately I have REALLY been enjoying Citizen's eco drive technology. Great work there. I see more and more Citizens entering my collection.  (one on the way inbound). Solar in general is a great way to go. Love that there are no batteries to change and one should never need to open the case.


----------



## xevious (Feb 1, 2008)

I think Seiko did it partly as a "we can do it" endeavor... and nobody else had done it, to my knowledge. Also, they probably expected that over time they'd be able to develop a reasonably priced higher storage capacitor. But, those costs never really came down enough. Plus, unless you wear the watch during your workouts or on long walks, you'll likely find yourself running low on charge fairly often. I've never owned one... can you manually wind it?

The sun provides free energy, there for the taking. No moving parts involved. Solar is just plainly and simply better than mechanically based horological power.


----------



## Jeff_C (Feb 11, 2006)

Standard knietics (or any that i know of) cannot be wound. But they can be started up like an auto. 

So No biggie, I wear mine like an auto. Its on right now as a matter of fact. I'm about to give it a real workout on the nightstand as I settle in for a long winters nap. Its quite chilly this evening and I have no work tomorrow.


----------



## Bonky McBonk (May 20, 2011)

ah, necroposting. 

I'm big into flashlights and use a lot of rechargeables in them.. enough to see that they're not nearly as robust as "primaries" (ie., non-rechargeables). They're more prone to explosion and failure from heat, etc. And sometimes they just die for no reason.

Also, they tend to lose capacity over time, very rapidly if they're hot. Which is a problem because many people leave their watches baking in the sun. If the battery sits baking at 100 degrees F at a full charge it can lose up to 35% of its total capacity per year. ( How to Prolong Lithium-based Batteries - Battery University ) Even if kept fully charged on the wrist at room temperature it's going to lose 20% of its capacity per year. Meaning that after 5 years the battery only has about 32% of its capacity left.

I imagine they will last about as long as your standard 2025 battery but toward the end of their lives will not hold a decent charge and will be frustrating to use.

So that's not to say they're 'bad' or inferior, but folks who think they'll never have to open up their watch to replace a battery are fooling themselves.

I'm waiting for solar watches that have capacitors that hold a decent charge. Maybe 10 years away. That way you'll truly never have to replace a battery. The concept of caustic chemicals creating electricity will someday become obsolete, I hope.


----------



## chromehead (Jun 24, 2008)

imo...

kinetics: more moving mechanical parts = more points of failure

solar: as stated its original capability to hold charge decreases with time


can't wait for them to put some 10-20 year fat lithiums into Gs. they'll probably die due to battery leakage thou


----------



## xevious (Feb 1, 2008)

Bonky McBonk said:


> I'm big into flashlights and use a lot of rechargeables in them.. enough to see that they're not nearly as robust as "primaries" (ie., non-rechargeables). They're more prone to explosion and failure from heat, etc. And sometimes they just die for no reason.


Have you tried Sanyo Eneloop batteries? They're quite a few steps above the typical commercial grade batteries. In any case, watch batteries are a very different type of battery from the ones used in watches (low discharge vs. high discharge) and not really a fair comparison here.



Bonky McBonk said:


> Also, they tend to lose capacity over time, very rapidly if they're hot. Which is a problem because many people leave their watches baking in the sun. If the battery sits baking at 100 degrees F at a full charge it can lose up to 35% of its total capacity per year. ( How to Prolong Lithium-based Batteries - Battery University ) Even if kept fully charged on the wrist at room temperature it's going to lose 20% of its capacity per year. Meaning that after 5 years the battery only has about 32% of its capacity left.


"Many people leave their watches baking in the sun"? :roll: Maybe people that _you_ know or yourself, perhaps... but in my experience this is not the case at all. Yes, a few times during the summer, one might leave a watch resting on a towel and get a good sun baking, but hey--GShock watches are extremely durable and easily survive such exposure, as well as protect the battery within. The batteries are designed to deal with extreme temperature ranges as well. And I've seen reports from some people getting 10 years on a CR-2016 inside a G-Shock. Also... I have a Citizen Eco-Drive solar watch coming up on 14 years now (owned since new). Specs say it should go no more than 80 days on a full charge if not exposed to light. I did this test at the 10 year mark. And you know what? The watch was in the final warning stage of battery discharge on the *78th day*. That's barely a *2% drop* in capacity in 10 years. I don't know where you got your information of _20% capacity loss per year_, but it's completely out of line with my experience--not just with my Citizen but also based on other reports I've seen regarding Casio G-Shock solar models. Be careful about how you quote sources. Taken out of context, it's very misleading. The Battery University tests with general consumer use rechargeable batteries of the AA, AAA, C, and D type.



Bonky McBonk said:


> I'm waiting for solar watches that have capacitors that hold a decent charge. Maybe 10 years away. That way you'll truly never have to replace a battery. The concept of caustic chemicals creating electricity will someday become obsolete, I hope.


Yes, a special capacitor outside of typical battery style chemistry would be great, if provided at an inexpensive price. I suspect they'll achieve this someday, perhaps in another 10 years. You could be sure with such a watch that it would easily outlast yourself if kept from harm! And if housed in a top quality casing, definitely something to pass down to relatives.


----------



## Bonky McBonk (May 20, 2011)

Removed post, don't want to contribute to a board run by fascists.


----------



## xevious (Feb 1, 2008)

I'm not disagreeing for the sake of it. I'm just disputing your exaggerated claim of a 20% reduction in battery capacity each year as not realistic at all. Battery chemistry does vary by battery type, although the basic ingredients are pretty much the same. Anyway, yes people do leave their watches in the sunlight, so that the solar cells can recharge the secondary battery. But "baking" implies a hot environment. You can leave a watch on a windowsill inside a home where the temps are 80F or less. That's certainly not "baking"--the watch is getting sunlight under temperatures that don't affect the battery life.


----------



## NH102.22 (Nov 10, 2011)

xevious said:


> No, it's not that... not about accuracy. It's about the artistry of the mechanical movements and the time honored skill involved in the craftsmanship. It's pretty amazing how accurate they are, given that they're all mechanical with no electronic parts involved. You can bet that such a watch will still work after exposure to an EMP (electro-magnetic pulse--atomic shockwave) whereas the digital watch would be fried. Of course... in most cases, the human being wearing the watch would probably suffer serious damage and care less about the watch.
> 
> The real issue is that duplicating a mechanical movement is much more expensive than duplicating a quartz movement. You can stamp out digital watches to such a volume that makes it possible to have individual units cost you just $1 to make (reselling on the market for $10). As such, they proliferate and "devalue" the technology involved. This is why top brands like Brietling and Omega made only a few digital watches, and why quartz movement models are priced quite a bit lower than mechanical automatics.


Lol sorry, that was a joke; I am a mechanical lover, as the Illinois Bunn Special might suggest. However, I still think it is something of a w**k.


----------



## Hudson1 (Oct 13, 2013)

I stumbled across this forum as I either need to get a new battery/capacitor or simply buy a new watch. I have a *Seiko Kinetic* that has been losing capacity rather rapidly and probably can't maintain it's charge for more than two days if not one (with regular usage -- not intentional charging gymnastics which I'm not interested in doing regularly). Importantly for those who might read this, the watch is approaching *six years age*. Cost of "fixing" is estimated at $70.

I also have a Casio analog watch that is solar powered and syncs nightly. It might be around *four years age* (not exactly sure). Seems to work perfectly but I better not lose the manual as it's required to do just about anything you might want to attempt like change time zone, etc.


----------



## captain kid (Jan 6, 2010)

Hudson1 said:


> I stumbled across this forum as I either need to get a new battery/capacitor or simply buy a new watch. I have a *Seiko Kinetic* that has been losing capacity rather rapidly and probably can't maintain it's charge for more than two days if not one (with regular usage -- not intentional charging gymnastics which I'm not interested in doing regularly). Importantly for those who might read this, the watch is approaching *six years age*. Cost of "fixing" is estimated at $70.
> 
> I also have a Casio analog watch that is solar powered and syncs nightly. It might be around *four years age* (not exactly sure). Seems to work perfectly but I better not lose the manual as it's required to do just about anything you might want to attempt like change time zone, etc.


If you know the model/module or battery type maybe someone can help you out with that Seiko. Either here or in the Seiko section of the forum.

As for Casio; they aren't exactly user friendly beyond basic functions like stopwatch and countdown timer. And even those basic functions work differently on different models..
But fear not for losing the manual: Timepieces(Watches) - Manuals - CASIO


----------



## Nemo (Nov 22, 2007)

My 15 year old Raysman got his bezel and band rotten, but the module is still working and the memory slots are still full with my phone numbers and other memos...
I do trust solar G's modules. I'll do some pictures of that poor old watch tomorrow.
Cheers !


----------



## Nemo (Nov 22, 2007)

15 years of difference.


----------



## Nemo (Nov 22, 2007)

Not bad for the first solar g shock...


----------



## VicLeChic (Jul 24, 2013)

Compared to battery, I much prefer kinetic and solar. No hassle having to go to the nearest jeweler to have the battery replaced., and the water seal checked, and depending on the watch the pressure test done. Such a hassle and an unnecessary cost. Also how long will we carry on polluting just for the sake of it? Honestly we don't need disposable batteries in so many electric devices, so why on earth should we keep them in watches? Go kinetic, solar or automatic!


----------



## VicLeChic (Jul 24, 2013)

Sean779 said:


> I think it's funny that when an automatic/mechanical watch needs-resetting or winding because it's not as accurate as a quartz, the effort is talked about as "getting closer to your watch" or the watch needs you and thus becomes more soulful less mechanical. But similar "effort" with a solar watch such as placing it in light from a window or synching with atomic time somehow doesn't foster the same "touchy feely" relationship?


Not the same! With kinetic and mechanical, the user gives "life" to his watch through the movement of his arm. With a solar watch, only light will bring life to it, nothing to do with its owner. Just carelessly leaving a solar by the window is not my idea of bonding with it.


----------



## VicLeChic (Jul 24, 2013)

NH102.22 said:


> I guess mechanical lovers feel the need to justify their spending large amounts of money on archaic, less accurate, less reliable technology. Poor souls.


You miss the point completely, but never mind


----------



## VicLeChic (Jul 24, 2013)

Jeff_C said:


> Solar in general is a great way to go. Love that there are no batteries to change and one should never need to open the case.


This can also be applied to kinetic with the added benefit that you don't need to be obsessed by light exposure for it to work.



Jeff_C said:


> My only comment will be anti Kinetic. And I should state Im a REAL lover of Seiko watches and have quite a large Seiko collection. But I cannot for the life of me figure out Kinetic. I think its an answer to a question never asked. If you want the personality of an auto, get an auto. If you want the accuracy of a quartz, get a quartz. I have had a few Kinetics, and presently have one. (Seiko Boss). The watch ROCKS and maybe if it was my ONLY Watch it would charge up to full capacity. But I have never had it even close. So I wear it like an auto.  LOVE that watch by the way.
> 
> I guess the thing you get is quartz accuracy with a winding rotor... but its just not the best option. I think Kinetic was a bit of a marketing attempt at a "next step".
> 
> I will also say, that lately I have REALLY been enjoying Citizen's eco drive technology. Great work there. I see more and more Citizens entering my collection.  (one on the way inbound). Solar in general is a great way to go. Love that there are no batteries to change and one should never need to open the case.


----------



## VicLeChic (Jul 24, 2013)

xevious said:


> Plus, unless you wear the watch during your workouts or on long walks, you'll likely find yourself running low on charge fairly often. I've never owned one... can you manually wind it?.


You can if it's direct drive, and it will show you the power reserve, up to a month with my Seiko Premier MoonPhase.


----------



## behnam (Jul 17, 2015)

For solar watches it depends on the battery model and its specification, for example the battery model of edifice eqs-a500 is *CTL920 *and it has 100 times charging cycle. Also, this watch can work 8 month in dark with power saving. So if u store it in dark for 8 month and then fully charge it you can do it for 100 times and 66 years!!! So on the paper you shouldnt be worry about replacing battery!!:think::-!


----------

