# Another Soprod A10 with possible issues.



## richtel (Jul 14, 2015)

Starting to worry about these movements (though granted you only tend to hear about problems).

O1T500, four months old and worn, maybe, a dozen times.

Came to wind it before wearing- no life. Wound fully, wouldn't spring into life. Set the time and date ans screw the crown back in, still no life. Gentle tap against my hand and it starts working- and has been going now for a few hours.

I'll need to keep an eye on this- I hate it when small issues start to sow seeds of doubt in a product. At least I know Steinhart will sort it out.


----------



## BigSeikoFan (Feb 15, 2010)

I'm not familiar with this movement, but I find that many mechanical movements need a gentle nudge to get them going.

Otoh, if your watch always started while simply winding and this tap is now required to get it going, then yeah, maybe it's worrisome...

Good luck.


----------



## Craustin1 (Apr 28, 2011)

Mine did the same thing, I think Steinhart said it was the mainspring. Looks like the failure rate on these has been higher than on other movements. Took about 3-4 weeks to get it back.


----------



## Ryeguy (Jun 24, 2009)

I'll post what my watchmaker says when mine (not a Steinhart) gets diagnosed. Since the A-10 is based upon a Seiko design, you would expect it to be a robust movement. 

What is interesting to me is my Steinhart A-10 (touch wood) is running like a top and my other A-10 powered watch is on its way back for diagnosis. It seems like either they work perfectly or have issues out of the box. There is no middle ground...


----------



## JSal (Aug 27, 2012)

Ryeguy said:


> Since the A-10 is based upon a Seiko design, you would expect it to be a robust movement.


This is a highly debated but widely spread myth. The A-10 is an original Soprod design.

If you search the Steinhart forum you will find at least one if not more posts by a member with the screen name Triton. This is Simon and he is Steinhart's head watch designer. He has confirmed that the A-10 is an original Soprod design and not based on a Seiko design.

Here is a link to one of his posts confirming this...

https://www.watchuseek.com/f275/a10-vs-a10-2-a-2403178-2.html#post20497386


----------



## richtel (Jul 14, 2015)

BigSeikoFan said:


> I'm not familiar with this movement, but I find that many mechanical movements need a gentle nudge to get them going.
> 
> Otoh, if your watch always started while simply winding and this tap is now required to get it going, then yeah, maybe it's worrisome...
> 
> Good luck.


Yes, that's just it. When new (it's only 4 months old now!) it would start with 5-7 turns, as my O2Prem does. Once going it'll happily crack on.

I have observed with both that when nearly fully wound, the rotor doesn't spin freely- which might explain what some people are observing with theirs- that might just be a mechanical characteristic of these movements.


----------



## onega (Mar 17, 2014)

sounds like a similar issue with mine... premium ocean 2 black


----------



## Ryeguy (Jun 24, 2009)

JSal said:


> This is a highly debated but widely spread myth. The A-10 is an original Soprod design.
> 
> If you search the Steinhart forum you will find at least one if not more posts by a member with the screen name Triton. This is Simon and he is Steinhart's head watch designer. He has confirmed that the A-10 is an original Soprod design and not based on a Seiko design.
> 
> ...


I read the link and with all respect to Triton, I agree with MrDragon007. I also believe that Soprod would never tell a customer (Steinhart) if their movement design was based upon / inspired by / etc. another company's design.

I also strongly disagree with your statement in the linked thread that Seiko movements "will never carry the same elagancy, sumptuousness, aura and status that a real Swiss movement will." Maybe this sentiment is based upon limited exposure to Seiko movements, but those who are truly interested in horology rarely look down their noses at Seiko.

I see Seiko as being one of the world's premier timekeeping engineering / design firms. Their accomplishments in movement design over the past 60+ years rival anything European. The fact that Seiko can design and manufacture movements as robust and inexpensive as the 7s-26, to vertical clutch column wheel chronographs, to designing an entirely new class of automatic watch, the Spring Drive, is pretty awe inspiring.

Getting back to Soprod, is the A-10 "Swiss"? Absolutely. Is the A-10 movement design based upon / inspired by / strongly resembling a Seiko 4L? To my eyes, absolutely. Is there evidence linking a business relationship between Seiko and Soprod? No, and honestly it is none of my business if there is. The watch industry is full of secret dealings and there are numerous examples of "manufacturer movements" being in reality based upon existing designs. Does this diminish the A-10 as a movement in my mind? Not at all.

The only thing which diminishes the A-10 in my mind is the number of issues being raised here on this forum. Again, I own two A-10 powered watches. My Steinhart is fine, but my other A-10 powered brand is on its way back to the manufacturer (second time) for similar symptoms as what have been posted here. Having two A-10 powered watches has allowed me to realize these issues aren't simply quirks of the movement design, but rather a fault as one A-10 example starts and runs perfectly and the other exhibits the same issues presented here.

PS- not to burst your Swiss bubble too much, but Soprod is owned by the Festina Group out of Spain (owned by Miguel Rodriguez)


----------



## Ryeguy (Jun 24, 2009)

Just to add for those not aware of this A-10 versus Seiko 4L discussion Jsal and I are having (and not to derail the thread further) but here some sample photos:

Soprod A-10








Seiko 4L









The balance wheel, anti-shock design and adjustment, rotor design and bearings, screw and jewel placement.... look pretty darn similar to me. Judge for yourself.


----------



## MacTruck (May 1, 2007)

Ryeguy said:


> Just to add for those not aware of this A-10 versus Seiko 4L discussion Jsal and I are having (and not to derail the thread further) but here some sample photos:
> 
> Soprod A-10
> View attachment 7700514
> ...


----------



## Tom_ZG (Sep 16, 2015)

I just got weird behavour from my A10 in Ti500. When worn tends to run 15+ seconds slow, but when left overnight only 3s slow. It used to be up to 1 s precise. Will try to demagnetize it.

Never had issues with same movement in pilot premium

sent from Lenovo Vibe X3


----------



## richtel (Jul 14, 2015)

Thanks for bringing the thread back Tom :-d

I wonder if it's worth establishing a new and separate thread to maintain a 'register' of observed A10-2 problems, descriptions and remedies? On one hand it provides a useful reference for feeding back to Steinhart, but I'm sensitive to how it may be perceived as commercially damaging.

Thoughts?
Rich.


----------



## Ryeguy (Jun 24, 2009)

Yes - sorry to derail the thread.

I'm of mixed minds about consolidating an A-10 issues thread. On one hand, I can see how this information would be good for us, as consumers, to have access to. On the other hand, I am somewhat concerned that consolidating this information on the Steinhart sub-forum would imply that somehow it is a Steinhart-specific problem, which I believe it is not. My A-10 -powered Steinhart is ticking away happily on my wrist as I write this.

Off the top of my head, the brands using the A-10 are Aegir, OWC, Stowa, Bremont, and Steinhart (obviously). Steinhart likely sells more A-10's than any of these other listed brands, so it stands to reason statistically they would see a higher failure rate. 

I'm certain that Gunther is looking at this as he is fronting the cost to ship and repair all these returned A-10's. It'll be interesting to see if he sticks with this movement or decides to switch to something like Sellita (which had its own set of teething issues early on).


----------



## Tom_ZG (Sep 16, 2015)

Yeah my watch was already at steinhart so there is a chance that somwthing was done there that moved movement into this strange behaviour. Shame because watch is nothing but great and I really love it and would stil recommend it to anyone.

Not sure will I be sending it again back but would definetly like to exchange email or two with Gunther before I do. Not to complain but to productivly share opinions on the product and qc

sent from Lenovo Vibe X3


----------



## MacTruck (May 1, 2007)

I'm really interested in knowing if this is a bad batch or just that the A10 sucks. I'm holding off on grabbing a Titanium 500 until the smoke clears.


----------



## watchNoob (Dec 3, 2007)

I don't think it sucks but it may have the finickiness that many movements have during the first few years of production on a different line. It's reminiscent of the criticism the first generation Omega coaxial movements had even though they were derivatives of the 2892. The A-10 is derived from the Seiko 4L but it's entirely made by Festina group, springs and everything except the Incabloc assembly.

For what it's worth, I've had an A-10 in an OWC Diver for a while now and I've noticed that it is a bit more sluggish in getting going than other movements. Once it starts though, it runs well with no discernible problems.


----------



## ArticMan (Feb 12, 2010)

JSal said:


> This is a highly debated but widely spread myth. The A-10 is an original Soprod design.
> 
> If you search the Steinhart forum you will find at least one if not more posts by a member with the screen name Triton. This is Simon and he is Steinhart's head watch designer. He has confirmed that the A-10 is an original Soprod design and not based on a Seiko design.
> 
> Here is a link to one of his posts confirming this...


Then it's Triton against this guy










I personally asked him about this, since he is using Soprod movements in his watches. He said straight away that yes it is Seiko desing with Soprod improvements. And that was clear as a water to him, no doubts of any kind. I believe him.

BTW he is a vary nice person with talent and his watches are worth to look.

Sarpaneva Watches - Home


----------



## JSal (Aug 27, 2012)

watchNoob said:


> The A-10 is derived from the Seiko 4L but it's entirely made by Festina group, springs and everything except the Incabloc assembly.


Really? Would you mind posting a link to where you got this information. I'd love to see it as it.

But please don't post something that is not from an authoritative source.


----------



## JSal (Aug 27, 2012)

Accidental Double Post


----------



## JSal (Aug 27, 2012)

ArticMan said:


> Then it's Triton against this guy
> 
> 
> 
> ...


That's just his opinion. He did NOT say he spoke with Soprod nor ask them directly. As you put it "it's clear as water" to him which indicates that it is in his "opinion" because he as others do, see some similarities.

Triton went right to the source and asked someone at Soprod he knows, and I would take Triton's word as gospel.

I also sent an email to Soprod & Seiko some time ago inquiring about this and Soprod replied stating it was not based on or a copy of any Seiko movement.

I thought I had saved these emails but I cannot find them and I must have deleted them when cleaning my inbox.


----------



## Ryeguy (Jun 24, 2009)

JSal said:


> Really? Would you mind posting a link to where you got this information. I'd love to see it as it.
> 
> But please don't post something that is not from an authoritative source.


Why would Soprod ever admit to anyone that they may have purchased the IP for the A-10 from Seiko? I'm 100% certain the A-10 is produced by Soprod. I'm not 100% certain the A-10 was developed by Soprod. We all understand the watch industry is very protective of their secrets, but there are dozens of examples of "original designs" being later found to be not so original. Marketing plays a huge role in this industry, so transparency is not in the manufacturer's best commercial interest.

For example, how long did it take Tag Heuer to admit their Calibre 1887 was not in fact an "in house" design as they claimed, but rather the result of licensed Seiko IP?Summary of this story can be found here:TAG Heuer Calibre 1887- Update | The Home of TAG Heuer Collectors

Another example of "Swiss Made" secrecy is the Claro-Semag CL-888, a Swiss Made movement based on the Seagull ST-16. Our own Lysanderxiii did a side-by-side tear down of the movements to demonstrate they were essentially the same design: https://www.watchuseek.com/f72/claro-semag-cl-888-versus-sea-gull-st16-tear-down-312588.html

More recently, Bremont got caught up in the "in-house" scandal with their BWC/01 being not "in-house designed and manufactured" as marketed, but rather the movement was based upon the 6901, a movement designed and manufactured by La Joux-Perrett. The Real Story Behind The Bremont Wright Flyer In-House Made BWC/01 "London" Watch Movement | aBlogtoWatch

So, unless there is a watch industry version of the "Panama Papers", the best we will likely ever get is circumstantial evidence from which we can draw our own conclusions: does Seiko sell movement IP to other manufacturers? Yes - Heuer is our example. Do movement manufacturers establish business relationships with other movement manufacturers to remake / rebrand established designs? Yes - numerous examples. Finally, does the A-10 look remarkably similar to the Seiko 4L? IMO, yes.

Until we can get Lysander to do a side by side movement tear down we'll just have to draw our own conclusions.


----------



## MrDagon007 (Sep 24, 2012)

You know, I take my words back about Seiko having designed the A10 as a Credor originally, it was my seikoprod mistake. Despite that they look absolutely identical in the smallest details it must be... Coincidence!
Why?
If it were a true Seiko movement there would be far less issues with it !



More seriously, my A10 flieger works well and I hope it will continue to do so for many years. I could conceivably sell my other steinharts if under financial duress, but losing the premium flieger would really hurt.

Also good to see John fully energetic again. May we discuss and tease long and often.


----------



## watchNoob (Dec 3, 2007)

JSal said:


> Really? Would you mind posting a link to where you got this information. I'd love to see it as it.
> 
> But please don't post something that is not from an authoritative source.



Sure; I feel confident in saying that because it's from two authoritative sources: a series of interviews with company execs in a trade publication: MECHANICAL - Who will succeed ETA? | Europa Star Magazine . . . and Soprod's own site: Mécanique - Soprod. In the article, Soprod execs actually brag that they "source components from other subsidiaries of the group, including MHVJ in the Vallée de Joux, for escapements, and MSE in Muriaux (JU) for balance springs." On their site, the specs for their mechanical movements say 'Assortiment Manufacture Soprod'. The assortment is the old industry term for all the regulating parts of the watch - hairspring, balance wheel, lever and the associated jewels. The rest of the movement is the ebauche - the plates and gear train. The assortment components are the most difficult components to produce profitably because specialist companies like Nivarox-FAR (springs) and Incabloc SA (shock absorbers and associated jewels) have a huge advantage in proprietary materials, tooling and expert people. Even companies as exclusive as Patek-Phillipe use those suppliers because they are often just better and cheaper.

The Festina Group, which owns Soprod, went on a buying spree and bought IP from Seiko and several other specialist producers in Switzerland when they set themselves up as alternative to the Swatch group. They didn't really hide that they were buying an insurance policy against ETA.


----------



## JSal (Aug 27, 2012)

Once again, you guys post a lot of interesting reading...

But not once has anyone posted anything from any authoritative source that irrefutably states that the Soprod A10 is a licensed copy of the Seiko 4L25 or any other Seiko for that matter. 

And until someone does, I stand by what I have shown to be proof from someone in the industry who has credibility and received the information direct from Soprod that the A10 is not a copied movement. 

If anyone can show me something factual to the contrary I would be more than thrilled and I would thank you for your work.

I personally have searched and searched for an answer and to this day the only proof I have is what Simon (Steinhart's Chief Watch Designer) has told me and also stated here on WUS and he received the information from a reliable source of his at Soprod.

I have also written Soprod and Seiko an email. Soprod replied and conformed it was their own design. 

I do not have the email any longer. I meant to save it but I must have deleted it when cleaning my inbox and sent files. 

I consider myself to be excellent at finding information online but I have been unable to come up with anything except for the above mentioned. 
Maybe you will have better luck.


----------



## watchNoob (Dec 3, 2007)

It's not a licensed copy, but it's not a clean-slate design either. The relationship is more analogous to, for example, the current Sellita SW200 and the vintage Eterna 1429 (Inherited and tweaked over generations by ETA engineers). The Seiko layout comes from an intermediate parent that was called STM Holdings which used the 4L layout because it just worked. I think the vast majority of modern mechanical movements, aside from those rearranged for aesthetic reasons, descend from earlier designs in this way.

What's more impressive is that Soprod has quite a high level of in-house manufacturing for their prices; I suspect more so than some companies marketing themselves as "manufactures". That's why I cut them a bit of slack on the sluggish winding issue with early A-10s. Mass producing to tight tolerances within a budget is actually much harder than producing a few examples of a cost-no-object item.


----------



## ArticMan (Feb 12, 2010)

JSal said:


> That's just his opinion. He did NOT say he spoke with Soprod nor ask them directly. As you put it "it's clear as water" to him which indicates that it is in his "opinion" because he as others do, see some similarities.
> 
> Triton went right to the source and asked someone at Soprod he knows, and I would take Triton's word as gospel.
> 
> ...


you are free to believe what ever you want. But what Stephan told was not just opinion. Read his history and believe, these guys just know things even if they're not all around these forums.


----------



## ArticMan (Feb 12, 2010)

JSal said:


> I have also written Soprod and Seiko an email. Soprod replied and conformed it was their own design.
> 
> I do not have the email any longer. I meant to save it but I must have deleted it when cleaning my inbox and sent files.


Of course it is their desing. They bought it and made some modifications. They own it now so it's their desing.

This is about the business not about the believe.


----------



## richtel (Jul 14, 2015)

To bring this thread back on track once more -d), by way of an update I've decided that the fact the watch won't start without a bit of 'mechnical encouragement' despite full hand winding, I'm sending the watch back to Steinhart for attention. Hopefully it'll come back in better shape.
Rich.


----------



## flyinglotus1983 (Jan 9, 2016)

richtel said:


> To bring this thread back on track once more -d), by way of an update I've decided that the fact the watch won't start without a bit of 'mechnical encouragement' despite full hand winding, I'm sending the watch back to Steinhart for attention. Hopefully it'll come back in better shape.
> Rich.


Mine's been out for service for over a month now, and I've not heard a peep. It will be a slow process, for sure.

Hope you've got something nice to wear while yours is being repaired.


----------



## richtel (Jul 14, 2015)

flyinglotus1983 said:


> Mine's been out for service for over a month now, and I've not heard a peep. It will be a slow process, for sure.
> 
> Hope you've got something nice to wear while yours is being repaired.


Thanks, yes, these two babies from the Steinhart corner. FedEx came and collected the O1Ti500 this afternoon- certainly can't fault Steinhart's willingness to get it sorted out.


----------



## aahyuup (Apr 17, 2016)

*Soprod a-10 issue?*

Hello all,

First off this website is excellent.

I recently purchased a lightly used Steinhart Blue Ocean One Premium from ebay. The watch arrived and the second hand was stopped, So i moved the watch around a little bit and nothing.....i wound the watch with the crown roughly 40 times.....still nothing. I pulled the crown out farther and set the time, pushed it back in and the watch started running. 
i wore the watch for a evening, and a full day with plenty of movement. The watch kept excellent time during this time. So i put the watch in my watch box that night and didn't wear it the next day.....following day it had stopped...im guessing around 27 hours of zero use. I'm having a really hard time finding much info on this movement.....

So my questions are:
-Does this sound like normal operation to get the second hand moving on the A-10?
-Shouldn't the second hand begin to turn shortly after winding the watch or moving it around for a bit?
-ive also never had a watch show up through post not running before....or stop running in such a short period.

Any input is greatly appreciated, i'm trying to figure out f this needs to be returned to the seller. Thanks for any input!!!


----------



## g-shockbilly (Oct 24, 2014)

Many of the automatic watches I have arrived stopped, so I don't think that is an issue. I have the same watch, I've owned it for a few weeks. Once you got it going, it sounds very similar to how mine behaves. After my normal day of wearing, mine will also die if I choose not to wear it for a full day. I have never tried just fully winding it and just letting it go to see what full power reserve it actually has. More concerning is that it did not start when you hand wound it. Are you sure you had the crown in the correct position and were turning the crown in right direction (clockwise, and you should feel a little resistance?)


----------



## aahyuup (Apr 17, 2016)

*Re: Soprod a-10 issue?*

Thanks for the reply, I'm positive i had the crown in the winding position, i could feel it winding and i even double checked it through the display case back.....Let me ask you this, will your watch second hand start with just a little movement? Mine does absolutely nothing. I tried this for a minute or so before winding. All of my other watches will begin to move after i do this.


----------



## g-shockbilly (Oct 24, 2014)

Generally yes it does, if I give it what I would call "a light shake" the seconds hand starts moving


----------



## aahyuup (Apr 17, 2016)

*Re: Soprod a-10 issue?*



g-shockbilly said:


> Generally yes it does, if I give it what I would call "a light shake" the seconds hand starts moving


yeah, i get nothing. the watch was purchased in 2015. I wonder if you have to be the original owner to send it back to Steinhart for warranty?


----------



## g-shockbilly (Oct 24, 2014)

Sorry, I don't have first hand experience with that, maybe someone else here can help you. It's sad to hear all of these issues with the A-10 movement. In any case, it is a beautiful watch, I hope you get it hashed out


----------



## Richqqqq (Jan 15, 2013)

*Re: Soprod a-10 issue?*



aahyuup said:


> yeah, i get nothing. the watch was purchased in 2015. I wonder if you have to be the original owner to send it back to Steinhart for warranty?


If you have the stamped warranty steinhart. card, you can send it back to steinhart. The warranty is transferable.


----------



## aahyuup (Apr 17, 2016)

*Re: Soprod a-10 issue?*



Richqqqq said:


> If you have the stamped warranty steinhart. card, you can send it back to steinhart. The warranty is transferable.


Thanks for the reply, i guess i'll be contacting them tomorrow.


----------



## aahyuup (Apr 17, 2016)

*Re: Soprod a-10 issue?*



g-shockbilly said:


> Sorry, I don't have first hand experience with that, maybe someone else here can help you. It's sad to hear all of these issues with the A-10 movement. In any case, it is a beautiful watch, I hope you get it hashed out


Yes i agree, I didn't realize people were having so many problems with them. Initially I was pretty excited to have a watch with the a-10 in it.....hopefully Steinhart will get it figured out. Thanks again!


----------



## JSal (Aug 27, 2012)

*Re: Soprod a-10 issue?*

There are several Soprod A10 threads already with similar issues in the Steinhart Forum.

I see that you are new to the forums so I will explain what the proper etiquette is.

You should do a thorough search first before starting a new thread. It will help you and others find answers to your problems much easier.

Now that's out of the way, I'd like to say welcome to the WUS forums and especially to the great Steinhart family of friends we have here. You will find that most everyone is friendly and very helpful.

As for the Soprod A10, I own several but I have yet to have one experience these issues.

From what I have heard there have been some lubrication issues and I think this may be the case with your movement.

My suggestion to you is to write Steinhart and explain in detail like you have here, what you are experiencing with the watch/movement.

If the movement is operating correctly and wound fully you should have a 42 hour power reserve.

It sounds like you are getting 24 hours or less once you put your watch down without wearing it. But remember, you should only get 42 hours or close to that if the movement is fully wound when put down.

As I mentioned already, you should write Steinhart and explain as you have done here in detail. Make sure you email them at [email protected] because if you use the general email address you may get a delayed response and/or no response at all. And if you get a response they may only suggest you use the after sale email address anyway. So this will save you time and effort.

I'm going to suggest to the moderator that they merge this thread with one of the other related Soprod A10 threads.

In the mean time do a search and you will see there are a few already and the info in them may be interesting and helpful to you.

Best of luck and again, welcome aboard.

If you have any questions or trouble contacting Steinhart don't be afraid to send me a PM and I'd be happy to assist in any way I can.


----------



## flyinglotus1983 (Jan 9, 2016)

*Re: Soprod a-10 issue?*



aahyuup said:


> Yes i agree, I didn't realize people were having so many problems with them


By my count, there's at least 15 in this forum alone that have had the problem. I don't think the OT500 is serial numbered but I'd recon they've sold 1000's of them. So percentage wise, it's not like ALL of them are having the issue, but I would argue that it is still alarmingly high defect rate (I couldn't count 15 people that have had the same issue with a Seiko or ETA movement in other sub-threads I read, for example).

Fyi sending it to steinhart for service will take *at least* 4 weeks but probably more like 6-8 weeks before it gets returned to you. Reports have been mixed as far as whether the servicing actually fixed the issue or not.


----------



## g-shockbilly (Oct 24, 2014)

*Re: Soprod a-10 issue?*

I've tried searching for this info, but couldn't find it. Does the rotor on this movement wind the mainspring in both directions, or only one? This might help explain (or not as the case may be) why people are perceiving "lower than normal" power reserve, because they are in fact not fully wound or are harder to keep wound with wrist movement?


----------



## aahyuup (Apr 17, 2016)

*Re: Soprod a-10 issue?*



JSal said:


> There are several Soprod A10 threads already with similar issues in the Steinhart Forum.
> 
> I see that you are new to the forums so I will explain what the proper etiquette is.
> 
> ...


Thanks for the reply, i did try the search function here, but didn't come up with any solid answers with my exact problem. I was hoping to find someone who knew what the issue was with this movement.

Thank you for the email link to Steinhart , i'm going to write them and see what they say.


----------



## JSal (Aug 27, 2012)

*Re: Soprod a-10 issue?*



aahyuup said:


> Thanks for the reply, i did try the search function here, but didn't come up with any solid answers with my exact problem. I was hoping to find someone who knew what the issue was with this movement.
> 
> Thank you for the email link to Steinhart , i'm going to write them and see what they say.


No problem. The search button can be a little tricky to use at times and I've found that doing an Advanced Search actually works a bit better and brings up more concise topics to your inquiry.

As you can see I referred your thread to the moderator and asked if he could merge it with one of the other Soprod A10 issue threads and they did.

Hope that your issue is resolved swiftly.


----------



## ArticMan (Feb 12, 2010)

*Re: Soprod a-10 issue?*



g-shockbilly said:


> I've tried searching for this info, but couldn't find it. Does the rotor on this movement wind the mainspring in both directions, or only one? This might help explain (or not as the case may be) why people are perceiving "lower than normal" power reserve, because they are in fact not fully wound or are harder to keep wound with wrist movement?


It winds both directions. But the thing is that one one way winding can more efficient than two way.


----------



## JSal (Aug 27, 2012)

*Re: Soprod a-10 issue?*



ArticMan said:


> It winds both directions. But the thing is that one one way winding can more efficient than two way.


Not disagreeing with you, but why do you believe that a unidirectional winding automatic movement is more efficient than a bidirectional one.

I would actually believe it would be just the opposite.

I'm just curious as I've never heard anyone say that before.


----------



## ndw6 (May 17, 2014)

I have










The date has been a little off centre but sending I back to Germany.
It's not worth it. Anyway no issues with the movement or accuracy at all.


----------



## g-shockbilly (Oct 24, 2014)

ArticMan said:


> g-shockbilly said:
> 
> 
> > I've tried searching for this info, but couldn't find it. Does the rotor on this movement wind the mainspring in both directions, or only one? This might help explain (or not as the case may be) why people are perceiving "lower than normal" power reserve, because they are in fact not fully wound or are harder to keep wound with wrist movement?
> ...


Thank you


----------



## Darwin (Jan 28, 2012)

I have two A10 powered versions of the same watch (not Steinhart) watches. Accuracy of both is disappointing and one has about 30 hours power reserve while the other is 42+ hours. The lower reserve one also had issues with the watch not starting from a stopped state - either fully wound and running and then failing to start again after hacking or not starting after it had fully run down, no matter how vigorously I tried to get it going by flicking it or doing figure 8's with it in the air... Handwinding EVENTUALLY worked but required at least 40 turns of the crown and several sharp flicks or taps of the watch to get it going. Both issues seem to have been solved using an old watchmaker's trick: I GENTLY heated the watch for about 20 minutes using an incandescent light bulb and making sure the watch didn't get too hot. The objective is to restore the viscosity of oils and lubricants that may have become gummy due to time sitting idle or exposure to extreme cold. This worked like a charm and the hacking issue seems to be a non-issue now... knock on wood. I'm not as worried about power reserve right now. Watch is only at most 8 months old and I am the third owner. I bought it VERY cheaply because of the movement issue. I'm hoping that with regular wear the power reserve will improve.


----------



## MacTruck (May 1, 2007)

Ok, so adding a mental note: buy all the ETA2824-2 watches you can before they are gone. Check.


----------



## 3mm (Dec 7, 2015)

The issues I had with my O500 A10 started after few months wearing the watch, and at first, they were intermittent in a sense that it would "seize" for short periods of time, effectively making it look like the watch was running slow. But it became worse over time, where even taps on the side wouldn't get it going. Then it would start on it's own and run for hours before seizing up again. I've sent it back at least a month, if not two, after noticing the problem. So the theory that something is not lubricated properly sounds plausible to me. If this is the case, it's also possible that a much larger percentage of these movements will have an issue, as things dry inside.

After seeing all the others report these issues, I am not buying any other watch with a Soprod movement, I lost confidence in it. However small the percentage of the "faulty" ones is. I like to depend on the watch running and being accurate. The way this issue manifested is the worst kind, it would have been far better if it was a hard failure. Even when I get the watch back, how can I ever fully trust it?


----------



## flyinglotus1983 (Jan 9, 2016)

3mm said:


> After seeing all the others report these issues, I am not buying any other watch with a Soprod movement


Me neither, which is a shame, because I was really lusting after the Ocean One Vintage Dual Time Premium which is A10 powered. I would, however, definitely pick up a Steinhart 6497/8-powered flieger, as that movement would probably survive the apocalypse (probably a few to be honest). Even after all all the crap I've been through with Steinhart, I'd still do it without thinking. I'm currently building a few ETA 6498 powered watches, from parts I picked up on eBay, just for fun. If I ever do have a 649x based watch stop, at least I've got the tools to completely overhaul it. On the other hand I wouldn't feel confident doing that to an A10 powered watch.



> I like to depend on the watch running and being accurate. The way this issue manifested is the worst kind, it would have been far better if it was a hard failure. Even when I get the watch back, how can I ever fully trust it?


I agree 100%. As far as priorities go, telling time is #1, everything else is just glitter and sparkles. When I finally do get my OT500 back, whenever that is, I don't think I'll ever have the confidence to use it on days when I really need a reliable watch. It's going to be more of a show-pony than a work-horse.


----------



## Ryeguy (Jun 24, 2009)

In the little bit of research I've been able to do, I've seen issues voiced by owners across multiple brands - not just Steinhart. The symptoms being described mirror those stated here: inaccuracy, random stops, and poor power reserve. 

Simply put, the issues we are seeing are not introduced by Steinhart, but rather they come from the factory. 

Soprod promotes the A-10 as a "premium" movement with features equaling ETA's "Top" standard. Soprod also charges a premium for the movement, pricing it above a comparable Sellita (from what I've read).

The challenge for manufacturers such as Steinhart is, alone they are only a single voice and easily ignored by Soprod. If, however, Steinhart could join with the brand owners of Aegir, Doxa, Oak and Oscar, OWC, MKii, and Stowa, then their combined voices would force Soprod to take notice. 

If nothing else, these brand owners will likely start voting with their wallets and eventually switch to using Sellita movements. This would be too bad as, on paper, the Soprod should be an outstanding movement option.


----------



## Tom_ZG (Sep 16, 2015)

I have premium pilot with A10 and that one is flawless. As far as I can see on this forum only ocean models have issues.

Btw my watch arrived at steinhart yesterday and Today Petra sent me an email saying they will not Fix it but replace the movement. There has been some bad rep on their customer care but in my book this is top notch. Really only best words for steinhart - I blame soprod for faulty movement, not steinhart

Sent from my YOGA Tablet 2-1050L using Tapatalk


----------



## g-shockbilly (Oct 24, 2014)

I agree that this is a directly a soprod issue. It is steinhart's issue (indirectly) by using these movements though. I feel like this is a tough issue, it's like it isn't their fault, but it kind of is at the same time, and the warranty work goes through them not soprod.


----------



## ArticMan (Feb 12, 2010)

JSal said:


> Not disagreeing with you, but why do you believe that a unidirectional winding automatic movement is more efficient than a bidirectional one.
> 
> I would actually believe it would be just the opposite.
> 
> I'm just curious as I've never heard anyone say that before.


If I remember right JLC made study about that and after conclusions they choose to use one way winding in they new caliber.

Try google it if you are interested, I might do the same on better time.


----------



## sefrcoko (Dec 23, 2015)

ArticMan said:


> If I remember right JLC made study about that and after conclusions they choose to use one way winding in they new caliber.
> 
> Try google it if you are interested, I might do the same on better time.


Found this: https://www.watchuseek.com/f2/all-t...more-efficient-than-bidirectional-664587.html


----------



## 3mm (Dec 7, 2015)

sefrcoko said:


> Found this: https://www.watchuseek.com/f2/all-t...more-efficient-than-bidirectional-664587.html


This is purely subjective, but I have a feeling that my only 7750 powered watch (unidirectional winding) does really well, as I wear it sparingly, like few hours a day (yeah, I rotate watches several time per day, work from home sickness..), never wind it manually, and it never stops on me. Omega's 8500 caliber that has 60 hour PR, is the only thing I have that feels the same way. So subjectively, I don't think that unidirectional winding is necessarily inferior vs bidirectional. There are other factors that also influence this efficiency IMHO.


----------



## JSal (Aug 27, 2012)

ArticMan said:


> If I remember right JLC made study about that and after conclusions they choose to use one way winding in they new caliber.
> 
> Try google it if you are interested, I might do the same on better time.


Thanks AM. I'm going to check it out as it sounds like good and interesting reading.



sefrcoko said:


> Found this: https://www.watchuseek.com/f2/all-t...more-efficient-than-bidirectional-664587.html


Thank you sefrcoko for finding that.


----------



## JSal (Aug 27, 2012)

Ryeguy said:


> In the little bit of research I've been able to do, I've seen issues voiced by owners across multiple brands - not just Steinhart. The symptoms being described mirror those stated here: inaccuracy, random stops, and poor power reserve.
> 
> Simply put, the issues we are seeing are not introduced by Steinhart, but rather they come from the factory.
> 
> ...


I totally agree and I never hold a watch company personally responsible for an issue with a standard issue movement unless they customise it or turn it into an in-house movement.

From what I've read (and I may be wrong) that the problem is lack of sufficient lubrication. This sounds logical with most of the issues that are being raised but what makes me think is how can this be so wide spread? If a specific lot put together by a specific watchmaker were the issue then it would not be so widespread and it would be easily discovered and controlled.

So my personal theory is that if this is a lubrication issue that MAYBE, there was something wrong with the lubricant used, or chosen. Possibly a bad batch, or just not have the longevity.

Most of the synthetic lubricants used today last much longer than the ones used years ago and also do not dry up, or cake up like the older ones did.

I'm sure we will eventually hear what has been causing the trouble and also why some are not affected.


----------



## BigSeikoFan (Feb 15, 2010)

Darwin said:


> I have two A10 powered versions of the same watch (not Steinhart) watches. Accuracy of both is disappointing and one has about 30 hours power reserve while the other is 42+ hours. The lower reserve one also had issues with the watch not starting from a stopped state - either fully wound and running and then failing to start again after hacking or not starting after it had fully run down, no matter how vigorously I tried to get it going by flicking it or doing figure 8's with it in the air... Handwinding EVENTUALLY worked but required at least 40 turns of the crown and several sharp flicks or taps of the watch to get it going.
> 
> Both issues seem to have been solved using an old watchmaker's trick: *I GENTLY heated the watch for about 20 minutes using an incandescent light bulb and making sure the watch didn't get too hot. The objective is to restore the viscosity of oils and lubricants that may have become gummy due to time sitting idle or exposure to extreme cold.* This worked like a charm and the hacking issue seems to be a non-issue now... knock on wood. I'm not as worried about power reserve right now. Watch is only at most 8 months old and I am the third owner. I bought it VERY cheaply because of the movement issue. I'm hoping that with regular wear the power reserve will improve.


Thanks for sharing that tip! |>


----------



## 3mm (Dec 7, 2015)

Update about my O500 A10 - I asked Steinhart to let me know what was wrong with the movement in my watch, and they said they would. I received this today:

"We have to apologize for the delay. Our watchmaker told me, we have to exchange the movement. We are the movements expected to receive next week. So that we can send expected next week your watch."

They have received this watch 13 days ago.


----------



## JSal (Aug 27, 2012)

3mm said:


> Update about my O500 A10 - I asked Steinhart to let me know what was wrong with the movement in my watch, and they said they would. I received this today:
> 
> "We have to apologize for the delay. Our watchmaker told me, we have to exchange the movement. We are the movements expected to receive next week. So that we can send expected next week your watch."
> 
> They have received this watch 13 days ago.


I wish they would have been a little more precise with the explanation. But I still believe this is a lubrication issue that Soprod had and they are exchanging any movement that comes back with a new one. 
It's probably a good idea on the part of Soprod to replace the movement instead of just asking the dealer to dissemble, clean and lubricate the movements. When lubricant is bad it puts stress on the moving parts and will cause premature wear and possible failure.

Hopefully they share more with you, but I have a feeling that Soprod wants to correct this and keep it as quiet as possible.


----------



## 3mm (Dec 7, 2015)

JSal said:


> I wish they would have been a little more precise with the explanation. But I still believe this is a lubrication issue that Soprod had and they are exchanging any movement that comes back with a new one.
> It's probably a good idea on the part of Soprod to replace the movement instead of just asking the dealer to dissemble, clean and lubricate the movements. When lubricant is bad it puts stress on the moving parts and will cause premature wear and possible failure.
> 
> Hopefully they share more with you, but I have a feeling that Soprod wants to correct this and keep it as quiet as possible.


Soprod wanting to keep this quiet is plausible, but dishonorable of them. Or this may be a tiny batch that was affected (and probably landed at Steinhart) and they don't feel it requires a public statement. Either way, I will be keeping this watch on a winder for a while before I start trusting it again.


----------



## 3mm (Dec 7, 2015)

After my query regarding the issue, Steinhart came back with an answer that they're sorry, and that they were only told by the watchmaker that a new movement is needed. I will not insist further.


----------



## ArticMan (Feb 12, 2010)

JSal said:


> Thanks AM. I'm going to check it out as it sounds like good and interesting reading.
> 
> Thank you sefrcoko for finding that.


It just might have been said allready behind that second link but still:

"The caliber 975 is to my knowledge the first JLC movement with unidirectional winding - it's said that this decision was made after intensive research which demonstrated that unidirectional winding is actually more efficient. (As an interesting side note, the well-known ebauche manufacture, A. Schild, is said to have discovered this in the mid-1950's. AS was one of the largest movement manufacturers of its time.) "

ThePuristS.com - Jaeger Le Coultre cal.975


----------



## Ryeguy (Jun 24, 2009)

ArticMan said:


> It just might have been said allready behind that second link but still:
> 
> "The caliber 975 is to my knowledge the first JLC movement with unidirectional winding - it's said that this decision was made after intensive research which demonstrated that unidirectional winding is actually more efficient. (As an interesting side note, the well-known ebauche manufacture, A. Schild, is said to have discovered this in the mid-1950's. AS was one of the largest movement manufacturers of its time.) "
> 
> ThePuristS.com - Jaeger Le Coultre cal.975


I wonder how true this holds in light of the Seiko Magic Lever winding system which was invented in 1959. This system is what allows Seiko movements to wind the barrel regardless of which way the rotor spins. The design has been widely copied by numerous European movement manufacturers and is almost ubiquitous today, but highly efficient bi-directional winding systems all trace their origins back to the humble Seiko 5.


----------



## Ryeguy (Jun 24, 2009)

ArticMan said:


> It just might have been said allready behind that second link but still:
> 
> "The caliber 975 is to my knowledge the first JLC movement with unidirectional winding - it's said that this decision was made after intensive research which demonstrated that unidirectional winding is actually more efficient. (As an interesting side note, the well-known ebauche manufacture, A. Schild, is said to have discovered this in the mid-1950's. AS was one of the largest movement manufacturers of its time.) "
> 
> ThePuristS.com - Jaeger Le Coultre cal.975


I wonder how true this holds in light of the Seiko Magic Lever winding system which was invented in 1959. This system is what allows Seiko movements to wind the barrel regardless of which way the rotor spins. The design has been widely copied by numerous European movement manufacturers and is almost ubiquitous today, but highly efficient bi-directional winding systems all trace their origins back to the humble Seiko 5.


----------



## Tom_ZG (Sep 16, 2015)

Little update - Ti500 is back with replaced movememnt - weight now turns much much MUCH better. This made me very happy. Seems that soprod had a bad batch and thanks to Steinhart for sorting this. Ti500 is now ready for many many years of wearing

sent from Lenovo Vibe X3


----------



## MacTruck (May 1, 2007)

Tom_ZG said:


> Little update - Ti500 is back with replaced movememnt - weight now turns much much MUCH better. This made me very happy. Seems that soprod had a bad batch and thanks to Steinhart for sorting this. Ti500 is now ready for many many years of wearing
> 
> sent from Lenovo Vibe X3


Please keep us updated if the problems occurs again.


----------



## richtel (Jul 14, 2015)

By way of follow up, I received my O1T500 back from Steinhart this week after being sent for repair. The accompanying docket suggested that the movement had been swapped out and the piece arrived ticking away. I have observed it for a few days letting it wind down and indeed it does burst into life after four or so turns of the crown now as all my other watches do. Result.

You'll already be aware, but Steinhart do indeed take their customer service seriously and stand by their products. Well done Steinhart.


----------



## ArticMan (Feb 12, 2010)

Ryeguy said:


> I wonder how true this holds in light of the Seiko Magic Lever winding system which was invented in 1959. This system is what allows Seiko movements to wind the barrel regardless of which way the rotor spins. The design has been widely copied by numerous European movement manufacturers and is almost ubiquitous today, but highly efficient bi-directional winding systems all trace their origins back to the humble Seiko 5.


Seikos Magic lever is really a clever invention. As far as I know, it's not the most efficient way to wind up watch but it's , simple, low cost, reliable, thin and almost maintenance free. Very good indeed and of course efficient enough.


----------



## smuggled_sheep (Dec 13, 2013)

I think if only Soprod just left Seiko to do all the works on the movement, then they wouldn't be encountering these problems... They can just do the final finishing to beautify the movements and put their brand on it. I don't think they have other things to worry about as it seems like Seiko is a company who is willing to keep secrets as they promise.;-)


----------



## yankeexpress (Apr 7, 2013)

smuggled_sheep said:


> I think if only Soprod just left Seiko to do all the works on the movement, then they wouldn't be encountering these problems... They can just do the final finishing to beautify the movements and put their brand on it. I don't think they have other things to worry about as it seems like Seiko is a company who is willing to keep secrets as they promise.;-)


Seiko does not make an affordable 28,800 beat per hour movement like the A-10. All Seiko watches with a higher beat movement cost over $1000US.

The Seiko 6r15 is low beat and does not compete with the A-10, which is based on the old Seiko 4L25 which SEIKO does not make anymore.

It would be fantastic if Seiko made and sold the 6r20 to outside watchmakers at an affordable price, but they don't.

FWIW, my A-10 watch works normally, an OWC 5517.


----------



## DamZe (Oct 11, 2014)

yankeexpress said:


> Seiko does not make an affordable 28,800 beat per hour movement like the A-10. All Seiko watches with a higher beat movement cost over $1000US.
> 
> The Seiko 6r15 is low beat and does not compete with the A-10, which is based on the old Seiko 4L25 which SEIKO does not make anymore.
> 
> ...


True, my Premier Automatic is a beast, the 6r20 on a good day is within COSC spec. Seiko's high beat movements can give the best Swiss made movements a run for their money.


----------



## Vlciudoli (Feb 24, 2013)

Steinhart sent my t500 back saying it had a new movement.

it works, is steady at -15 (not a figure I like) but at least it's consistent.

so, I emailed them to ask if it was replaced with a soprod or an ETA

ive mailed twice, still no reply....


----------



## kelt (May 17, 2013)

Vlciudoli said:


> Steinhart sent my t500 back saying it had a new movement.
> 
> it works, is steady at -15 (not a figure I like) but at least it's consistent.
> 
> ...


The TI 500 has a crystal display back you can check by yourself at a glance what movement is in your watch, there are some differences (balance wheel on opposite location) between the two movement and I believe both are signed!


----------



## DamZe (Oct 11, 2014)

Vlciudoli said:


> Steinhart sent my t500 back saying it had a new movement.
> 
> it works, is steady at -15 (not a figure I like) but at least it's consistent.
> 
> ...


Damn that's pretty out of spec. I would contact Steinhart to get it adjusted. -15 sec a day is a not good look for either the a10 or 2892A2-Top.


----------



## Vlciudoli (Feb 24, 2013)

DamZe said:


> Damn that's pretty out of spec. I would contact Steinhart to get it adjusted. -15 sec a day is a not good look for either the a10 or 2892A2-Top.


I agere. I would send it back except my experience with their customer service is so poor that I just can't deal with them anymore.


----------



## Tom_ZG (Sep 16, 2015)

Local watchmaker can regulate if for few USD easily. Mine is -5 to -9. Will get it regulated for sure as I dont like watches going slow
Please try to demagnetize it first

Sent from my YOGA Tablet 2-1050L using Tapatalk


----------



## sefrcoko (Dec 23, 2015)

Tom_ZG said:


> Local watchmaker can regulate if for few USD easily. Mine is -5 to -9. Will get it regulated for sure as I dont like watches going slow
> Please try to demagnetize it first
> 
> Sent from my YOGA Tablet 2-1050L using Tapatalk


Magnetism will usually make it run faster rather than slower, so it is unlikely to be the culprit. Like you said though, a good regulation should do the trick.


----------

