# Recommendations for first high accuracy quartz



## DistortedVision

I've become interested in high accuracy quartz watches recently. I am looking to buy an inexpensive high accuracy quartz to add to my collection.

Wondering what you all thought of these Bulova:

















I'm tending towards the grey dial one with leather strap. Would be grateful for any other suggestions in the same price range.

Many thanks!


----------



## ronalddheld

I will let others handle this one as I would shy away from Bulova, for the long term in mind.


----------



## wdrazek

I'm off to grab some popcorn...


----------



## DistortedVision

I am interested in other suggestions. The Bulova was just the first I found as quartz is unknown territory to me.





ronalddheld said:


> I will let others handle this one as I would shy away from Bulova, for the long term in mind.


----------



## ronalddheld

DistortedVision said:


> I am interested in other suggestions. The Bulova was just the first I found as quartz is unknown territory to me.


You could look at the Certina models. If possible I would save for a Grand Seiko or a Citizen.


----------



## tmathes

ronalddheld said:


> You could look at the Certina models. If possible I would save for a Grand Seiko or a Citizen.


I second what Ron said, in particular Certina. I have a DS-2 and a DS-8. Love them both.

The downside, if you're a US/Canadian customer, is they're not easy to find (nearly impossible actually) from a local AD. Certina has no US dealers outside of a couple of Swatch boutiques, one in NYC, one in Las Vegas. The easier route with them is via the gray market if you want to buy from a US-based dealer. There is a respected Spanish AD that ships to the US, I've bought from him twice and he's great to deal with. PM me if you want more details. Since I bought from an AD my two Certinas have US warranty coverage, they can be serviced by the US Swatch repair centers. Luckily, both watches have been trouble free (so far).

Some have had decent experience with Bulova's high freq. quartz movements, some not so much, regarding accuracy. From what I can tell (anecdotal, mind you) the newer 262kHz movements seem to be more accurate than the earlier (1st gen?) 262kHz Precisionist movements. The big advantage to buying a Bulova in the US/Canadian market is a large distribution network of ADs. Bulovas are easy to find (but the ones you show aren't so much, at least in my area).

My only advice: buy what 'speaks' to you. I've seen some HAQ watches that I don't care if they're as accurate as an atomic clock, I wouldn't wear them if you paid me (too freakin' ugly). If the Bulova suits your needs and had the look you want, then go for it. My only request is if you do buy one, please post pictures. I've been interested in the Bulova you're considering on the leather strap, but the blue/rose gold version.


----------



## gangrel

I wouldn't go all the way to a GS or The Citizen; that's $2000 range.

I'm sure there are many Bulova models; heck, I think there are like 3 separate *lines* that are HA. There's some concern, I believe, about how well they'll maintain their HA-level rate...but by the same token, would it be fine with you if it was running at, say, 30 SPY (instead of 10) in 10 or 15 years' time? Many of us who are regulars here, are *extreme* sticklers; some are a bit more practical.

Others...and I think these are in increasing order of street price:

Certina DS-2 and Tissot PR100 COSC quartz are both ETA TC movements
Seiko Dolce SACM 150, 154, 171 
Citizen Exceed AR4000, 4001, and 4002...a bit more expensive, but also the only solar models at this level. My AR4002 got into El Paso this morning.  But it's a bit over $600, so I suspect that's a bit more than you were considering. However, I dislike changing batteries, so the options become limited.

Link to a Tissot on Amazon. Note, this may NOT be the best price out there, but it should give a pretty good idea of street price:
https://www.amazon.com/Tissot-Black..._UL250_SR145,250_&refRID=YHZS2NMSCX06EJN7CN2Y

The Citizen and Seiko models are JDM only; the AR4002 was literally just released, last Friday, so it's a bit trickier to find. (I found it on eBay.) The AR4000-55E is probably the easiest to find, but that's relative. The Seikos are easy; Amazon has them. The Certina and Tissot can probably be found through most of the big gray market sellers.

Secondary point...

Maybe it's the pic, but I don't like the silver dial on that Bulova...that's something you can't change. I don't much like the bracelet on the Bulova or the Tissot I link to...but that *can* be changed, and rather easily. I'd be pretty happy if the companies offered a no-strap, no-bracelet, head-only option, most of the time. Then just go find whatever style you like.


----------



## Alden

Are you after accuracy or style? If you just want accuracy all you need is a Casio G-Shock solar powered six band "atomic" digital. It will attempt to sync with the radio tower in Colorado Springs every night. Mine syncs about three-four times a week. It's the most accurate watch I own.

Casio GWM-5610










I paid $88.00 for mine. It looks like a cheapo digital, unless you know what it does. It is one of the watches I will never part with.

_ETA: This is the watch I use to set the correct time on all my other watches. _


----------



## tmathes

Alden said:


> Are you after accuracy or style? If you just want accuracy all you need is a Casio G-Shock solar powered six band "atomic" digital. It will attempt to sync with the radio tower in Colorado Springs every night. Mine syncs about three-four times a week. It's the most accurate watch I own.
> 
> Casio GWM-5610
> 
> I paid $88.00 for mine. It looks like a cheapo digital, unless you know what it does. It is one of the watches I will never part with.
> 
> _ETA: This is the watch I use to set the correct time on all my other watches. _


I'll jump on this before the other regulars do: it's not HAQ.  There, I said it first!!

In all seriousness, I was going to suggest Citizen RC watches but decided against it since the original poster specifically said HAQ and those Citizens aren't HAQ. I have one of those (Citizen RC), it's always dead on since it syncs to the WWVB signal every night. But, what the original poster shows are dressy looking, understated 3 handers. My Citizen AT4008 isn't understated like that nor is the Casio.

Gangrel mentions Tissot, I completely forgot about their HAQ line. Great suggestion, and for US/Canadian customers a whole lot easier to find than anything from Certina.


----------



## DistortedVision

I live in UK. I really like the Certina DS-2 Precidrive range. Funnily, I only bought a Certina DS Action Driver Automatic 2 weeks ago and I've been really impressed with it. Buying Certina is very easy in the UK as its easily available compared to North America.

Anyway, this is the model I'm interested in:









What do you guys think?


----------



## Rallyfan13

Seiko and Citizen are both OK but at least the Seikos are very costly. 

The Bulovas you linked are both attractive; I'd prefer light face on a bracelet personally. 

If you want to go vintage you might consider the Longines Conquest VHP from the 80s (I'm basing this on looks alone; I liked them). 

The Certina is nice and that's the overall "look" I'd like if I were to select a watch from Bulova as you initially suggested -- lighter dial, bracelet.


----------



## ronalddheld

I will repeat the phrase: except for the Morgenwerk, no RC/GPS watches have intrinsic high accuracy.


----------



## DistortedVision

I'm actually tending towards buying both the Bulova and the Certina.


----------



## Rallyfan13

DistortedVision said:


> I'm actually tending towards buying both the Bulova and the Certina.


That's the spirit. If you do so, I'd see what color combos are actually available and consider getting diverse looks etc.


----------



## gangrel

Yes, if you want to go with both, then I'd personally go with different dial colors at least, and preferably a little different look. I'd say the Bulova and Certina are too similar, for example, and I'd rather go Bulova and Tissot, for contrast both visually, and in their approaches to accuracy.


----------



## Tom-HK

Alden said:


> Are you after accuracy or style? If you just want accuracy all you need is a Casio G-Shock solar powered six band "atomic" digital. It will attempt to sync with the radio tower in Colorado Springs every night. Mine syncs about three-four times a week. It's the most accurate watch I own.
> 
> Casio GWM-5610
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I paid $88.00 for mine. It looks like a cheapo digital, unless you know what it does. It is one of the watches I will never part with.
> 
> _ETA: This is the watch I use to set the correct time on all my other watches. _


I have a six-band G-Shock (GW-5000 1JF) and it's one of my least accurate watches simply because it currently resides on the very fringes of a radio reception area and almost never picks up a signal. The RC Citizen that I keep in the UK, however, does manage to sync daily, so it can work out ok. It's worth repeating, however, that even the daily-synching RC Citizen isn't my most accurate watch as it's lost as much time by the end of each day as one of my better-performing watches will have lost in a couple of months.

Point is, the OP would need to be sure of RC reception, first, and understand that he isn't getting a proper HAQ if he is to consider going the RC route.


----------



## Tom-HK

I would lean towards either the Certina or the Tissot for a first HAQ, simply because each if these could be sent back for regulation if it should drift off-spec. The Bulovas cannot be adjusted, even back at the factory.

That said, I also agree with the entry-level Seiko and Citizen suggestions, which can also be sent back (albeit requiring a more lengthy trip to Japan).

A vintage HAQ such as Citizen's EBJ74 or Longines' VHP (with perpetual calendar) can be a great choice, but would require a bit of research to avoid getting a lemon.


----------



## Alden

Tom-HK said:


> I have a six-band G-Shock (GW-5000 1JF) and it's one of my least accurate watches simply because it currently resides on the very fringes of a radio reception area and almost never picks up a signal. The RC Citizen that I keep in the UK, however, does manage to sync daily, so it can work out ok. It's worth repeating, however, that even the daily-synching RC Citizen isn't my most accurate watch as it's lost as much time by the end of each day as one of my better-performing watches will have lost in a couple of months.
> 
> Point is, the OP would need to be sure of RC reception, first, and understand that he isn't getting a proper HAQ if he is to consider going the RC route.


I find that the best way to pick up the signal is to wear it at night. It uses my body as an antenna and picks up the signal between 12am and 5am. It _always_ works when I wear it, but not when I leave it on the shelf.


----------



## Jordanbav

DistortedVision said:


> I live in UK. I really like the Certina DS-2 Precidrive range. Funnily, I only bought a Certina DS Action Driver Automatic 2 weeks ago and I've been really impressed with it. Buying Certina is very easy in the UK as its easily available compared to North America.
> 
> Anyway, this is the model I'm interested in:
> 
> View attachment 8442906
> 
> 
> What do you guys think?


I got the precidrive aqua diver, really nice watch however I think it isn't a accurate as what they claim to be however still good.


----------



## Alden

ronalddheld said:


> I will repeat the phrase: except for the Morgenwerk, no RC/GPS watches have intrinsic high accuracy.


Apparently I'm a dunderhead. Why would you need intrinsic high accuracy with an RC/GPS watch?


----------



## Pandybelly

I have a Breitling Aerospace with 13 years. Great watch. 
A Certina DS-2 LE with Precidrive. Great quality and value. 
I have just got a Junghans Mega Voyager which syncs with a radio clock in Germany so it is always correct. Three great watches and different price ranges and I love them all. Enjoy the search and enjoy the watch you buy. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Tom-HK

Alden said:


> Apparently I'm a dunderhead. Why would you need intrinsic high accuracy with an RC/GPS watch?


Fair question. Different discussion. Rather than divert the course of this thread, maybe just read through a few of the older threads where this topic has been done to death (several times). Essentially, intrinsic accuracy is the primary focus of this High Accuracy forum, with a healthy side interest in RC and GPS watches. There are plenty of arguments surrounding how best to get the correct time on your wrist but it's safe to say that no current, mainstream approach has quite nailed it. Thermocompensated movements, RC and GPS movements all have their disadvantages. It is hoped that by combining GPS with thermocompensation and self-calibration, as Morgenwerk have done, the best of all worlds may come together to produce a watch that isn't just the world's most accurate but one that is also consistently accurate.


----------



## ronalddheld

Alden said:


> Apparently I'm a dunderhead. Why would you need intrinsic high accuracy with an RC/GPS watch?


One reason is to not have to frequently reset the time base. Also the GPS allows you to set the time to microseconds, in principle.


----------



## gangrel

Alden said:


> Apparently I'm a dunderhead. Why would you need intrinsic high accuracy with an RC/GPS watch?


You largely don't. The point being made, tho, is that the OP wasn't asking about RC/GPS.


----------



## wbird

Welcome OP. In my opinion I would start with either the Bulova, Tissot or Certina. But I wouldn't get a Certina and a Tissot. Simply buying the same watch branded differently.

I have a Bulova and a Certina. There is not a great deal of difference in the fit, finish, and overall execution between these two brands in my opinion. 

The Bulova is inexpensive, unique second hand sweep and gazillions of color and band options. Most folks (including me) are reporting it hits around the 10 s/yr spec but if it does ever vary it can't be regulated.

The Certina and Tissot can be had pretty reasonably from Jomashop and Precidrive has been solid at meeting specs and has great battery life. But hard to tell which models can be regulated, and I wonder if it is running at say 20 s/yr would you ship it out for service.

Personally I went with a 3 hand Certina dive watch and a very busy Bulova chronograph. I tend to like the Bulova a little more because it is unique, no other quartz watch like it for the price. Went with the Certina because it is far more rare in the US than Tissot. But that's just me. All three brands offer a lot of options, including those nice dress watches you've been looking at.

Good luck with whatever you choose, look forward to seeing pictures after you decide and buy.


----------



## Tom-HK

If getting a Tissot PR 100, make sure it's one of the 'COSC' versions (or the 'Danica Partick LE'). The other variants of the quartz PR 100 use a different, non-thermocompensated movement and are not HAQ.


----------



## Ahriman4891

If I'm not mistaken, the Bulova models in the OP are only WR to 30 meters. The Certina posted later is a more robust watch, I also happen to think it's handsome. A coworker got a DS-2 reverse panda on my recommendation, it looked very well executed.


----------



## bluecamowhite

Alden said:


> I find that the best way to pick up the signal is to wear it at night. It uses my body as an antenna and picks up the signal between 12am and 5am. It _always_ works when I wear it, but not when I leave it on the shelf.


I have two Casio solar atomics and my experience is the same: if I wear it, it syncs; if I don't wear it, it doesn't sync. For the record, I regard them both very, very highly.


----------



## CLP

Alden said:


> I find that the best way to pick up the signal is to wear it at night. It uses my body as an antenna and picks up the signal between 12am and 5am. It _always_ works when I wear it, but not when I leave it on the shelf.


Ever researched if that's very healthy for you?

Reason I ask is I wear my Citizen AT pretty much 24/7 and I've never thought about being subjected to radio waves going through my body every night, until you put it that way.


----------



## Zynec

I can't excite about the look of he Bulovas, don't know why :-s. But that Certina looks nice.


----------



## time-man

C Perry said:


> Ever researched if that's very healthy for you?
> 
> Reason I ask is I wear my Citizen AT pretty much 24/7 and I've never thought about being subjected to radio waves going through my body every night, until you put it that way.


Radio waves "go through your body" *all* the time. We are constantly surrounded by RF fields of various frequencies. What do you think happens when you are using WiFi, using your cell phone, drive past an AM or FM radio tower, walk through an electrically operated automatic door, go through a police radar trap,.........etc. Just because he is wearing his watch, does not make him more (or less) prone to RF exposure, any more than standing near your TV or radio, or driving with the radio on will.


----------



## CLP

Sounds miniscule in comparison when you put it that way, but I'd think none of the exposure we get can be very good for you and it'd be in everyone's best interest to minimize it as much as possible.


----------



## chris01

C Perry said:


> Sounds miniscule in comparison when you put it that way, but I'd think none of the exposure we get can be very good for you and it'd be in everyone's best interest to minimize it as much as possible.


Bear in mind that RC and GPS watches only receive RF. They don't transmit, so there is no extra exposure from your watch. Of course, if you must wear a smart watch with Bluetooth all bets are off. But your smart phone is still a much greater hazard.


----------



## time-man

C Perry said:


> Sounds miniscule in comparison when you put it that way, but I'd think none of the exposure we get can be very good for you and it'd be in everyone's best interest to minimize it as much as possible.


Then move here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_National_Radio_Quiet_Zone


----------



## time-man

chris01 said:


> Bear in mind that RC and GPS watches only receive RF. They don't transmit, so there is no extra exposure from your watch. Of course, if you must wear a smart watch with Bluetooth all bets are off. But your smart phone is still a much greater hazard.


Yes, bear in mind that your phone actually transmits periodically to let the local cell site know it is there, so your phone is constantly doing periodic transmissions, even if you are not actually using it! In today's world, it is virtually impossible to avoid RF exposure.


----------



## brandon\

Remember folks, use protection!


----------



## time-man

Zynec said:


> I can't excite about the look of he Bulovas, don't know why :-s. But that Certina looks nice.


Certina does make some very nice looking pieces; I have a charcoal gray dial Precidrive DS-2 Chronograph, and it looks great. (runs great too!) Too bad they aren't the easiest thing to find in the U.S.


----------



## gangrel

C Perry said:


> Sounds miniscule in comparison when you put it that way, but I'd think none of the exposure we get can be very good for you and it'd be in everyone's best interest to minimize it as much as possible.


Then never go downtown in ANY city. The number of private microwave transmitters is VERY large. Pay attention while being a passenger in a car, particularly outside cities, to the LARGE number of towers. Got a cell phone? Download a tower locator app. You're SURROUNDED by them.

Don't go into a granite building. Granite has significant natural radioactivity.

Don't live at any kind of altitude. UV intensity is higher.

Don't forget *media* outlets...radio and TV.

Airports...well, no one wants to live near one from the noise, but they've got LOTS of radar dishes running. I suspect those are fairly high-power units. Sure, they're largely directional, but there's always side lobes and leakages.

To borrow from Joe Jackson...everything gives you cancer. There's no cure, there's no answer.

On a scale of 0 to 10 of risks...there have been reports of problems with people who maintain communications towers, but they're up close and personal with the transmission sources. For what we get in daily life...it's probably about 0.001. Worry about the air you breathe...especially if you live in a city. Water issues in MANY places...Flint's not going to be the only city whose water supply infrastructure crumbles, or where the water's rather poor. The slow rise of resistant bacterial strains due to overuse of antibiotics in animal feed. Increased acidity in the oceans causing shifts there. Global warming. There's TONS of stuff where there's a great deal more hard evidence of issues.

IMO the people who push the 'risk' of such-and-so, are generally anti-science Luddite types, massively over-romantic dreamers who think Life Was Perfect 50 Years Ago...and completely forget all the negatives of those days, or actually elitist types who want to block the proles from having these benefits. They use fear-mongering to push their agenda and get others, who don't understand anything scientific anyway, to parrot their lines.


----------



## chris01

time-man said:


> Yes, bear in mind that your phone actually transmits periodically to let the local cell site know it is there, so your phone is constantly doing periodic transmissions, even if you are not actually using it! In today's world, it is virtually impossible to avoid RF exposure.


The biggest danger from phones is for the morons who walk around texting and listening to their music. Then they step off the kerb without seeing or hearing the truck.


----------



## timemachineluvr

I bought a Bulova Precisionist last year. It gained five seconds when I adjusted for DST last year. So far this year, it gained six seconds since I adjusted for DST in March.

I also have a Casio tough solar that can sync. This is the most inaccurate watch I have, worse than even the 3 Swiss auto watches I have. It is tough to get mine to sync. I'd have to place it high up on a window sill, or it would never sync while being worn or placed on the counter. Without syncing, it would lose 10-15 seconds a day. Of course this is not a high accuracy quartz, but I've never had a digital watch so inaccurate.

It is just mesmerizing watching the ultra smooth sweeping seconds hand on the Bulova. Highly recommended!


----------



## Tom-HK

timemachineluvr said:


> I also have a Casio tough solar that can sync. This is the most inaccurate watch I have, worse than even the 3 Swiss auto watches I have. It is tough to get mine to sync. I'd have to place it high up on a window sill, or it would never sync while being worn or placed on the counter. Without syncing, it would lose 10-15 seconds a day. Of course this is not a high accuracy quartz, but I've never had a digital watch so inaccurate.


Same here. Besides a fairly wide variety of HAQs I also have some ordinary quartz watches and a couple of radio-synched watches, including a Casio 6-band RC digital. Without exception the Casio RC watch is the least accurate. Even when it has successfully synched during the night, it's measurably off within half a day.

I am gradually coming to think that the best first HAQ might very well be a Longines VHP (perpetual calendar), in good condition, off eBay. It might, in fact, be such a good first HAQ that you wouldn't need another. Ever.


----------



## wbird

I'm not going to get into the electromagnetic spectrum I think gangrel said it well, but I will say radio waves and cell phone signals are so weak you can't get them in most the buildings in NYC, I loose radio going under an overpass so they are really awfully weak. If you need things to worry about there are a lot of other things to devote your time to,and possibly help solve.

As far as gshock accuracy most are rated to 15 s/mo. If you have trouble receiving a signal someone offered a smartphone app on this forum to address this problem. Now I've never noticed any problem with any of my gshocks or Citizen RC watches, and I think people would talk about minutes per month error.


----------



## svorkoetter

C Perry said:


> Sounds miniscule in comparison when you put it that way, but I'd think none of the exposure we get can be very good for you and it'd be in everyone's best interest to minimize it as much as possible.


I think you're missing the point. Yes, the RF signals that synchronize an RC or GPS watch are miniscule. But they are present whether or not you're wearing such a watch. Wearing an RC or GPS watch will increase your exposure by exactly zero. Not a miniscule amount ... exactly zero.

It's just like ordinary AM or FM radio signals. They are present whether or not you have a radio to receive them with.


----------



## gangrel

wbird said:


> I'm not going to get into the electromagnetic spectrum I think gangrel said it well, but I will say radio waves and cell phone signals are so weak you can't get them in most the buildings in NYC, I loose radio going under an overpass so they are really awfully weak. If you need things to worry about there are a lot of other things to devote your time to,and possibly help solve.


That's not signal strength per se; it's absorption and reflection. Regular window glass is highly transparent to visible light, but reflects IR. I think concrete tends to reflect; multipathing is a larger issue in cities, and that is indicative of reflection.

Another point: Low-frequency EM radiation is non-ionizing. Radio frequencies are very much low-frequency here. Ionizing damages atoms and molecules, which in quantity means it damages tissues. When non-ionizing radiation is absorbed, it generally translates into heat...but for that to be significant, you need lots of it, OR it has to penetrate much deeper. The *tiny* amount of energy incident on a person is not an issue.

One last comparison. I've got to do some grocery shopping here in a moment. It's summer, it's hot...pushing 100 for the high. So, shorts, short sleeve shirt. No hat. If I'm out in the sun for a total of 15 minutes, I'll probably get hit by more energy, and MUCH more energy capable of actually doing damage, in those 15 minutes than in a month of incidental RF exposure.


----------



## CLP

It wasn't my intention to de-rail this topic, I was just trying to play devil's advocate. 

I guess it's safe to assume from the info given that I can continue to wear mine at night worry-free. For the record it works on the nightstand too. )

Back to the original topic, I'd go for an Accutron II Surveyor as well. The only issue I see with it is you'd want a battery or 2 already stored in the case for the eventuality of it running out, which I've heard is every 2 years or so.


----------



## Alden

Tom-HK said:


> Same here. Besides a fairly wide variety of HAQs I also have some ordinary quartz watches and a couple of radio-synched watches, including a Casio 6-band RC digital. Without exception the Casio RC watch is the least accurate. *Even when it has successfully synched during the night, it's measurably off within half a day.*


How much off is "measurably off" within 12 hours? I just checked mine. It last synced 27 hours ago and it seems to be running *a half-second fast.* If I had worn it last night it would have synced and it would not be off by a half second. Is that what you mean by measurably off?

In half a day, or 12 hours, it would not be noticeably off at all. Not noticed by the average human, anyway.


----------



## ronalddheld

For RC watches it might be up to a half second of after a .sync.


----------



## Tom-HK

Alden said:


> How much off is "measurably off" within 12 hours? I just checked mine. It last synced 27 hours ago and it seems to be running *a half-second fast.* If I had worn it last night it would have synced and it would not be off by a half second. Is that what you mean by measurably off?
> 
> In half a day, or 12 hours, it would not be noticeably off at all. Not noticed by the average human, anyway.


I don't want to split hairs, but half a second, even over 27 hours, is huge in the HAQ world and should be especially damning in a watch that claims accuracy of one second per ten thousand years (or whatever it is that RC watches often like to claim). Even among non-HAQs, this might seem like a lot.

As Ron said, for RC watches, seeing about half a second's worth of drift within 12 hours is not uncommon. By 'measureable' I mean any amount that I can discern by my standard stopwatch timing method that cannot be put down to operator error or system latency and, basically, if you can see the drift with the naked eye then you can be pretty sure that it can be measured.

I'm not trying to have a go at RC watches - I love my RC Citizen despite its being nearly as inaccurate as the RC Casio. Nor am I having a go a Casio - some of my favourite HAQs are Casio digital watches. But the plain fact of the matter is that RC watches just aren't very accurate and my G-Shock is my worst. They're very useful things to have, as I have mentioned in other threads on this topic, but in discussing HAQs (which very well might not see half a second's drift in an entire month, regardless of any signal coverage area), RC watches really do come lumbered with quite a bit if baggage.


----------



## wbird

Tom, your best non RC or GPS HAQ watch has about a half a second of drift a month, the others are worse. This isn't even counting the error in your initial hack or the fact that you don't routinely hack your watches. I'm guessing that the only watches that are displaying the correct time to 2s are your RC and GPS watches. There should be no reason an RC watch doesn't receive a signal, again there is the cell phone app for that, search this forum for it, if you are having issues. GPS seems to work somewhere on this planet within your daily travels.

I like the technology that an HAQ watches represents but I recognize they have their own set of limitations, they have way more precision than most any watch on the planet. But accuracy is displaying the correct time. Watches that sync win the accuracy game.


----------



## Alden

I guess I don't understand why RC watches need to be inherently super accurate when they sync every 24 hours or so with an atomic clock.


----------



## Tom-HK

My current tally has 5 HAQs at 5 SPY or better (and a further 4 at better than 10 SPY), while all of the off-spec HAQs besides the Precisionist can be regulated back down to sub-10 SPY, but I do take your point about how close each watch is likely to be to UST at any given time. On the other hand, if I know that my my dual oscillator VHP is off by three seconds this morning, then I can depend on its still being three seconds off in two weeks' time and I don't have to worry about RC reception in order to be confident about that.


----------



## Tom-HK

Not wanting to divert this thread too much, the entire debate about the relative merits of HAQ (TC), RC/GPS and RC/GPS + TC has been pretty much done to death in other threads. Each technology has its place. The original point if this thread was, I think, to ask for recommendations for a first HAQ, so it is to that side of the spectrum that my current bias of thinking lies.


----------



## silverwind2712

To the OP, and regarding the watch in the first post, here are some strap options. 


Milanese mesh and Brown leather. I had a photo with a blue perlon somewhere but can't find it.


Performance: so far 5 seconds fast over a duration of 7 months.


----------



## ronalddheld

Alden said:


> I guess I don't understand why RC watches need to be inherently super accurate when they sync every 24 hours or so with an atomic clock.


Short of the Morgenwerk, they are not. If you miss a few syncs you could be off seconds.


----------



## Alden

ronalddheld said:


> Short of the Morgenwerk, they are not. If you miss a few syncs you could be off seconds.


I see. Mine will sync on average 5 times a week. If I miss two days in a row it could be off by as much as one second. That is not a bother to me.

If accuracy down to the split second is that important to you, then a Casio is not the answer.


----------



## Sgt10p

My recommendation would be to go for the best quality you can 'justify'. I prefer Sports watches and went for a Breitling Colt which I recommend. Looks like you have a preference for Dress Watches so the Grand Seiko would suit. You need to buythe whole package not just one feature IMHO.

With regard to the forbidden subject I have 4 RC Casios all keep deplorable time when not in sync. I thnk their (Casio) philosophy is 'don't worry about accuracy' because it's RC (no to be confused with Roman Catholic) Well you've got no chance of a signal in Southern Spain Just my 2p.


----------



## arogle1stus

IMO If accuracy is yer game, the only way to fly is with Casio Multi Band 6's.
I have 4 of em. Just like Aldens M B 6, they attempt to Synch at least 5 times
per week. I live in Texas.
Fave Multi Band 6's are the GW6900 and GW3000bb1.They are also Solar another
perk

X traindriver Art


----------



## hughesyn

Alden said:


> I see. Mine will sync on average 5 times a week. If I miss two days in a row it could be off by as much as one second. That is not a bother to me.
> 
> If accuracy down to the split second is that important to you, then a Casio is not the answer.


So if you go on holiday somewhere with no reception for a few weeks, it would be way off!

It's also not inconceivable that the transmission tower could stop working for days or weeks.
In the UK, the NPL radio signal from Anthorn is funded by the government. That's no guarantee it will always be turned on though...


----------



## ronalddheld

arogle1stus said:


> IMO If accuracy is yer game, the only way to fly is with Casio Multi Band 6's.
> I have 4 of em. Just like Aldens M B 6, they attempt to Synch at least 5 times
> per week. I live in Texas.
> Fave Multi Band 6's are the GW6900 and GW3000bb1.They are also Solar another
> perk
> 
> X traindriver Art


All RC/GPS watches, short of MW, have no intrinsic high accuracy.


----------



## Alden

In two weeks it could be off by five or six seconds. To me, that's not "way off". 

Five or six minutes in two weeks is way off.


----------



## Tom-HK

Alden said:


> In two weeks it could be off by five or six seconds. To me, that's not "way off".
> 
> Five or six minutes in two weeks is way off.


It shouldn't really need saying, but this is the 'high accuracy' forum, so five or six seconds in two weeks would certainly be seen as fairly disastrous around here.


----------



## gangrel

Alden said:


> In two weeks it could be off by five or six seconds. To me, that's not "way off".
> 
> Five or six minutes in two weeks is way off.


5 minutes in 2 weeks is performance for a lower-end *mechanical*; that would basically be 20 seconds per day, which is the spec of the typical low-end Seiko. It'd be bad performance for a better-grade 2824/2892; those rate about 7 seconds per day. It would be obscenely *terrible* for a standard, decent quartz; my $40 Gotham pocket watch does quite a bit better than that! It's off by a couple of minutes, but that's probably since DST change; that's, what, 5+ months.

I get that, as a practical matter, being off a handful of seconds poses no particular problem in daily life. But that's also just routine accuracy from your everyday 15 SPM quartz, more or less. So it's definitely NOT high accuracy by any notion.


----------



## ronalddheld

Alden in this forum, 6 sec/yr is considered good performance. 3 s/week is an ordinary quartz movement which we do not discuss here.


----------



## rfortson

Alden said:


> In two weeks it could be off by five or six seconds. To me, that's not "way off".
> 
> Five or six minutes in two weeks is way off.


I've just recently started following HAQ since I purchased a couple of the Bulova 262kHz watches (and learned they're not really considered HAQ by the purists). I get your point about RC watches, and what's "good enough". I think the people here are after what is technically feasible without outside influence (from a GPS or radio signal). It's just another form of appreciation for what technology can do. Just like we obsess over the accuracy of mechanical watches, it's the same with quartz. There's no "need" to any of this. It's just "can it do it".

BTW, I really love my two Bulovas. Both seem to be dead on as far as I'm concerned (I'm not doing super slo-mo video capture to measure to the fraction). The Military model is my reference for my mechanical watches, and my Moon Watch is just fun to wear and compliments my Speedy Pro and Seiko "Pogue" in my space watch collection.


----------



## Alden

ronalddheld said:


> Alden in this forum, 6 sec/yr is considered good performance. 3 s/week is an ordinary quartz movement which we do not discuss here.


Yes, thanks, I know. I was just responding to something somebody posted two before my post.


----------



## zuckermania

For inexpensive I'd go used Breitling SQ. If you are able to spend over $1,000 a used Grand Seiko is hard to beat for the price.


----------



## oak1971

They don't need need to be, but some would prefer them to be.


----------



## oak1971

I will sit here happy with my dual quartz.


----------



## Alden

oak1971 said:


> I will sit here happy with my dual quartz.


Dual? As in two quartz movements in one watch?


----------



## ronalddheld

Alden said:


> Dual? As in two quartz movements in one watch?


No, two quartz oscillators in one movement.


----------



## oak1971

Probably not even HAQ by today's measure, but then I can't seem to find two specs that agree either.


----------



## Alden

ronalddheld said:


> No, two quartz oscillators in one movement.


Yes, that is what I meant to type. So, both oscillate and an average is taken between the two, thus in theory creating a system that is more accurate?



oak1971 said:


> Probably not even HAQ by today's measure, but then I can't seem to find two specs that agree either.


Hmmmm...


----------



## ronalddheld

One oscillator is used to discipline the primary one


----------



## oak1971

Sounds kinky.


----------



## stubvintage

Oysterquartz!


----------



## SigmaPiJiggy

Hi guys - I figured this would be a good place to hop on the HAQ forum...

I have grown tired of worrying about keeping my reserves up ( I have ZERO ambition to get a winder) --- so I've been looking to quartz.

Looks like I've identified the Precidrive already (take that, WUS!) as one of the absolute best HAQ pieces in my price range of up to $700US.

Any other suggestions are GREATLY appreciated!

Also- in my short time into horological ventures, I did buy (and subsequently sell off) an Accutron II. And from my Twixting, it certainly is HAQ-worthy. (Even though I'm sure Twixt does not really qualify as a "legit" HAQ measurement tool).










Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## wbird

First nice job hacking that Bulova. IMO Twixt is no better or worse than most ways to track a 10 s/yr watch. And lastly good luck with the precidrive. Nice watches, I assume you're going with a Certina, or did you get a deal on a Longines.

By the way I have a precidrive and a Bulova precisionist, the Bulova is performing about the same maybe better than the Certina.


----------



## ronalddheld

But


SigmaPiJiggy said:


> Hi guys - I figured this would be a good place to hop on the HAQ forum...
> 
> I have grown tired of worrying about keeping my reserves up ( I have ZERO ambition to get a winder) --- so I've been looking to quartz.
> 
> Looks like I've identified the Precidrive already (take that, WUS!) as one of the absolute best HAQ pieces in my price range of up to $700US.
> 
> Any other suggestions are GREATLY appreciated!
> 
> Also- in my short time into horological ventures, I did buy (and subsequently sell off) an Accutron II. And from my Twixting, it certainly is HAQ-worthy. (Even though I'm sure Twixt does not really qualify as a "legit" HAQ measurement tool).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Welcome. Have you searched for similar thread on low cost HAQs?


----------



## Alden

My Seiko SKA369 kinetic diver is off by +0.8 seconds in two weeks. 

For a $188 watch, that ain't bad.


----------



## SigmaPiJiggy

ronalddheld said:


> But
> Welcome. Have you searched for similar thread on low cost HAQs?


For whatever reason Tapatalk only gave me like 5 total threads in here, I'll have to check it out on the PC.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## gangrel

The other inherent HAQs in that range that I can recall:

--Seiko 8J41-based: SACM171, SACM150, a couple other variants. These are JDM but more widely available than....
--Citizen G530-based: AR4000 series (4000, 4001, 4004)...all are JDM and usually require ordering from Japan
--Tissot PR100 quartz COSC. Same PreciDrive movement as the Certina, IIRC, in a dress-oriented package.

The Seikos run quite small...like 34mm. That knocks them out for many. The Citizens are just harder to find. They're also not big...but 37mm. That works fine for me. The Tissot is *probably* the easiest to source in the US, but I think Jomashop carries both the Tissot and Certina.


----------



## stratct

You can always get a Seiko 7A38. 15 jewels, 4 stepper motors, regulator, chrono. Regulated you can make it into the HAQ territory. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## dicioccio

gangrel said:


> The other inherent HAQs in that range that I can recall:
> 
> --Seiko 8J41-based: SACM171, SACM150, a couple other variants. These are JDM but more widely available than....
> --Citizen G530-based: AR4000 series (4000, 4001, 4004)...all are JDM and usually require ordering from Japan
> --Tissot PR100 quartz COSC. Same PreciDrive movement as the Certina, IIRC, in a dress-oriented package.
> 
> The Seikos run quite small...like 34mm. That knocks them out for many. The Citizens are just harder to find. They're also not big...but 37mm. That works fine for me. The Tissot is *probably* the easiest to source in the US, but I think Jomashop carries both the Tissot and Certina.


Hello gangrel,
I didn't know there are Tissot with HAQ movements - would you mind to give me some example ?


----------



## svorkoetter

dicioccio said:


> Hello gangrel,
> I didn't know there are Tissot with HAQ movements - would you mind to give me some example ?


Tissot PR 100 COSC Quartz - T1014512603100


----------



## gangrel

That's the one, altho I usually highlight the black dial version.  As far as I can tell, it's the only one they offer at this time.


----------



## Popeye47

Where do the Omega , Breitling, Tag Heuer and other "Swiss" watches stand as far as quartz movement pieces? Is a quartz watch less valuable in the marketplace because of the "lack of workmanship"?


----------



## wbird

Might want to look at the offerings in the sport watches from Hoptroff. For some reason they get about the same amount of love as Bulova in these parts. They feature TC, bluetooth, and HAQ specs.


----------



## yankeexpress

Popeye47 said:


> Where do the Omega , Breitling, Tag Heuer and other "Swiss" watches stand as far as quartz movement pieces? Is a quartz watch less valuable in the marketplace because of the "lack of workmanship"?


Workmanship has little to do with HAQ certification.....either it fits the HAQ spec definition or it doesn't.

Many quartz watches come close, like Bulova, but they get short shrift here in the HAQ forum if they don't meet the HAQ criteria, no matter how much anecdotal evidence is presented.

Anyway, this Moonwatch has been dead-nuts accurate since it arrived, but it ain't HAQ:


----------



## svorkoetter

yankeexpress said:


> Anyway, this Moonwatch has been dead-nuts accurate since it arrived, but it ain't HAQ:


Off topic, but what's the lug-to-lug measurement on that watch?


----------



## Alden

svorkoetter said:


> Off topic, but what's the lug-to-lug measurement on that watch?


Lug to lug it is 52mm, 45mm in diameter, 13mm thick, and the exposed edge of the crystal is 1mm thick, so it might be 2mm thick.

Bulova says the Precisionist movement should be accurate to within a ten second range in a year.


----------



## ronalddheld

I thought Bulova is not quoting any specs for those watches, anymore?


----------



## Alden

ronalddheld said:


> I thought Bulova is not quoting any specs for those watches, anymore?





> From the Precisionist Collection with precise timing to 1/1000th of a second and continuous-sweep second hand, the Precisionist Chronograph is particularly refined....Powered by Bulova's unique three-prong crystal Precisionist movement with a 262 kHz vibrational frequency-eight times greater than standard watches-...


Bulova 98B270 Men's Precisionist Chronograph Watch | Bulova



> Product DescriptionPushing the limits of Bulova engineering fashioning something new and wonderful the Precisionist series.
> Brushed and polished stainless steel case measures 42mm diameter by 12mm thick.
> Sturdy link bracelet includes a push button hidden deployment clasp tastefully securing the watch to your wrist.
> Patterned black dial is well accented by luminous hands and genuine diamond hour markers.
> With a Quartz movement allowing for accuracy of 10sec +/- per year the Precisionist lives up to its lofty name.
> Convenient date display at the third hour.
> A scratch resistant mineral crystal protects the water resistant case.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The world's most accurate watch with a continuously sweeping second hand. Most quartz watches are accurate to within 15 seconds/month. Precisionist is accurate to within 10 seconds/year.


https://www.amazon.com/Bulova-96D11...003P1L5UK#technicalSpecifications_feature_div


----------



## Alden

More recently, this is what Bulova is saying about the Precisionist.



> Product DescriptionThis is the limited edition Bulova UHF 262 kHz quartz chronograph replica of the Bulova watch worn on the moon by astronaut David Scott during Apollo 15 in 1971. This model 96B251 features date and one-hour stop watch with 1/120 second subdial. It is in unworn condition new in the box with all tags.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From the Precisionist Collection. Featuring Bulova's proprietary Precisionist accuracy, this advanced chronograph offers 1/1,000-second precision over a twelve-hour time frame, with accuracy to within seconds a year. In stainless steel with curved crystal, multiple-layer black carbon fiber, blue, silver and black dial, chronograph measurement of hours, minutes, seconds, 1/10-seconds, 1/100-seconds and 1/1,000-seconds, yellow continuously sweeping second hand, luminous hour and minute hands, luminous markers, tachymeter, calendar, screw-back case, screw-down crown, double-press fold-over clasp with safety lock, and water resistance to 300 meters.


https://www.amazon.com/Bulova-96B25...&nodeID=6358539011&keywords=bulova+moon+watch


----------



## gangrel

I don't see *Bulova* claiming 10 SPY, tho. Looks like they're hedging their bets. The 10 SPY is from an Amazon listing. Bulova can claim this is an assertion made by the seller, so they're not committed to it as a performance claim.

EDIT: what I'm thinking is...ok, perhaps they made the claim at some point. In practice, let's say that 70% of the movements achieve 10 SPY; through wear pattern or manufacturing variance, 30% didn't. Eww, better back off from that claim. Then all we gotta say is that the seller didn't keep his blurbs up to date.


----------



## Alden

gangrel said:


> I don't see *Bulova* claiming 10 SPY, tho. Looks like they're hedging their bets. The 10 SPY is from an Amazon listing. Bulova can claim this is an assertion made by the seller, so they're not committed to it as a performance claim.
> 
> EDIT: what I'm thinking is...ok, perhaps they made the claim at some point. In practice, let's say that 70% of the movements achieve 10 SPY; through wear pattern or manufacturing variance, 30% didn't. Eww, better back off from that claim. Then all we gotta say is that the seller didn't keep his blurbs up to date.


You're most likely right.


----------

