ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX
20 June 2021, 06:48 PM | #61 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Oct 2019
Real Name: Graham
Location: Aus
Posts: 2,449
|
Rolex date just losing time again
Saxo I don’t think they do. They’ve listed precision and superlative chrono just like cosc and metas standards. They mean it should generally be +- 2 seconds a day.
These guys are not as flawless as you believe. They’ve messed up pretty badly on these movements. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
20 June 2021, 06:50 PM | #62 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Oct 2019
Real Name: Graham
Location: Aus
Posts: 2,449
|
|
20 June 2021, 08:23 PM | #63 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2020
Location: .
Posts: 2,918
|
Rolex date just losing time again
Quote:
A movement with -50 s/d - deviating between -48 and -52 s/d - not necessarily have a precision of -2/+2 sec/day! You may not have fully appreciated what the diference between accuracy and precision is. Sorry! |
|
20 June 2021, 08:28 PM | #64 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2020
Location: .
Posts: 2,918
|
Rolex date just losing time again
Quote:
I never said and don't believe that Rolex SA is flawless, nobody can be 100% perfect. There are others here who have perfectly explained in many many posts why Rolex cannot guarantee the accuracy. It can strongly depend on external conditions and owner specific wearing pattern. |
|
20 June 2021, 08:49 PM | #65 | |
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
Join Date: Apr 2019
Real Name: Brad
Location: Purdue
Watch: Daytona
Posts: 9,243
|
Rolex date just losing time again
Quote:
The average rate of multiple positions taken at full wind and then again X hours later falls inside +\-2 seconds per day is what they are teaching the watchmakers in training classes. Max deviation allowed is 10 seconds per day if I recall. I don't remember if that is absolute 10 spd or max rate minus min rate can't exceed 10. The watchmaker at AD here seemed happy to help when I told him I was getting -3 spd worn on the wrist. Took the watch back and made it +0.4 average in my worn positions. In and out in 4 minutes.
__________________
♛ ✠ Ω 2FA Active |
|
20 June 2021, 10:44 PM | #66 | |
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
Join Date: Dec 2010
Real Name: PaulG
Location: Georgia
Posts: 42,014
|
Quote:
The picture simply compares the actual definition of the two words with examples. Just poking at Rolex’s use of the word precision. “Spec” is better defined using the word accuracy when referenced against a well-defined target. By that we really mean +/-2 of a reference (e.g., an atomic clock). If one’s watch was consistently +2 day after day, then it would be both accurate and precise. Conversely, ask an archer to “hit that tree” without a reference to the center of the tree. Then her tight grouping of shots on the far left side of the trunk would be precise archery. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
__________________
Does anyone really know what time it is? |
|
21 June 2021, 12:04 AM | #67 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Oct 2019
Real Name: Graham
Location: Aus
Posts: 2,449
|
Quote:
Well cosc do as well as metas and clearly Rolex were trying to be better than cosc. I don’t think anyone finds cosc standards confusing. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
|
21 June 2021, 12:08 AM | #68 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Oct 2019
Real Name: Graham
Location: Aus
Posts: 2,449
|
Quote:
Nah I think you’re having troubles. I’m just reading them charts pointing out what precision is and you folk trying to point out Rolex purposely uses that word. We all know Rolex are saying the watch should be +- 2s per day and yes it could be a tad different to that should be wear the watch unusually ie you’re an ultra marathon runner. They’re setting a standard for themselves that’s better than cosc. Good on them. When the 32xx movements are in spec they are amazing. They just screwed up… Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
|
21 June 2021, 12:10 AM | #69 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Oct 2019
Real Name: Graham
Location: Aus
Posts: 2,449
|
Rolex date just losing time again
Quote:
Some people here are genuinely trying to make the argument that Rolex are not indicating accuracy here. I’m glad you were only poking at it. Sorry hard to tell over the internet. All these chronometer certifications and new standards they come up with and here people are like “oh they purposely used the word precision” come in guys… Rolex want to be superior to cosc and be superlative. For my two 3235s they were for about 14 months. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
|
21 June 2021, 12:17 AM | #70 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Oct 2019
Real Name: Graham
Location: Aus
Posts: 2,449
|
Quote:
Yeah -3 is fine I suppose. Especially if you move around a lot. My Daytona is +4. I find that awesome. My op36 is +6, you won’t hear me complain. -20s consistently not so much. It was damn precise in how consistently it lost time….. they’re not getting a pat on the back for that. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
|
21 June 2021, 12:55 AM | #71 | |||
2024 ROLEX SUBMARINER 41 Pledge Member
Join Date: Aug 2012
Real Name: Lee
Location: 42.48.45N70.48.48
Watch: Too many to list!
Posts: 33,693
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
I agree; marketing knows nothing about accuracy and precision!!! The target analogy is perfect with respect to the discussion of scientific accuracy and precision!!! Rolex's precision is a combination of the two; the accuracy and precision must both be within +/- 2 seconds!!! |
|||
21 June 2021, 12:58 AM | #72 | |
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
Join Date: Dec 2010
Real Name: PaulG
Location: Georgia
Posts: 42,014
|
Quote:
Well I think the ongoing debate here, while interesting over a cup of java, makes a great example of an old saying: The English and Americans are two peoples separated by a common language (and by extension, I might add Aussies) So allow me a way of bringing that to bear on this convo… If one can allow that the Swiss are also a people with multiple languages in their country. And no cantonment speaking predominantly English. Then off we go to Google translate… Guess what? Accurate = Precise Precise = Precise Interesting, no? In other words, I believe Rolex undoubtedly chose the best word decades ago to mean both. We English-only speakers may just have a bit of tunnel vision from a language-centric viewpoint. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
__________________
Does anyone really know what time it is? |
|
21 June 2021, 09:27 AM | #73 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Brisbane
Watch: DSSD
Posts: 8,064
|
Quote:
For my money, I would prefer it to be kept simple and easy to understand for the purposes of the consumer. After all the consumer is the one the industry should be serving. To that, +6 to -4 should be deemed to be a measure of accuracy around + or - 0 as the ideal when measured against the gold standard reference of an atomic clock(for example). Likewise +6 to -1 and so forth, should also be held to a standard the consumer can digest and apply in practical terms. After all, that was the whole point of the quartz revolution. Let's be clear about one important thing though. It's hard to make a movement run accurately if it's not displaying a workable degree of precision. Otherwise it's a bit like trying to catch a greasy weasel. So we idealy need a high degree of precision as a prerequisite to achieving the ideal level of accuracy. Any movement that displays a high level of precision can be easily made to run accurately |
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
*Banners
Of The Month*
This space is provided to horological resources.