The Watch Site banner

1 - 17 of 17 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
379 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
...mostly anyway. After gaining a fair few Citizen Eco Drives during the past year or so, i set them all to atomic time at the beginning of the year and have kept tabs on how they've performed purely for my own amusement.

I thought id share the results with the members here and invite others to let us know how their eco drives have been performing. Maybe we can get a fair idea how these movements perform if we get a large enough database. Obviously all radio controlled models should be excluded from this, (even though two of mine are rc, as im in oz, none receive any signals and thus only operate as standard quartz).

my rate results (all watches except where noted set on 28/1/10):

Citizen AS8009-53E = +4sec/month

Citizen Calibre 2100 = -2sec/month

Citizen Nighthawk = +4sec/month

Citizen World Time = +6sec/month

Citizen BJ2120-07E = +8sec/month

Citizen BN0065-55E = +8sec/month

Citizen JP3040-59E = +3sec/month (digital display)
(battery powered) = -5sec/month (analogue display)

Citizen PMD56-2972 = +/- 0sec/month (measured 2wks only)

Citizen JR3090-58M = +4sec/month

Citizen BL5280-52W = +9sec/month

and as a reference from two others i measured:

Casio EF-524SP-1A = +10sec/month (measured 2 wks only)

Tissot T-Touch = +2sec/month

I hope this was of interest to someone
...surprised?, as expected?, let us know what you guys are getting.
This is my first post here, i see many regulars from other joints ^-^ , pleased to be here, thanks for the invite John, cheers.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,504 Posts
That's a nice collection of Citizens you have there and with pretty good performance.

Any reviews you feel like sharing would be appreciated, but the PMD56-2972, BN0065-55E, BJ2120-07E, AS8009-53E look interesting and not normally seen around here.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
822 Posts
Those are the sort of figures I'd expect to see, well within Citizen's specs. Since the specs are based on the watch being worn for about 16 hours a day at normal temperatures, you might find the ones running fast will improve their performance if you wear them daily. [Edit -- actually, I got that the wrong way around. Non-thermo compensated quartz watches tend to go faster when warmer, such as when being worn. This is the opposite to mechanical watches, which tend to run slower when warmer.]

One thing that did surprise me was that the digital and analogue on your JP3040 drift apart -- and in opposite directions. Mine stay firmly in sync, as does my other Aquamount and also my Aqualands.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,504 Posts
Sir said:
One thing that did surprise me was that the digital and analogue on your JP3040 drift apart -- and in opposite directions. Mine stay firmly in sync, as does my other Aquamount and also my Aqualands.
I noticed that too. Does that mean that each is regulated independently?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
379 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
Sir said:
Those are the sort of figures I'd expect to see, well within Citizen's specs. Since the specs are based on the watch being worn for about 16 hours a day at normal temperatures, you might find the ones running fast will improve their performance if you wear them daily.

One thing that did surprise me was that the digital and analogue on your JP3040 drift apart -- and in opposite directions. Mine stay firmly in sync, as does my other Aquamount and also my Aqualands.
Gday Sir Les,

thats interesting to know about the 16hr wear/day spec on quartz, has that been published by the manufacturers or accepted wisdom based on experience? also interesting to know quartz slow down while worn more, but i guess that'd tie in with your first point mentioned?

regards the 3040, yeah i know, im slightly dissapointed about that to be honest, i thought they act off the same electronics...not sure why they differ but they do. The Tissot synchronises perfectly, ill have to check the skyhawk, forgot to check that one.

cheers
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
822 Posts
brett said:
Gday Sir Les,

thats interesting to know about the 16hr wear/day spec on quartz, has that been published by the manufacturers or accepted wisdom based on experience? also interesting to know quartz slow down while worn more, but i guess that'd tie in with your first point mentioned?
Actually, I got the 'quartz slowing down when worn' thing the wrong way around -- sorry about that! In contrast to mechanical watches, quartz tends to run faster when being worn, due to the warmth from contact with your skin.

Typical Citizen quartz accuracy specs are +/- 20 seconds/month when worn at normal temperatures of +5°C to +35°C (41°F to 95°F). Wearing the watch on a daily basis tends to keep its temperature constant, and hence stabilise its timekeeping. Eco-drives tend to be more tightly specified to +/- 15 seconds/month, although I must say I've found from personal experience that they run much more accurately than that, even when not being worn. The ones I have range from 5 sec/month to less than a second a year. Sometimes you get lucky! :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
379 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
brett said:
my rate results (all watches except where noted set on 28/1/10):

Citizen AS8009-53E = +4sec/month

Citizen Calibre 2100 = -2sec/month

Citizen Nighthawk = +4sec/month

Citizen World Time = +6sec/month

Citizen BJ2120-07E = +8sec/month

Citizen BN0065-55E = +8sec/month

Citizen JP3040-59E = +3sec/month (digital display)
(battery powered) = -5sec/month (analogue display)

Citizen PMD56-2972 = +/- 0sec/month (measured 2wks only)

Citizen JR3090-58M = +4sec/month

Citizen BL5280-52W = +9sec/month

and as a reference from two others i measured:

Casio EF-524SP-1A = +10sec/month (measured 2 wks only)

Tissot T-Touch = +2sec/month
This is my first post here, i see many regulars from other joints ^-^ , pleased to be here, thanks for the invite John, cheers.
UPDATE @ 28/1/11 (1 year interval):

*note there's a couple new acquisitions so these are measured over time period in brackets

Citizen AS8009-53E = +4.7sec/month

Citizen Calibre 2100 = -1.5sec/month

Citizen Nighthawk = +5.2sec/month

Citizen World Time = +6.8sec/month

Citizen BJ2120-07E = +8.5sec/month

Citizen BN0065-55E = +8.8sec/month

Citizen PMD56-2972 = - 0.9sec/month (9 months)

Citizen JR3090-58M = +5.2sec/month

Citizen BL5280-52W = +9.2sec/month

Citizen BT0070-01A = +8.4sec/month (6 months)

Citizen JR4045-57E = +0.6sec/month (4 months)

Citizen JW0030-55E = +5.75sec/month (3 months)

Citizen AS4020-44B = +0.25sec/month (3 months)

Tissot T-Touch = +1.1sec/month

...more or less not a great deal of deviation compared to when i last measuredin May last year, some results are stellar, most are id say pretty good/ average and all well within spec +/-15sec/month. conditions have been stable (room temp) for 98% of the time as no watch i have gets huge wrist time due to big rotation = max. couple days/ month except the tissot which is my preferred beater.

hope this is of interest to some of you

cheers
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
321 Posts
I'd say that those are pretty decent results for ordinary quartz movements. As noted earlier, if you were to wear each for at least 12 hours per day, the results would probably be better. This is because it's probably the case that the watch makers calibrate the rate to be at its best when the watch is worn. However, one point made earlier in this thread is incorrect: non-TC movements don't tend to go faster when warmer (or more precisely, this is true for only a small part of the temperature range). If this were true, it would suggest a linear relationship between temperature and rate, and no such relationship exists with quartz. The relationship is quadratic, or in the form of a parabola, with the parabola crossing the 0 sec./month line at two points, one at a relatively cool temperature as the parabola rises, and then again at a warmer temperature after the parabola has reached its maximum height and is now on the way down again. With some movements, the calibration is really good, so that the first point occurs near room temperature (say 70F) and the second near typical 'wearing' temperature (about 86F: ambient temperature blended with skin temperature of about 91F). This perfect calibration is rarely seen, however, in normal quartz watches, and, if you're lucky, you will have the 'wearing' temperature coincide with something close to 0 sec./month.

You have established some good, reliable accuracy values for off-wrist performance. It would be great if you took one watch at a time and wore it for, say, one-two months (perhaps something like 12 hrs. on/12 hrs. off, or better, 14/10) to get its 'wearing' performance. You could use the Stopwatch Method detailed in a sticky on the WUS-HEQ forum, or, if you prefer, just do it by eye.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
379 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
SouthPender said:
You have established some good, reliable accuracy values for off-wrist performance. It would be great if you took one watch at a time and wore it for, say, one-two months (perhaps something like 12 hrs. on/12 hrs. off, or better, 14/10) to get its 'wearing' performance. You could use the Stopwatch Method detailed in a sticky on the WUS-HEQ forum, or, if you prefer, just do it by eye.
appreciate the comments SP!

whilst id also be interested to see if the "on wrist" performance improved due to being closer to calibrated temp, i only really have a passing interest in overall accuracy performance and im not sure i could stop the rotation for the length of time it would require to gain any substantive results from any one watch here. also, given none of these watches claim any performance brilliance, im not sure the interest in extending the test on any one of these would be high?

btw, how did your testing with Franks chronomaster and bulova go? im not sure i remember seeing the final results posted? was it abandoned? im more interested in those tbh :57: ;D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,680 Posts
Your evaluations are very interesting. I however wonder how you manage to measure the decimal fraction of a second, what kind of calibration apparatus are you utilizing?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
379 Posts
Discussion Starter #13
JoseJMartinez said:
Your evaluations are very interesting. I however wonder how you manage to measure the decimal fraction of a second, what kind of calibration apparatus are you utilizing?
probably not required but i used a stopwatch at the end measurements though i only used the eye when i started. given the long interval between measurements, the errors incurred i figured would be minute as a percentage of overall measurements
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
321 Posts
brett said:
btw, how did your testing with Franks chronomaster and bulova go? im not sure i remember seeing the final results posted? was it abandoned? im more interested in those tbh :57: ;D
Well, we got to a 4-week time period with Frank's Bulova Precisionist Claremont model, with the 'on-the-wrist' condition (12/12 or 14/10), and the results were pretty good: +11.32 seconds per year, which, in my opinion, is terrific for a non-thermocompensated watch movement. Rather than continuing with the 'on-the-wrist' condition for a longer period of time, we then went to the 'off-the-wrist' condition, but only got two weeks' worth of data. Over that time period, Frank's Precisionist showed +7.40 seconds per year, but two weeks is too-short a timing period to have much faith in the results. At that point, testing stopped. Still, I think the results that Frank got (and one or two others have as well) suggest that this new 3-prong, high-frequency crystal technology has real promise.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
379 Posts
Discussion Starter #15
SouthPender said:
Well, we got to a 4-week time period with Frank's Bulova Precisionist Claremont model, with the 'on-the-wrist' condition (12/12 or 14/10), and the results were pretty good: +11.32 seconds per year, which, in my opinion, is terrific for a non-thermocompensated watch movement. Rather than continuing with the 'on-the-wrist' condition for a longer period of time, we then went to the 'off-the-wrist' condition, but only got two weeks' worth of data. Over that time period, Frank's Precisionist showed +7.40 seconds per year, but two weeks is too-short a timing period to have much faith in the results. At that point, testing stopped. Still, I think the results that Frank got (and one or two others have as well) suggest that this new 3-prong, high-frequency crystal technology has real promise.
wow, excellent to see that at least the marketing wasnt frivolous. mostly though im surprised that the off wrist performance increased vs on wrist given as you say the manufacturers try to calibrate for on wrist accuracy

cheers
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
321 Posts
brett said:
wow, excellent to see that at least the marketing wasnt frivolous. mostly though im surprised that the off wrist performance increased vs on wrist given as you say the manufacturers try to calibrate for on wrist accuracy.
Yes, a little surprising. Below is a link to a thread started by dwjquest on the WUS HEQ forum that gives some excellent temperature X rate data on a Bulova Precisionist. Dwjquest uses advanced technology to track oscillator frequency and does so at precisely-stated temperature points (which he controls with some sort of oven). You'll see two separate tests there, and the results are almost identical. "Off-the-wrist" temperature is difficult to peg precisely, as it will vary from one person (and environment) to another, but I've used 70F as a good temperature equivalent. "Wearing" temperature can be generally pegged at about 86F. This arises from the combination of the temperature of the surface of the skin (about 91F) and the ambient temperature; 86F seems to be about right. If you look at dwjquest's excellent graphs, you'll see about 10 seconds per year for 86F and 8-9 seconds per year for 70F. In Post #21, you'll see the results minidriver and I got with his Precisionist--very close to dwjquest's values.

http://forums.watchuseek.com/f9/bulova-precisionist-rate-vs-temperature-493249.html
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,140 Posts
As I just noted in a solar watch thread here, I wore an E-D ti SkyHawk daily for five years and set it back 40 seconds after three years, once... that was it! Or, about a second a month, on average, if you prefer. I still have it, along with 23 other E-Ds, but the SkyHawk isn't nearly as accurate in the box as it was on my wrist (runs fast) or it's just getting old... like me! ;D
 
1 - 17 of 17 Posts
Top