The Breitling Watch Source Forums
https://www.breitlingsource.com/phpBB2/

Dead-beat seconds
https://www.breitlingsource.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=39882		 Page 1 of 1
Author:  nr123 [ Tue May 15, 2012 4:56 pm ]
Post subject:  Dead-beat seconds
Anyone own one, or seen one of these in person? I have been trying to learn as much as I can about watches and was reading the glossary on this site:

dead-beat seconds: A complication on a mechanical watch where the second hand does not sweep, but jumps forward in one second intervals, much like a quartz watch.

I know a watch should be bought for what you like, granted it's a fairly interesting complication, but....can't get the image of quartz out.
Author:  ricardo [ Wed May 16, 2012 8:18 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Dead-beat seconds
The dead beat seconds is another of those complications that are fairly useless to the owner in this day and age but they have a natural charm and character and are a reflection of the expertise of the watchmaker. Just like tourbillons, minute repeaters, etc.

The most famous of recent times is the Gronefeld One Hertz. Other recent manufacturers have been FP Journe and Audemars Piguet. As you can see, these are high end horological craftmen that are responsible and as a result are tens of thousands of pounds. Although when I heard how much the One Hertz retailed for I thought it was good value!

Incidentally, most mechanical clocks from the 17th to the 19th century had a dead beat seconds due to the use of the deadbeat escapement, which would never work in a wrist watch because it is pendulum driven.

As another aside, an average quartz crystal in a wrist watch runs about 8000Hz. Clearly very little change would need to be made to the IC to distribute movement to the seconds hand at a much higher frequency to make it sweep.
Author:  Roffensian [ Wed May 16, 2012 8:53 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Dead-beat seconds
ricardo wrote:
The dead beat seconds is another of those complications that are fairly useless to the owner in this day and age but they have a natural charm and character and are a reflection of the expertise of the watchmaker. Just like tourbillons, minute repeaters, etc.


One of the traditional uses, which I assume still applies is for doctors to get a more accurate heart rate reading than with a sweep seconds.


ricardo wrote:
As another aside, an average quartz crystal in a wrist watch runs about 8000Hz. Clearly very little change would need to be made to the IC to distribute movement to the seconds hand at a much higher frequency to make it sweep.


32,768Hz actually, but who's counting :lol: . The issue with sweeping on a quartz is simply one of significantly shorter battery life with a higher number of movements. Incidentally, Bulova announced a quartz powered watch at Basel that beats at 262,144Hz.
Author:  ricardo [ Wed May 16, 2012 9:24 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Dead-beat seconds
Roffensian wrote:
ricardo wrote:
The dead beat seconds is another of those complications that are fairly useless to the owner in this day and age but they have a natural charm and character and are a reflection of the expertise of the watchmaker. Just like tourbillons, minute repeaters, etc.


One of the traditional uses, which I assume still applies is for doctors to get a more accurate heart rate reading than with a sweep seconds.


ricardo wrote:
As another aside, an average quartz crystal in a wrist watch runs about 8000Hz. Clearly very little change would need to be made to the IC to distribute movement to the seconds hand at a much higher frequency to make it sweep.


32,768Hz actually, but who's counting :lol: . The issue with sweeping on a quartz is simply one of significantly shorter battery life with a higher number of movements. Incidentally, Bulova announced a quartz powered watch at Basel that beats at 262,144Hz.


Where did I get 8KHz from? I remember this particular question coming up in another forum and I could have sworn 8KHz was quoted. I should have done my research before making my reply. :oops: Thanks for the correction Roff.
Author:  Roffensian [ Wed May 16, 2012 9:28 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Dead-beat seconds
ricardo wrote:
I remember this particular question coming up in another forum and I could have sworn 8KHz was quoted.



See what happens when you hang out on the wrong side of the internet tracks!!!
Author:  JacksonStone [ Wed May 16, 2012 3:55 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Dead-beat seconds
On a three-hand watch, one of the things I like best is the sweep of the second hand. It looks much nicer to me than the once-per-second tick of a quartz second hand. For that reason, I don't think I would like a dead-beat seconds mechanical.
Author:  nr123 [ Thu May 17, 2012 3:14 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Dead-beat seconds
JacksonStone wrote:
On a three-hand watch, one of the things I like best is the sweep of the second hand. It looks much nicer to me than the once-per-second tick of a quartz second hand. For that reason, I don't think I would like a dead-beat seconds mechanical.


I agree. I do think though if you could switch between the tick and sweep, that would be a pretty cool feature.
Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC - 8 hours
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
https://www.phpbb.com/