mastergod Posted July 19, 2008 Report Share Posted July 19, 2008 Hi. Well the quest for perfect sweep continues. Amazed with the Rolex Oysterquartz (Rolex 5100) sweep, I Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pugwash Posted July 19, 2008 Report Share Posted July 19, 2008 Has anyone seen these sweep movements? What Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TwoTone Posted July 19, 2008 Report Share Posted July 19, 2008 What on earth gives you the impression the Oysterquartz is a sweeping movement? ">" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="425" height="350"> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest carlsbadrolex Posted July 19, 2008 Report Share Posted July 19, 2008 Yep Yep Yep... they sweep! And they sweep pretty damn smoothly! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pugwash Posted July 19, 2008 Report Share Posted July 19, 2008 Oh? Is that a gen? Compare it to this: http://www.2east.de/rolex/anlegen.mov Tick ... tick ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
POTR Posted July 19, 2008 Report Share Posted July 19, 2008 The 5035 & 5055 are nearly the same as the 3035 automatic, but, have a pulse motor that drives the pallet fork 1 time per second... unlike the 3035 which is driven by the unwinding mainspring & pulses the pallet fork at 8 times per second. Because of this difference the wheels are a little different with the 5035/5055, and they beat at exactly 1 time per second with no backlash or sweep. Oysterquartz models "TICK." Interesting BETA 21 (Ebauches SA/now ETA)- 5100 there though TT. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TwoTone Posted July 19, 2008 Report Share Posted July 19, 2008 Oh? Is that a gen? Interesting BETA 21 there though TT. What the hell do I know... I thought everything on YouTube was accurate, truthful, and legitimate... Ban the SOB that uploaded it on their site... Hang his ass high... How dare him post a fake 5100 Thieving bastard... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pugwash Posted July 19, 2008 Report Share Posted July 19, 2008 Ok, that sweeping Rolex TT posted is gen. It just doesn't use a Rolex movement. It's this one: http://www.oysterquartz.net/the_quartz_date_5100.htm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
POTR Posted July 19, 2008 Report Share Posted July 19, 2008 My foggy brain has a hard time remembering some things... especially nasty quartz stuff... But... the BETA 21 was developed by Ebauches SA (who is now ETA) for a bunch of companies... ROLEX DID USE IT in the 5100 for a couple of years in the late 60's (the first quartz Rolex) BUT... it was NOT AN OYSTER. Hence not an OYSTERQUARTZ. Rolex had to design a special case for it, that is why it doesn't say Oyster... and why there are so damn few of them wandering around to be remembered... but it is the daddy of the ETA quartz stuff that followed... (and the same movement as the Bulova Accutron...) and the ETA children of it are legitimately found in Tudors... which do fit Tudor Oyster cases,and ARE Oysterquartz.. well, sort of. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mastergod Posted July 19, 2008 Author Report Share Posted July 19, 2008 (edited) Ok so I guess they tick if pug says so!! I was fooled by the youtube video too!! The world wide web of lies!! However the info needed is: The ETA Quartz movements (as sold by ofrei) with sweeping seconds: How many times per second they tick? Is it 8-ish like mech Rolex, 300-360 times/sec like tuning forks? Pug - you Edited July 19, 2008 by mastergod Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest carlsbadrolex Posted July 19, 2008 Report Share Posted July 19, 2008 In the mid 90's I had a Rolex OysterQuartz for a very short period of time and I am quite sure it was smooth. It was a much earlier model, but I am sure it was an quartz. Was there an overlapping of movements in these watches? I think the one I had was from 71 or 72. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drhydro Posted July 20, 2008 Report Share Posted July 20, 2008 MG, all the quartz movements you're looking at tick at one per second. Except for the Beta 21 and the new Seiko Spring Drive, I'm not aware of any quartz movement that ticks more than one per sec. The "sweep second hand" that they advertise is simply a center seconds hand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pugwash Posted July 20, 2008 Report Share Posted July 20, 2008 Ok so I guess they tick if pug says so!! I was fooled by the youtube video too!! The world wide web of lies!! The video was real. I didn't realise Rolex made a watch with a BETA21 until I looked it up. It's not a Rolex movement in the 5100. As for the Ofrei-sold ones, if I knew anything about them, I would have posted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mastergod Posted July 20, 2008 Author Report Share Posted July 20, 2008 I Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robj Posted July 20, 2008 Report Share Posted July 20, 2008 I always thought sweep second hand was center sweep hand but thats in English so Ofrei being an American company could mean something completely different Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baglc1 Posted July 20, 2008 Report Share Posted July 20, 2008 A quartz watch with a sweep second hand is different from an automatic Watch king. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- There are quite a few issues here but perhaps I can comment on a few of the more salient considerations. Quartz watch drive systems are much lower in inertia compared to mechanicals. One of the reasons why Accutrons are not being made today is because this hybrid intermediary inertia system could not be sufficiently developed to overcome some of the major problems. With today's battery technology Accutrons SHOULD be feasible but alas .... If you look carefully at any mechanical watch with an operating frequency below 32,400 vph you will see that there is a barely perceptible rebound (backwards) movement to the second hand. Unlike tower clocks whose second hands are damped in their forward movement, most watch second hands are undamped to some degree. This puts a piece of metal in motion to bang up against another piece of metal (not counting detent chronometers of course where the banging metal occurs internally and the second hand is released not revolved). This banging is what creates the second hand jitter which is additional to the stuttering movement. In a quartz watch the second hand is propelled forward by a pulse like a regulator clock in a school or train station. The second hand is ultralight nowadays (unlike a mechanical system with a second hand which "balances" part of the escapement inertia and which would wiggle incredibly if it was ultralight). Even at higher movement rates the second hand on a quartz mechanism wouldn't look like the second hand on a mechanical watch. In addition mechanical watches tick. The ticking effect is real, just watch the reaction of a puppy to a loud mechanical alarm clock that it can have for its own. With the right teething handle on the clock the puppy may want to carry it around "for company". So do puppies prefer tickers to digital pulse systems, well ... they used to. Now with lift activated "talking clocks" using the owners voice, the puppy would much prefer to carry the box "with the bigger dog's voice" around "for company" instead of the ticker. Mechanical watches can reassure the owner with sound and whenever wearers were unsure of their mechanical watches they used to put them up to their ear. This impulse reaction is fading from the culture due to quartz watches which are usually go-nogo systems. There used to be watchmakers with failing eyesight who could diagnose movement problems simply by listening to the movement. So the real issue here is what people's expectations are with quartz watches and could they be fulfilled. The 1/10 second quartz module already exists and could easily be incorporated into a watch. Jaeger and Seiko both have prototypes and test runs in the field for testing. The battery isn't a problem although the cost for the new tooling is a consideration. The smooth flowing second hand of the Accutron did have its fans. A watch made for Lucien Piccard had a vibration rate of 39,600 vph and it's second hand seemed to flow as well (although it is a real pain to regulate). There will be enough fans to make this specialized second hand a reality. Will it overcome a fascination with ticking that humans have become conditioned to expect over the last 500+ years, I don't know. Eventually it may, but there are still ticking, ringing tower clocks all over Europe. People will still have grandfather and cuckoo clocks in their homes. For the next hundred years or so people may grow up (and thus be conditioned from childhood) in the presence of a ticker. Minus this reassurance humans can feel a loss. Most likely when we have talking response devices that tell us the time (and other things, from birth, when we whack them, as sort of a baby's minute repeater with mama's voice) only then will the mechanical ticker become less interesting and thus more forgotten. All transition periods are like this. The difference between tube sound and transistors led some companies to "add" rounding distortion to their "sound" to retain customers who complained about the dryness of transistor sound. When CDs began to replace vinyl people claimed there was something lost although they acknowledged something was gained. We humans need accurate timekeeping to run our complex daily lives. In reality we don't need a constant reminder of the passing seconds, but constant movement reassures us that this important device is working, easing our insecurities. The 4 second attention span of the MTV generation makes this amount of time about the limit of our patience when we are determining if our "device" is working (which is why Nintendo had to keep attention getting messages onscreen as game programs loaded, or the audience thought the game player had broken). There is nothing intrinsically "bad" about a one second pulse rate. Old slow-beat fusee movement watches had 1 or 2 pulse per second advance rates for their second hands. What is funnier was the clutch connected second hand which could be stopped while the hour and minute hand continued to move correctly. The second hand was only there as an accessory. I'm sure there will be watches with quartz drives and flowing second hands available soon (so please write your favorite watch company, except of course Blancpain, to hurry them along). This will be a niche market item. It will out-MTV MTV. If the 1/10 second pulse interval is visible (unlike the synchronous motor clock second hand which flows at 60 pulses per second) we might be able to respond to the pulses which fascinate us. Like watching the activity of ants frantically building nests, collecting food and fighting for territory, the pulsed/flowing second hand may intrigue enough humans to inspire its own fan base in the market. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mastergod Posted July 20, 2008 Author Report Share Posted July 20, 2008 (edited) Wow baglc1, some interesting perspectives there. In my view, perfect sweep is (oopps going off topic:) kind of a cosmic<philosophical<spiritual<aesthetic thing, as I there is no such thing as step-by-step movement in reality, it Edited July 20, 2008 by mastergod Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gran Posted July 20, 2008 Report Share Posted July 20, 2008 Check out the Spring Drive movement by SEIKO now that is a smooth sweep......as smooth as is possible http://www.seikospringdrive.com/flash.html gran Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mastergod Posted July 21, 2008 Author Report Share Posted July 21, 2008 Check out the Spring Drive movement by SEIKO now that is a smooth sweep......as smooth as is possible http://www.seikospringdrive.com/flash.html gran Sure is a bewt movt. However tuning forks IMHO are cheaper (50-100 USD), more "mysterious" (humming sound) and feature a high enough frequency...dammit those S-drives are costly. Pls lemme know if you know of any budget springdrivers... MG Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
omni Posted July 21, 2008 Report Share Posted July 21, 2008 Sure is a bewt movt. However tuning forks IMHO are cheaper (50-100 USD), more "mysterious" (humming sound) and feature a high enough frequency... MG Yet unlike the beauty of the mechanical Spring Drive, the tuning fork movements require a battery. And the Spring Drive, although mechanical, does not "tick". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest carlsbadrolex Posted July 21, 2008 Report Share Posted July 21, 2008 YES, there is a slight difference in price between any of the options we are discussing and the Seiko Spring drive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fakemaster Posted July 21, 2008 Report Share Posted July 21, 2008 I thought everything on YouTube was accurate, truthful, and legitimate... and I thought all the sellers on ebay were honest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gran Posted July 21, 2008 Report Share Posted July 21, 2008 and I thought all the sellers on ebay were honest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mastergod Posted July 22, 2008 Author Report Share Posted July 22, 2008 (edited) Yet unlike the beauty of the mechanical Spring Drive, the tuning fork movements require a battery. And the Spring Drive, although mechanical, does not "tick". BTW all, got a reply from Ofrei on wether all (their) quartz "sweepers" tick once per second... Does the pope wear a funny hat? Not really. Still, Interesting things (Oysterquartz elaboration etc) came outta this thread, thanks for well-conceived replies and contributions. And Ofrei has tought us that "sweeping seconds" means two things: Sweeping if we Edited July 23, 2008 by mastergod Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
omni Posted July 23, 2008 Report Share Posted July 23, 2008 Then, MG, it sounds like your only possible cheap solution for your project to achieve the "sweep seconds" is what you mentioned earlier, using a "tuning fork" quartz movement, if you can make it fit. But don't think you can source one for (50 - 100 USD), well at least not an ETA from Ofrei. Taking an ebay search has a few old '70s Accutron watches for sale and saw a working recently serviced one for $75. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.