The wider public sees quartz as a cheap technology, so asking for $400 or for 4000 like Grand Seiko for a quartz is a gamble. Let's see, it might work 😉
@@karlsenula9495 Good idea. Since I got the Escapement Time King Seiko homage, I also wonder why that Seiko quartz movement (VH31 I think?) with four tics per second isn't used more. It's not super slick sweeping, but way, way better than the usual index missing quartz movements. I've just learned about it and am surprised I've never heard about it before.
It took 85 days for my Casio EF-125 to divert two second second from general GPS time. My other Casio EFA-110D do about 3 sec per month. On the other hand my Seiko5 can do +12s per DAY.. but they are from early 1980s and had service only once 15 years ago..
If you want to spend $10,000 to get the accuracy of a $10 Casio, you deserve to lose your money. Then again, in ten years time you might get most of your money back (and possibly them some) if you sell your Rolex. You will get nothing for your Casio. What is the accuracy like after a few years?. The Rolex will need a $1,000 service by then.
Excited to watch this again and comment what I've learned recently, which is that watches are optimized (typically, at least one brand I was reading about) for a standard wear pattern of 16 hours per day on wrist. So both of your watches might be much more accurate if you tried that. It turns out temperature is the main factor behind watch inaccuracy/movement variability, both for quartz and mechanical.
Fwiw my BLRO I last set in November to time.is and have been wearing it daily without resetting the time (other than adjusting the hour for DST and the date for 30/28 day months). The watch is currently +1.0 seconds from time.is. That’s a deviation of one second over eight months. By far the most accurate mechanical watch I’ve seen, and that includes seiko spring drive (which uses quartz).
I’m not spending $10,000 to keep time within a few second “better” range. That’s ludicrous. If Rolex is your jam, go for it. But, don’t disparage less expensive watches. They all do the same thing: keep time.
That has got to be one of the most accurate mechanical watches going, you definitely lucked out with that one mate. Did you leave it in a watch winder for the week or did you wear it and rest it in one position?
I did luck out, even for a Superlative chronometer! I wore it all the time, just taking it off for showering. However with time mechanical will degrade much faster than quartz. In 5 years the Rolex will be way off, as the automatic will pretty much keep its rate
I love mechanicals I think the way they are assembled is much more "romantic" and impressive but quartz are just unbeatable if all you want is to keep track of time. Not only there's very few moving pieces, a chip calculates the vibrations of the quartz crystal and moves the hands, this technology has become more and more accurate over time. The most accurate quartz right now is the citizen Caliber 0100with about ±1 second per year...
Bonjour Olivier! Rolex the best watch brand? I know some will be pretty angry with me but I can hands down name a better watch brand: Grand Seiko! Half the MSRP, actually available, superior in execution and every spring drive movement wipes the floor with a Rolex in terms of timekeeping! 😆
I was quoting people who believe that. What I believe is that Rolex IS the best watch brand (amazing brand management, marketing l, sponsorships, desirability, etc), but not the best watchmaker, far from it. GS, and pretty much any other brand making high horology timepieces are superior.
I wonder how my 1983 Casio Marlin would have performed. I have had many, many quartz watches since but they have been nowhere near as accurate. In this day and age they should be able to do much better than this.
Nice idea to compare accuracies, might be interesting to see on the long run, but I mean long run. Mind you, I am not a accuracy maniac, as long as my mechanical watches are within a +/- 10 sec a day :) I am fine with it, as I can't even make any of my meetings on time, it is a great excuse. Ok rolex and metas and some other standards are obviously higher than a lot of watches but... What surprises me is the people's beliefs upon chronometer certified watches and little understanding of how these mechanical watches work and can vary depending on so many factors. I recall a lady complaining about a longines chronometer which was gaining some 20s every fortnight and giving a 'shut' to the seller about it 🥴.
You can't afford to be an accuracy maniac when you like mechanical watches, those 2 don't mix well 😂. I'll leave them for a month and check what happens 😁
What am I to conclude from this, it seems to me that the Rolex for $ 10,000 does much the same job as a $ 10 watch. now we are talking about seconds apart, which is not huge I think the choice must be made in relation to the desire for a watch and of course to its means, the Rolex is absolutely magnificent, and the Casio quartz to another style let's say ... then the real question is if I could afford to buy both, I will buy which watch in priority for a performance that seems almost equal ....it seems to me that it remains a question of passion, means and desire. =)
the question is do you wear the rolex & the casio within 7 days of testing it?.. you must wear it to both to really able to teast its capability.. gravity on different angle of the watch will effect all machanical watches while quartz has no effect on gravity on different positions.. even my pagani design is running 0 beat error & +/- 0/day when in dial up positioned in a timegraph but when in defferent position my pagani design will change the beat error & accuracy.. next time wear both the watch so it will be a valid comparison..
For accuracy and convenience get a solar, it lasts about 20 years and is always less within 15 seconds per month and way cheaper. And after 20 years just replace the battery and it goes again.
I have a Christopher Ward C11... Which cost me £400 in 2011. It has a Sellita SW200-1 automatic movement. I spent a week calibrating it shortly after purchase... It runs at +1/-1 sec per day and has done so for 11yrs without any further adjustment and still looks like new... So no need to spend that sort of money for accuracy. The most I've spent on a new Watch is £3500 for a limited Edition Christopher Ward 7350... Number 69 of 75 to celebrate 75yrs since the Battle of Britain... And no.. it's not as accurate as the C11 but im not messing with that as it it keeps to Chronometer specs.
So, the big news is that the $10k Rolex matched the accuracy of the $10 Casio after a week?! Somehow I don't see Rolex putting that into their ad campaigns. Just think -- for only 1000x more money you can have about the same accuracy as a quartz Casio... I do like watches and appreciate the engineering etc that go into high end watches but I suppose it depends on what role you want your watch to play.
Wear both the rolex & casio on the wrist to relly test it.. wearing it both will change the accuracy of any mechanical watch due to different dial positioning & due to gravity & moving or your hands & some impact.. vs casio that has no effect on any impact & gravity.. not to mention the price difference.. digital watch is still the best & the cheapest watch than a mechanical.. but the only reason I also use mechanical is the craftsmanship & the soul from it.. but in timekeeping accuracy & practicality then quartz watches are the best even the cheapest fake quartz can beat the rolex & all mechanical watch.. Next time wear it both use it & I am sure casio will win & your rolex will be many seconds difference..
🤣🤣🤣🤣 What an innovative comparison. I think in a months time the Casio will be more accurate. So I would buy a 1000 Casio's and live forever. Have to wear them all 😁😂🤣
Pas mal mais en portant la Rolex combien d'heures par jour avec des périodes de repos de combien ?? Mon automatique la plus précise .... une San Martin DJ en PT5000 !!! portée 14h par jour quasiment sans discontinuer, donc avec 10h de repos donne du +1s en ... 10 jours !!! Dés que je la porte pendant 8 heures en la posant souvent pendant cette période c'est de suite du +4s par jour !!!
Super résultats du PT5000 ! Tu en as un en or ! Je dors avec mes montres, je ne les enlève que pour prendre ma douche, donc sur la semaine j'ai dû ne pas la porter 3 heures
@@HorologiqueAh alors voilà l'explication 😉 Oui pour la PT5000 franchement je n'en reviens pas, dans les mêmes conditions d'usage mon autre la plus précise est une Revue Thommen Diver en ETA à +13s en 8 jours = +1,625s/jour.
@@laurentb7351 ce qui est déjà impressionnant ! Mais pour cette Rolex ça m'a tellement surpris qu'il fallait que je le partage. Ce qui m'a aussi surpris est d'échanger avec des collègues de travail qui pensaient que les Rolex étaient les plus précises. Je voulais donc faire cette vidéo pour tenter d'éclaircir les choses, mais là, c'est la surprise 😳
Oh man: you could've just tried again with the Rolex, until you got a spot-on start. And why start at 12:00:01? Just start at 00 on the dot. And you were about .5 seconds fast, and then it was about .5 seconds behind. So that's minus ~1 second per week for the Rolex (which IS amazing, but not nearly as close as the Casio).
My £35 GBP Casio WV-58U-1AVES watch will beat this Rolex and this Casio F91W..... Because my Casio WV-58U-1AVES is radio-controlled using Multi band 5 and is ALWAYS 100% Accurate. It loses and gains NOTHING.
In mission critical jobs and jobs that involve so much strategy nothing is more important than accuracy. And nothing can beat g shocks that are multi band radio connected. Luxury watches simply don't stand a chance when pure functionality is needed.
It makes no sense to buy a Rolex or other expensive mechanical watch unless you are buying it to impress others. As a timepiece, it is no better than a phone or a dimestore digital watch.
