WCU #50: Watch Second Tracks: The Good, The Bad & The Ugly

[@roygardiner2229]

That was very interesting and thought provoking. It made me take a close look at my Omega Speeedmaster Professional. Two things struck me: First, that I needed a magnifier to clearly see the second track markings. Second, there is considerable physical separation, and therefore potential visual parallax, between the tip of the chronograph second hand and the second track markings. Meaning, in effect, that reading fractions of a second would be very difficult, even if the second track markings were in step with the beat rate (6 ticks per second).

[@jimbegin6554]

I’ve never given it a second thought, but an interesting topic. Thanks Armand.

[@garyboyle695]

Very clever, nice one

[@ghostxfairy]

You'd think that something simple like having subdivisions to match the beat rate of the watch would be something everyone gets right.

[@jameshoward9700]

Fantastic! Yes, we're into the details here - love it! That Longines is brilliant, but then they really are THE historical chronograph maker. Well done to Omega for finally putting an accurate track on the Speedy. It does seem odd just how little thought has gone in to the accuracy of tracks, especially on chronos.

[@davidc5191]

Here's another example of a subdial blocking out the seconds/minutes track: the Tudor Advisor, which I recently acquired and love since it has an alarm function. But in setting the time, I noticed there's a date subdial at the 6 o'clock area of the dial that blocks out the seconds/minutes track from about 4:30 to 7:30. Now in this region, there is another track that's used to set the alarm, but it's graduated in increments of 25%, 50%, 75% and 100% of the distance between hour markers (4 increments), rather than the traditional 20%, 40%, 60%, 80% and 100% (5 increments). For those who are sticklers about setting their watches to precise computer time, you can only approximate it in the area covered by the subdial.

[@markpercival2619]

I found this podcast/video to be one of the best by anyone that I’ve heard in a long time. I’m in the obsessed with accuracy camp and therefore on a watch when the seconds count/matter the markings should accord with the beat rate of the watch. So, despite owning many watches no Daytona and up until Omega’s latest release, no SpeedMaster either for me.

[@cj1000]

My biggest pet peeve: when the “made in_” words are superimposed on the seconds track at 6:00 and knock out several minute/sec intervals.

[@johnseeger9083]

Another excellent piece. It reiterates the eccentric aspects of our hobby which start as common sense solutions to real world problems and end as vestigial adornment that we enjoy.

[@davidjb3671]

I like the clever Longines scale - just like how you read a classic Vernier caliper scale - something which a lot of people are probably not aware of. But personally I've always felt that if you want accurate timing you just get a G-Shock or a dedicated quartz digital stopwatch. For ordinary use my Moser Venturer Concept is quite sufficient - devoid as it is of any markings on the dial. Probably the most elegant though is the Patek 5196 sub-seconds, and I guess that's why the design is essentially unchanged after 89 years.

[@mckernovic]

I've always seen the 104 second track more as part of its artistic, 'Art Deco' style design, rather than it trying to be a 'micro-precise' measuring function. As you move the watch further away from your eye (and when other people look at the watch) you only notice the larger markings. The smaller markings 'fade' into the background. The black-dialled 104 is a beautiful watch.

[@paulbennett6729]

You've wrecked my head. You've given me nightmares just when I have only 1 more week of homeschooling. Could you not have waited 1 more week.😁😁

[@leyay7540]

Interesting topic 👍 As an owner of the Credor Eichi II for 1+ year, I have no problem to read the time precisely to second. Actually five-minute indices only is definitely sufficient fro me.

[@donrogan2812]

Interesting as always. Thanks again Armand for all your efforts.

[@andrew8992]

Great video, it’s all about the little details . . . .

[@ianmarshall3633]

Very interesting and informative video. Enjoyed it very much.

[@davidjb3671]

Very interesting. Another example of incorrect usage is the Bulgari Octo Finissimo Chronograph which runs at 4 Hz but has one fifth gradations between the seconds. But I guess they figure that if the Daytona can get it wrong and still prosper, why bother... 😏

[@Saints-Forever]

Interesting indeed how you pick such minute seconds hand and markers to provoke us watch nuts even more.

[@BWo-bb1yw]

I look to the second hand in everything but a dress watch, the daytona's beat rate has always bugged me.

[@mohammedines6182]

Combien coûte toutes ces belles montres ?

[@paul--b]

Wow a much bigger deal than where a dot is in relation to the 90!

[@BobbyDazzler888]

singer track 1, Launch edition

[@henrywest7217]

I feel as though the age of innocence is now over.

[@styx4947]

Don't beat yourself up, lol. A lot of people,(watch nerd or not) are interested in things like this. I appreciate it certainly.

[@A.T.148-Scot-HK]

A fascinating topic. One other thing that bothers me immensely about the new IWC Tribute to 3705 is that the running seconds subdial is at 6 o'clock now - meaning the white bordered subdials do not correspond with the Chronograph function anymore. Just a lot of sloppy designing from IWC.

[@billoconnor1601]

By all means, please nit-pick! Seems the conclusion is fairly clear...the consumers don't care if the watch makes sense.