Parachrom Hairspring and Why it is so Good!

[Thai]

Thanks to another member on the Omega forum, i found this cool little video: http://watchmakingblog.com/2008/10/17/parachrom-video/

This should put to rest some of the arguments regarding PC hairspring vs. Nivarox hairspring. PC is indeed significantly better...and it is not just a marketing ploy by Rolex, as implied by few members with the older movements.

I must say...i now want Si hairspring in my Omega and PC in my Rolex!

[JimC]

I can't speak for much more than my experience, but the movement (including the blue PC spring) is much more accurate than the other three in my stable.

Also, I don't know if it has anything to do with it, but the Deepsea is the only watch that appears to follow the "placement" guidelines. For example, the DS does seem to gain a few on its back, and lose more when on it's side (crown up), and less crown down...

[JJ Irani]

Originally Posted by JimC

......but the movement (including the blue PC spring) is much more accurate than the other three in my stable.

Also, I don't know if it has anything to do with it, but the Deepsea is the only watch that appears to follow the "placement" guidelines. For example, the DS does seem to gain a few on its back, and lose more when on it's side (crown up), and less crown down...

Yes, I can definitely vouch for the superior accuracy, in fact ZERO deviation, on my TT GMT-IIC and V-series Exp-II with the 3186 movement.

Funnily, howver, the two work in opposite ways with placement of the watch.

The GMT-IIC runs slow crown DOWN, while the Exp-II gains when placed crown DOWN. Of course the loss and gain is very insignificant, but it's puzzling how the same movement acts in different ways in 2 different watches.

JJ

[Thai]

Originally Posted by JJ Irani

Yes, I can definitely vouch for the superior accuracy, in fact ZERO deviation, on my TT GMT-IIC and V-series Exp-II with the 3186 movement.

Funnily, howver, the two work in opposite ways with placement of the watch.

The GMT-IIC runs slow crown DOWN, while the Exp-II gains when placed crown DOWN. Of course the loss and gain is very insignificant, but it's puzzling how the same movement acts in different ways in 2 different watches.

JJ

That's great to hear. I have to wonder why Rolex did not go with Si14?? I know that Silicon is hard to produce in large amounts...i wonder if that is why Rolex went with PC because Rolex can make lots of it?? Anyway, with the PC hairspring, i don't see any disadvanage over Si14.

[acce1999]

Originally Posted by JJ Irani

Yes, I can definitely vouch for the superior accuracy, in fact ZERO deviation, on my TT GMT-IIC and V-series Exp-II with the 3186 movement.

Funnily, howver, the two work in opposite ways with placement of the watch.

The GMT-IIC runs slow crown DOWN, while the Exp-II gains when placed crown DOWN. Of course the loss and gain is very insignificant, but it's puzzling how the same movement acts in different ways in 2 different watches.

JJ

Interesting! I have a similar experience from my two 3186. Very consistent, but different behaviour when it comes to position. Haven't figured out why yet.

[padi56]

Originally Posted by JJ Irani

Yes, I can definitely vouch for the superior accuracy, in fact ZERO deviation, on my TT GMT-IIC and V-series Exp-II with the 3186 movement.

Funnily, howver, the two work in opposite ways with placement of the watch.

The GMT-IIC runs slow crown DOWN, while the Exp-II gains when placed crown DOWN. Of course the loss and gain is very insignificant, but it's puzzling how the same movement acts in different ways in 2 different watches.

JJ

So what you are saying JJ your watches self regulate in different positions.So in fact they are not ZERO deviation.If you left them in the same position there would be some gain or loss correct.???

[JJ Irani]

Originally Posted by padi56

So what you are saying JJ your watches self regulate in different positions.So in fact they are not ZERO deviation.If you left them in the same position there would be some gain or loss correct.???

I should have mentioned it, Padi - ZERO Deviation on the wrist whilst wearing at all times.

JJ

[mike]

Originally Posted by JimC

I can't speak for much more than my experience, but the movement (including the blue PC spring) is much more accurate than the other three in my stable.

Also, I don't know if it has anything to do with it, but the Deepsea is the only watch that appears to follow the "placement" guidelines. For example, the DS does seem to gain a few on its back, and lose more when on it's side (crown up), and less crown down...

I've noticed the same thing Jim.

[ParisDakarBmw]

Interesting info!

[DRAWTOOL]

Cool little video, however I am perfectly satisfied with my EXP-IIs performance using the junky old Nivarox spring.

[HL65]

One thing I can tell you: My 3186 movement in GMT ll Pepsi has gained only 3 seconds in 3 weeks--That is far better than most I have owned.

[tkc324]

Interesting video... thanks for sharing~

[sparky_magoo]

Does the PC hairspring make the Milgauss obsolete?

[LouS]

The Milgauss has a parachrom hairspring, does it not?

[JJ Irani]

Originally Posted by LouS

The Milgauss has a parachrom hairspring, does it not?

Definitely does!!

[Thai]

Originally Posted by JJ Irani

Definitely does!!

Is the hairspring the only thing that can get magnetized in a mechanical watch?? I think that other parts (steel) in the watch can get magnetized and affect performance??? I think that the hairspring is a biggie in terms of magnetism, which i think Si4 and PC solved.

[JJ Irani]

Originally Posted by Thai

Is the hairspring the only thing that can get magnetized in a mechanical watch?? I think that other parts (steel) in the watch can get magnetized and affect performance??? I think that the hairspring is a biggie in terms of magnetism, which i think Si4 and PC solved.

You're right, but the Milgauss would also be equipped with a powerful anti-magnetic inner shield covering the movement.

JJ

[padi56]

Originally Posted by Thai

Is the hairspring the only thing that can get magnetized in a mechanical watch?? I think that other parts (steel) in the watch can get magnetized and affect performance??? I think that the hairspring is a biggie in terms of magnetism, which i think Si4 and PC solved.

Well in over 30 years of Rolex wearing and working around strong magnets
capable of picking up 20 plus tons.Myself have never experienced any form of magnetising in any watch I was wearing.And now working in strong magnetic fields with high power radio equipment again no problem with any Rolex modern or vintage.Rolex watches are made mainly from S.steel or precious metals and in conjunction with nickel, brass or beryllium, bronze or Glucydur balance wheels so they were very anti-magnetic to begin.Sure the Nivourax hairsrings were very very very slightly magnetic.But today there must be millions upon millions of them around and without any problems.But as long as you don't wear your watch dial down with the back off with a magnet dangling over movement.Then like a placebo test if you did not know whats inside case I would doubt if you would fine any difference in the every day real world of watch wearing.With quite a few older Rolex running to a couple of seconds a day or less.One Rolex Unicorn 88 years old and still running to just a few seconds a day.

[The GMT Master]

An interesting video, thanks for sharing

[DadsWatch72]

I heard that the material used in the new hairsprings if from alien technology.

[Thai]

Originally Posted by DadsWatch72

I heard that the material used in the new hairsprings if from alien technology.

Mexico? China?

[sparky_magoo]

Originally Posted by DadsWatch72

I heard that the material used in the new hairsprings if from alien technology.

Is this an example of reverse engineering from Area 51?

[DadsWatch72]

Originally Posted by sparky_magoo

Is this an example of reverse engineering from Area 51?

Maybe......who knows????? I want to believe.

[DadsWatch72]

Originally Posted by DadsWatch72

Maybe......who knows????? I want to believe.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7mUwqD1oiYQ

[DadsWatch72]

I didn't really hear that but the subject reminded me of seeing a show on tv about material that was reported to be from a UFO and that it wasn't effected by magnetic fields.

http://alienufoparanormal.aliencaseb...o-hunters.aspx

http://aliencasebook.blogspot.com/20...cs-in-its.html

[Fofo]

Excellent video! Thank you for sharing it, very interesting and educational.

[cody p]

while it may indeed be anti-magnetic, i'm not sure it's inherently more accurate. anecdotal evidence does not make an assertion so. cosc records might shed more light on this subject...

[Thai]

Originally Posted by cody p

while it may indeed be anti-magnetic, i'm not sure it's inherently more accurate. anecdotal evidence does not make an assertion so. cosc records might shed more light on this subject...

Maybe it is more precise over the long haul?? It is totally anti-magnetic AND stronger than the Nivarox hairspring...aka, the benefits of Si14 without the high cost and low production numbers.

[ayres]

i have to agree with padi56 on this one... i'm thinking to myself as i watch the video, 'okay, they're putting a magnetic tip up against the movement... and i'm sure every day, we watch wearers are putting similar stresses on a watch!'

how many would notice a difference if they did not know if the watch were outfitted with the pc hairspring? i'd guess fewer owners. and i would like to shed light on some experimental design...

can you really compare a 3186 with a 3135, and say that the difference in accuracy/consistency is truly due to only the hairspring?... i don't know... i'm asking others to chime in here. but i know enough about stats and science to know that you cannot use just two watches (and different models, at that) to draw any conclusions. your sample size needs to be vastly larger.

the people at cosc would have telling data.

[Thai]

Originally Posted by ayres

i have to agree with padi56 on this one... i'm thinking to myself as i watch the video, 'okay, they're putting a magnetic tip up against the movement... and i'm sure every day, we watch wearers are putting similar stresses on a watch!'

how many would notice a difference if they did not know if the watch were outfitted with the pc hairspring? i'd guess fewer owners. and i would like to shed light on some experimental design...

can you really compare a 3186 with a 3135, and say that the difference in accuracy/consistency is truly due to only the hairspring?... i don't know... i'm asking others to chime in here. but i know enough about stats and science to know that you cannot use just two watches (and different models, at that) to draw any conclusions. your sample size needs to be vastly larger.

the people at cosc would have telling data.

The difference may not be much at all...since COSC does not test for magnetism...nor shock resistance of a watch. The main difference is for someone who exposes his/her Rolex to magnetism frequently or daily...that is when you will see the main difference. Even though you may not pass a magnet over your caseback, it is still nice to know that your hairspring won't change if you leave your watch on your computer or next to your kids toy magnet. It happens.