Beat Rate. Do you care?

[Easy E]

21,600 v 28,800 v 36,000 Potential increase accuracy, potential increase in power reserve, potential increase in friction (wear). Does that matter to you in anyway? What about in a chrono? I see occasional nods to Zenith for such, maybe from time to time a GS gets brought up for high beat rates. Largely a topic never covered here. What's your take, does this have any impact on your watch selection in the slightest?

[mongrelnomoad]

I have a lot of vintage 36k Seiko watches from the original Lord Marvel to some very rare GSs. I think the increased accuracy is mostly theoretical, but the gattling-gun sound and the smooth sweep of the second hand are intoxicating.

[BraveBold]

Doesn’t play a major role for me. Center seconds hand will sweep more fluidly. Maintenance is impacted (all other things equal). You covered the tradeoffs already, though in practice not sure how much impact it has in modern movements (eg correlation to greater accuracy, other than immaterial / impractical considerations with chronographs)?

Enjoy my vintage hi-beat GS.

[AEC]

Overall performance matters way more to me. It can have any beat rate necessary as long as it performs consistently well across positions, temperatures, etc.

As a chronograph enthusiast, though, I'm gonna need me an El Primero before too long

[dmb359]

doesnt even matter a little bit to me

[Easy E]

Originally Posted by AEC

Overall performance matters way more to me. It can have any beat rate necessary as long as it performs consistently well across positions, temperatures, etc.

As a chronograph enthusiast, though, I'm gonna need me an El Primero before too long

The El Primero is pretty slick. Get one

I think a great number of watch owners don’t even really care about performance

[Easy E]

Originally Posted by dmb359

doesnt even matter a little bit to me

Based on the relatively low response to this question, I think you probably represent the vast majority here. Not saying that’s good or bad, just is what it is.

[77T]

For the sake of discussion, 28,000 vph is good enough for me. But there are advantages and trade offs to all 3 you asked about.

28,800 vph (8 beats per second)
Advantages:
- Provides a good balance between accuracy and power reserve.
- Reduces wear on the movement compared to higher frequencies, potentially leading to greater longevity.
- Offers smoother second-hand motion than lower frequencies.

Trade-offs:
- Slightly less accurate than higher frequency movements in extreme conditions.
- May not have the same level of prestige as high-frequency movements in luxury watches.

21,600 vph (6 beats per second)
Advantages:
- Generally has a longer power reserve due to less energy consumption.
- More durable and less prone to wear, making it ideal for everyday watches.
- Often found in more affordable or practical timepieces.

Trade-offs:
- Provides less smoothness in second-hand movement compared to higher frequencies.
- May be perceived as less sophisticated in high-end watch markets.

36,000 vph (10 beats per second)
Advantages:
- Offers superior accuracy, making it ideal for precision timekeeping.
- The high frequency allows for extremely smooth second-hand motion, enhancing aesthetic appeal.

Trade-offs:
- Higher energy consumption can lead to shorter power reserves.
- Increased wear and tear on components can lead to more frequent servicing.
- Typically found in higher-end, luxury watches, which may limit accessibility.


But I'm sure there are different opinions...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Easy E]

Perfect summary. I may be wrong about this point, but I have it in my head that there are some relatively well finished, therefore relatively pricey pieces that have a 21,6 BR movement. Which indicates at least some portions of watch owners value finish and presentation over some feature as improved accuracy. Yet then an informed Grand Seiko owner will tell you they have both, well finished and high accuracy, generally for less money. Interesting micro-confliction

[Golden Palomino]

Re: accuracy, I’d argue that beat frequency doesn’t affect accuracy at all, assuming the balance wheel / hairspring resonance has an equal tolerance at all frequencies. ie 21.6k +/- x% will yield the same error as 36k +/- x%. The real frequency will never be the nominal, and it will also drift. But not clear why a resonant system like this would suffer more at one frequency vs another.

Precision will be affected, particularly for chronographs capable of sub 1 second timing. However I would think in this case that timing error of nerds like us activating pushers drowns out the potential gains in precision.

FWIW I personally think an additional advantage of a slow beat rate is the way you can really see the pulsing of the hairspring and balance mechanism. I just think it looks cool.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[77T]

Originally Posted by Golden Palomino

Re: accuracy, I’d argue that beat frequency doesn’t affect accuracy at all, assuming the balance wheel / hairspring resonance has an equal tolerance at all frequencies. ie 21.6k +/- x% will yield the same error as 36k +/- x%. The real frequency will never be the nominal, and it will also drift. But not clear why a resonant system like this would suffer more at one frequency vs another.

Precision will be affected, particularly for chronographs capable of sub 1 second timing. However I would think in this case that timing error of nerds like us activating pushers drowns out the potential gains in precision.

FWIW I personally think an additional advantage of a slow beat rate is the way you can really see the pulsing of the hairspring and balance mechanism. I just think it looks cool.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

You're correct to point out that my statement about 36,000 vph providing greater precision under certain conditions could be misleading without context. But to claim it doesn't affect it at all is also misleading.

While high-frequency movements like those operating at 36,000 vph can offer improved accuracy under normal conditions, their performance in extreme conditions is influenced by several factors, not solely the frequency itself.

High-frequency movements can be more resilient to changes in temperature and magnetic fields, which can maintain better accuracy in such scenarios.

But it comes at the cost of more frequent service because they may experience greater wear over time due to the increased speed of the escapement. So if poorly maintained, the wear/tear causes less reliability compared to lower-frequency movements that might have greater durability.

In summary, while higher frequency can contribute to better accuracy, it doesn't automatically guarantee superior performance under all conditions as you point out.

Chrono use was never in my scope since a Daytona is worthless in sprint racing due to the hand/eye pusher dilemma. But a Daytona is designed for endurance racing where one fifth of a single pusher error over 12 or 24 hours is negligible.

The overall design, materials, and protective features of a watch play greater roles than beat rate in its reliability and accuracy in extreme situations. We agree there.

Thank you for highlighting your important distinctions.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Golden Palomino]

Originally Posted by 77T

You're correct to point out that my statement about 36,000 vph providing greater precision under certain conditions could be misleading without context. But to claim it doesn't affect it at all is also misleading.

While high-frequency movements like those operating at 36,000 vph can offer improved accuracy under normal conditions, their performance in extreme conditions is influenced by several factors, not solely the frequency itself.

High-frequency movements can be more resilient to changes in temperature and magnetic fields, which can maintain better accuracy in such scenarios.

But it comes at the cost of more frequent service because they may experience greater wear over time due to the increased speed of the escapement. So if poorly maintained, the wear/tear causes less reliability compared to lower-frequency movements that might have greater durability.

In summary, while higher frequency can contribute to better accuracy, it doesn't automatically guarantee superior performance under all conditions as you point out.

Chrono use was never in my scope since a Daytona is worthless in sprint racing due to the hand/eye pusher dilemma. But a Daytona is designed for endurance racing where one fifth of a single pusher error over 12 or 24 hours is negligible.

The overall design, materials, and protective features of a watch play greater roles than beat rate in its reliability and accuracy in extreme situations. We agree there.

Thank you for highlighting your important distinctions.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yeah, my argument is only valid in the context of invariance in error vs frequency. It probably has some effects as you point out. It would satisfy the engineer in me to make a set of curves across the band for common movements. But it would be a shitton of work lol

[Andad]

Originally Posted by 77T

You're correct to point out that my statement about 36,000 vph providing greater precision under certain conditions could be misleading without context. But to claim it doesn't affect it at all is also misleading.

While high-frequency movements like those operating at 36,000 vph can offer improved accuracy under normal conditions, their performance in extreme conditions is influenced by several factors, not solely the frequency itself.

High-frequency movements can be more resilient to changes in temperature and magnetic fields, which can maintain better accuracy in such scenarios.

But it comes at the cost of more frequent service because they may experience greater wear over time due to the increased speed of the escapement. So if poorly maintained, the wear/tear causes less reliability compared to lower-frequency movements that might have greater durability.

In summary, while higher frequency can contribute to better accuracy, it doesn't automatically guarantee superior performance under all conditions as you point out.

Chrono use was never in my scope since a Daytona is worthless in sprint racing due to the hand/eye pusher dilemma. But a Daytona is designed for endurance racing where one fifth of a single pusher error over 12 or 24 hours is negligible.

The overall design, materials, and protective features of a watch play greater roles than beat rate in its reliability and accuracy in extreme situations. We agree there.

Thank you for highlighting your important distinctions.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The Daytona error can’t be in 1/5ths Paul only in 1/8ths.

[Moondoggy]

Originally Posted by 77T

For the sake of discussion, 28,000 vph is good enough for me. But there are advantages and trade offs to all 3 you asked about.

28,800 vph (8 beats per second)
Advantages:
- Provides a good balance between accuracy and power reserve.
- Reduces wear on the movement compared to higher frequencies, potentially leading to greater longevity.
- Offers smoother second-hand motion than lower frequencies.

Trade-offs:
- Slightly less accurate than higher frequency movements in extreme conditions.
- May not have the same level of prestige as high-frequency movements in luxury watches.

21,600 vph (6 beats per second)
Advantages:
- Generally has a longer power reserve due to less energy consumption.
- More durable and less prone to wear, making it ideal for everyday watches.
- Often found in more affordable or practical timepieces.

Trade-offs:
- Provides less smoothness in second-hand movement compared to higher frequencies.
- May be perceived as less sophisticated in high-end watch markets.

36,000 vph (10 beats per second)
Advantages:
- Offers superior accuracy, making it ideal for precision timekeeping.
- The high frequency allows for extremely smooth second-hand motion, enhancing aesthetic appeal.

Trade-offs:
- Higher energy consumption can lead to shorter power reserves.
- Increased wear and tear on components can lead to more frequent servicing.
- Typically found in higher-end, luxury watches, which may limit accessibility.


But I'm sure there are different opinions...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think that is a pretty good summary.

[WatchEater666]

I like the super smooth sweep

[brandrea]

What about 18000 vph?

Never really gave it a thought to be honest