Grand Seiko Spring Drive, should Rolex follow?

[No SUBctitute]

The great difficulty in creating a mechanical watch is making it extremely accurate. Its a difficult thing. (That's why watches that tick within a second or two a day consistently over years cost thousands of dollars.) Seiko replaced a very important part of a mechanical watch--the escapement--with a circuit. Interesting. But the accuracy no longer impresses me, at least no more than an accurate quartz watch would impress me--which is not much.

[Dsmith1974]

If you read around it the Seiko story is every bit the equal of the Rolex story IMHO.

The SD is definitely a fully automatic watch.

I’m not sure it uses a ‘computer’ as some have stated, it just uses an electric force generated from a magnetic/mechanical movement in a negative feedback loop to deliver a breaking effect via a magnetic brake. The low levels of power used to attain this simplicity and accuracy as such that if every person in the World were to wear a GS SD the combined force would not power a single light bulb! The number of winds on the magneto and efficiency required a new hexagonaly shaped copper wire thinner than a human hair which is where a lot of the 20 years of R&D went. It’s not a quartz watch, it just uses an incredible quartz crystal as one third of the tri-mech regulator.

The planets do not judder and tick as they make their way through the heavens and neither does a Spring Drive.

No one knows what Rolex will do (except Rolex), but my guess is that the would only do something similar if it was better. For example ditching the quartz crystal for a miniaturised atomic oscillator (something they already have a patent on). If the Atom Master came out in my life time I would sell my whole collection, house and wife to buy one.

[RRGHOST1]

I would wear a Spring Drive type Rolex.

[toxicavenger]

I hope Rolex does not. It would be out their wheelhouse and they have stuck with some of the same designs for so long that I think it would be a qc nightmare for them.

[TheVTCGuy]

Originally Posted by Dsmith1974

If you read around it the Seiko story is every bit the equal of the Rolex story IMHO.

The SD is definitely a fully automatic watch.

I’m not sure it uses a ‘computer’ as some have stated, it just uses an electric force generated from a magnetic/mechanical movement in a negative feedback loop to deliver a breaking effect via a magnetic brake. The low levels of power used to attain this simplicity and accuracy as such that if every person in the World were to wear a GS SD the combined force would not power a single light bulb! The number of winds on the magneto and efficiency required a new hexagonaly shaped copper wire thinner than a human hair which is where a lot of the 20 years of R&D went. It’s not a quartz watch, it just uses an incredible quartz crystal as one third of the tri-mech regulator.

The planets do not judder and tick as they make their way through the heavens and neither does a Spring Drive.

No one knows what Rolex will do (except Rolex), but my guess is that the would only do something similar if it was better. For example ditching the quartz crystal for a miniaturised atomic oscillator (something they already have a patent on). If the Atom Master came out in my life time I would sell my whole collection, house and wife to buy one.

How much for the wife?

[Dsmith1974]

Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy

How much for the wife?

5 digit Pepsi and she’s all yours. No returns.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Fredrik]

Originally Posted by Dsmith1974

...
I’m not sure it uses a ‘computer’ as some have stated, ...

In the top here you see the circuit board used in the spring drive with the custom IC in the middle that calculates the breaking force needed processing the current speed and quartz oscillator as reference. Seiko actually has a great explanation somewhere on their site, the picture is from it.

[mailman]

No.

[joli160]

They should not and I doubt if they are capable of inventing something as ground breaking as Seiko has done many times.

Seiko is light years ahead in this field and is probably the most innovative brand with the Kinetic, Astron and Spring drive movements.
These are truly marvels of micro engineering.

Rolex is old school and a very good one in that, love the way they are able to upgrade their line up with tiny alterations and respect to the past. No Rolex looks ever outdated, major allure for me.
Hope they stick to that philosophy.

[Art 1]

No.

[rolexpatek363]

Originally Posted by PJ S

You’re free to ask me how mine is after 12 years since first being assembled.
It’ll be purely anecdotal, but at least it’ll be a starting point.

Hi PJ, which model do you have?

I owned a Spring Drive for a couple of years, but reluctantly sold it because it was a bit too big/thick on the wrist for my taste.

Watching the second hand glide around is very therapeutic.

[PJ S]

^
I have the SNR001

[rolexpatek363]

A bit of googling reveals mine was the SNR 017 w/ moon phase. It was nice, but like a hockey puck on the wrist!

[singkwokhk]

I have many Grand Seikos and Rolexes. I also have German watches. What I am trying to say is that "A true watch collector loves all types of all from all over the world."

[|404|]

To you guys saying its a quartsz... or like a quartz...

It isn't at all...

It's a mechanical watch and it is a revolution. It's 20 years in the making. It's an entirely mechanical and automatic based system...

The only thing that is different is that there is a quartz crystal that is used to regulate the speed of the movement. That does not make the watch quartz or anything like it... there is no battery.

It is a mechanical watch and it is revolutionary. I don't see Rolex doing it, not because it is not good but because it isn't Rolex's style...

Rolex are not a movement focused brand, they are not heavy innovators. They are pushing and selling a brand of luxury goods. That's the only thing the GS has going against it.

Watchmaking and technology wise... it is far surpasses anything the swiss have ever made.

I will buy a GS Snowflake very soon, I'm currently looking to find an AD.

[cda555]

Originally Posted by lenfried29

If it has electronics in the watch I'm not consider it. IMO, it defeat a whole purpose of mechanical watch.

I could be wrong, but spring Drive is battery free, right? Isn’t that the whole purpose of a mechanical watch? I think GS makes awesome stuff, and I can’t wait to own one some day.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[rolexpatek363]

Originally Posted by |404|

I'm currently looking to find an AD.

Jura watches, London.

[|404|]

Originally Posted by cda555

I could be wrong, but spring Drive is battery free, right? Isn’t that the whole purpose of a mechanical watch? I think GS makes awesome stuff, and I can’t wait to own one some day.

There is no battery, it is fully mechanical just a quartz crystal to regulate the mechanical speed to make it perfectly accurate.

It is also automatic - meaning self winding, you don't have to wind it. It has a rotor that spins with movement and winds the mainspring.

Originally Posted by rolexpatek363

Jura Watches, London

Thank you, I will check them out, as I want to go see one in real life! But expect an incoming post here soon!

[daveathall]

Originally Posted by rolexpatek363

Jura watches, London.

Yes, I got my two from their off shoot shop in Leeds.

[Dsmith1974]

Originally Posted by rolexpatek363

Jura watches, London.

There’s a SEIKO boutique in Knightsbridge. 58 Brompton Road IIRC.

[|404|]

Originally Posted by Dsmith1974

There’s a SEIKO boutique in Knightsbridge. 58 Brompton Road IIRC.

Ooo well I will check them out next weekend when I should have some free time!

[MILGAUSS88]

Originally Posted by Wools

I’m sure there’s an R&D team who’ve tried a similar technology at Rolex and favoured against it. As someone else said, do we know how reliable these Spring Drive movements are, over 5-10 years?

I really doubt Rolex has tried anything similar.

And the spring dive has been in use since 1999 in various Seikos and 2004 in the Grand Seiko. So, I would say Yes, to your second question.

[Fredrik]

Originally Posted by cda555

I could be wrong, but spring Drive is battery free, right?

There are plenty of electronic watches that are battery free too, that is not the point. Electronics can be powered by batteries, capacitors, solar panels and a main spring for instance.

The integrated circuits in the spring drive is powered by the main spring and probably also helped by the large capacitor on the circuit board. See the picture above.

It is basically a mechanical watch with electronic regulation.

[imperio]

Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy

A. Do you consider it a TRUE automatic, since the wound spring does produce an electical charge, even if it is not used to power the hands?

B. Should Rolex strive for something similar? The accuracy is better and again, watching that smooth movement of the second hand was impresseive IMHO.

A: don't know about this one, still figuring it out in my head. I guess it depends on how you classify what an automatic is. No battery? Hand powered? No electronics within the movement?

B: no, Rolex would do better being seen as trend setters, not followers. They've missed the boat on this one... By almost 20 years

[dubins930]

Originally Posted by Peter99

Unfortunately it’s still a ‘Seiko’! You know what I mean?

At least these types of people do a nice job at separating themselves from the rest of us. Classic Rolex sub owner

[Rolexavidfan]

Originally Posted by |404|

There is no battery, it is fully mechanical just a quartz crystal to regulate the mechanical speed to make it perfectly accurate.



It is also automatic - meaning self winding, you don't have to wind it. It has a rotor that spins with movement and winds the mainspring.







Thank you, I will check them out, as I want to go see one in real life! But expect an incoming post here soon!

Are you sure if there is no need to wind it? In my other automatic, I can merely shake the watch and it will start ticking. But for an SD, you need to wind it first before it will starting functioning. No ticking sound for an AD.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[subtona]

Many years ago I owned a seiko kinetic quartz.
Not sure where /if or how significantly the springdrive deviates from that technology?

[gaeleus]

I don't think so just as I don't think Rolex needs to use the Co-axial gimmickry used by Omega. Rolex is Rolex because it is solid, proven, reliable

[PJ S]

Originally Posted by subtona

Many years ago I owned a seiko kinetic quartz.
Not sure where /if or how significantly the springdrive deviates from that technology?

Night and day difference, Gus.
Kinetic uses a rotor to charge a rechargeable battery, but the rest of the movement is a basic quartz one.
SD is a comparator circuit providing output to a brake, which acts as and replaces the (conventional) escapement. The rest of the movement is completely mechanical like any automatic.

[ashbaug2]

Originally Posted by tmo8320

Nah,

Rolex does Rolex.
In the same way they don’t do exhibition backs (save for that one Celini) because their movements are unadorned work horses, I don’t think Rolex should pursue such a complication because it would mess with Rolex’s legendary service intervals.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

To be fair, Rolex service intervals are nothing compared to Seiko's... The Seiko 6105 divers of the late 60's-to-mid 70s are notorious for having water damage because their crown was designed so that the gasket was internal to it, thus requiring it to be replaced at service; unfortunately, they ran so well, that hardly anyone serviced them, thus far too many have been water-logged. That is only one example, of which I'm very familiar, as my dad's daily driver was a 6105-8119 that he wore every day for over 35 years without a service. He only stopped wearing it because the crystal was too scratched to legibly read the time.

I don't think Rolex should do anything with quartz or SD technology, simply because that sort of innovation is what defines Seiko for so many people. Spring Drive is part of what makes them special. And in my opinion, I think it's amazing that you can buy a $200 SKX007, a $2,000 SBDX017 MarineMaster 300, a $10,000 Grand Seiko SBGH255 Hi-Beat diver, and anything in between, all from the same manufacturer. Finishing may be different throughout, but quality is high no matter which piece you get.

My 2 cents...