Shouldn't 9SA5 be more accurate than +5/-3?
The new black birch with titanium case is amazing. My only problem is that, shouldn't I get a bit more from the more expensive 9sa5 than same spec as 9s85?
The new movement models are all in Rolex entering price, shouldn't it be as accurate as rolex's +2/-2 standard?
My theory is that GS watchmakers are still taking time to understand manufacturing this new movement. They might be working on some adjustment in the watchmaking process. Then they should be ready for a better standard of percision.
btw I think 9sa5 will be better with a gmt module to utilize its thinness.
7 comments
Sort by
I suspect this is more about Seiko and Grand Seiko having a policy of under-promising and over-delivering. Rolex have a justified reputation for excellent accuracy (and I think no other manufacturer claims better than +/- 2spd) but anecdotally GS have superb long-term accuracy comparable to Rolex level, they just don't guarantee it. Any GS owners want to chime in with long-term mechanical accuracy stats??
The 9SA5 was introduced on 2020. I’m not sure when development started, but don’t believe GS has a history of rushing new movements to market before they are confident in them.
I can’t speak to the 9SA5 or other GS mechanical movement accuracy first hand (Someday…hopefully I’ll be able too!). However, I will note the spec accuracy on my Snowflake Springdive 9R65 is listed at +/-1spd (+/-15 seconds per month), but my example averages +0.1spd. And when I have worn it for a month or more it gains ~ +1.6 seconds per month. The 9F86 GMT quartz in my SBGN003 listed accuracy is +/-10 seconds per year. In 11 months of ownership it has gained 0.3 seconds.
GS definitely underpromises and overdelivers on accuracy. And I expect the 9SA5 will perform better than the advertised accuracy as well.
I've only owned Spring Drive GS models that are crazy accurate. I wouldn't keep a GS piece that doesn't hit it's specs. The GS value prop is accurate movements and next level fit and finish. With pricing moving into Rolex levels the product has to perform. GS only makes watches. If this was another manufacturer (let's call out Cartier here) that makes jewelry, belts & handbags, I guess I could live with overpaying for a name. I say this but I don't have any Cartier pieces in my collection. A watch company that pitches accurate movements as justification for pricing needs to deliver. I'd take it back
I suspect this is more about Seiko and Grand Seiko having a policy of under-promising and over-delivering. Rolex have a justified reputation for excellent accuracy (and I think no other manufacturer claims better than +/- 2spd) but anecdotally GS have superb long-term accuracy comparable to Rolex level, they just don't guarantee it. Any GS owners want to chime in with long-term mechanical accuracy stats??
💯💯💯
No long-term stats from me. I'm not an accuracy or spec person - my life is such that if I'm +/- 5 minutes off, it doesn't really matter, 'cause YouTube videos and Netflix don't really care when you watch 'em.
But, with that said...
I do think you're right in that GS may still be taking time to get everything dialed in. The dual-impulse escapement is only the 2nd mass manufactured escapement innovation in 250 years, so it's probably gonna take a bit of time to work out all the gremlins.
Regardless, even if everything is dialed in, I doubt that GS will revise their stated accuracy. After all, given tort law, there's no upside. Many moons ago, I was one of those white shoe strategy and operations consulting types, and our study team was tasked with helping a sausage manufacturing operation find tens of millions of dollars in operating efficiencies. One bright idea I came up with had to do the fill amounts for the sausage chubs...
My brilliant idea was that the packages all said 16oz, but in reality the company would fill each chub with ~16.1oz. The company could save millions of dollars a year if they could bring the fill closer to 16.0oz. I was immediately laughed out of the room when I brought this up. Turns out that if you promise 16oz, and somehow the tolerances of your machinery are off even by a smidge, and you end up putting chubs into the hands of consumers with only 15.99oz, that opens you up to a class-action lawsuit that might bankrupt the company.
No upside to promising more. So, always promise less!
Also, totally random aside... I am personally responsible for this, which was a HUGE Internet sensation back in the day!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f4RNb3tt0LM
💯💯💯
No long-term stats from me. I'm not an accuracy or spec person - my life is such that if I'm +/- 5 minutes off, it doesn't really matter, 'cause YouTube videos and Netflix don't really care when you watch 'em.
But, with that said...
I do think you're right in that GS may still be taking time to get everything dialed in. The dual-impulse escapement is only the 2nd mass manufactured escapement innovation in 250 years, so it's probably gonna take a bit of time to work out all the gremlins.
Regardless, even if everything is dialed in, I doubt that GS will revise their stated accuracy. After all, given tort law, there's no upside. Many moons ago, I was one of those white shoe strategy and operations consulting types, and our study team was tasked with helping a sausage manufacturing operation find tens of millions of dollars in operating efficiencies. One bright idea I came up with had to do the fill amounts for the sausage chubs...
My brilliant idea was that the packages all said 16oz, but in reality the company would fill each chub with ~16.1oz. The company could save millions of dollars a year if they could bring the fill closer to 16.0oz. I was immediately laughed out of the room when I brought this up. Turns out that if you promise 16oz, and somehow the tolerances of your machinery are off even by a smidge, and you end up putting chubs into the hands of consumers with only 15.99oz, that opens you up to a class-action lawsuit that might bankrupt the company.
No upside to promising more. So, always promise less!
Also, totally random aside... I am personally responsible for this, which was a HUGE Internet sensation back in the day!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f4RNb3tt0LM
If we ever get you out of @Hotwatchchic69 purgatory we should rename you Sausage King or Spirit of Jimmy Dean
The "superlative" chronometer +-2/sec/day claim stands only when you are wearing your watch (check the Rolex spec. if you do not beleve me). And when you are wearing your mechanical watch, not a big deal achieve a 4 sec range - even with a cheaper movement, or a "simpler" chronometer.
Accuracy is one thing, but precision is other. I personally prefer when my watch is precise and consistent even if it runs a bit fast, but I will never be in a situation when the watch loose or gain too much - it is very convenient to me. I have a high beat GS with the 9S85 movement. It is basically the simplest movement with the highest quality in the World, if you take into account everything. Incredible stable and precise, the average daily deviation is between 0 to +2sec, but if it is fully wound it gains around 5sec. Basically it does not matter how high/low the temperature or in which position the watch rests overnight, it will be the almost the same, flat and horizontal position difference overnight is less than 1 sec. I think the torque of the mainspring has more impact on the "gain" than the static position.
The 9SA5 has heavier balance wheel, which gives better static position rates, maybe it is due to the increased weight ot the balance wheel which has been less affected by gravity and the balance spring also tested 80k times to get them the best parameters for this escapement construction.
I was fortunate to test a 9SA5 with a timegrapher for a few days, and it is more precise than the 9S85 but not that much, you will hardly tell it when you wear them. Common mistake is when people are winding their GS's on a daily basis, but they should not do that, or I would say it is not necessary - if it is an automatic. I am a software engineer, and I never wind my watch and it has been working - never stopped yet. I think when Grand Seiko are testing their watches they try to achieve an average torque in the mainspring - because an average person won't wind it each day just wears it - and they try to regulate with this torque in several positions.
I you are fortunate you will get the best regulation for you lifestyle but you probably won't, it is rare. But if your watch super-consistently keep +2 sec / day you will be satisfied :)
What I like about the 9S85 is that it is basically a very simple movement, no fancy escapement or even silicon balance spring, no microstella screws etc. It has "only" these simple features:
The main spring is made from an alloy (SPRON 510) of chromium, cobalt and nickel which is probably the hardest metal on earth (https://www.newscientist.com/article/2350789-toughest-material-ever-is-an-alloy-of-chromium-cobalt-and-nickel/)
The balance spring is made from a modified/stronger version of it (SPRON 610)
Exceptional metal quality
Cutting edge technology and precision with semiconductor technology (MEMS)
Every surface has been polished which are contact with each other
There are not screws on the balance wheel but it's weight is adjusted to tolerances of one ten thousandth of a gram - so it is basically perfectly balanced
The pallet fork 25%, the escape wheel 5% lighter - it does not seem significant but it is!
They added an additional wheel for stability
... and you get this movement.
I think this construction is could not be simpler - and at higher level - especially in this price range. As an engineer, I think there is beauty in an elegantly simple work. No fancy stuff, just a simple result at the highest level.
Yes, it is oscillating at a higher rate with more torque but all the elements are more lighter and harder so I think it is durable enough. Since GS has no time limits on full servicing even with parts replacements I am assured (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8JSfcccbCIo&t=11s&ab_channel=GrandSeiko)
And a quick fun fact: Rolex chronergy escapement introduced in 2015. The Grand Seiko 9S85 in 2009. So basically the 9S85 is older than the chronergy 🙂
... and Rolex used a Seiko patent when they were developing the chronergy escapement: https://watchesbysjx.com/2021/05/rolex-chronergy-analysis.html
They are history.
9S just went 25 years old. They not just celebrated it (GS) with special editions but they are still keep selling it without any significant modifications - after 25 years! I think the 9S85 is well tested and it really should be durable :)
... and go back to the 9Sa5: yes, it is a young movement, but I think they have the expertise and the dual impulse escapement reduces wear radically, so it should be more durable over a longer period of time. Buy it and use it until you can...
The "superlative" chronometer +-2/sec/day claim stands only when you are wearing your watch (check the Rolex spec. if you do not beleve me). And when you are wearing your mechanical watch, not a big deal achieve a 4 sec range - even with a cheaper movement, or a "simpler" chronometer.
Accuracy is one thing, but precision is other. I personally prefer when my watch is precise and consistent even if it runs a bit fast, but I will never be in a situation when the watch loose or gain too much - it is very convenient to me. I have a high beat GS with the 9S85 movement. It is basically the simplest movement with the highest quality in the World, if you take into account everything. Incredible stable and precise, the average daily deviation is between 0 to +2sec, but if it is fully wound it gains around 5sec. Basically it does not matter how high/low the temperature or in which position the watch rests overnight, it will be the almost the same, flat and horizontal position difference overnight is less than 1 sec. I think the torque of the mainspring has more impact on the "gain" than the static position.
The 9SA5 has heavier balance wheel, which gives better static position rates, maybe it is due to the increased weight ot the balance wheel which has been less affected by gravity and the balance spring also tested 80k times to get them the best parameters for this escapement construction.
I was fortunate to test a 9SA5 with a timegrapher for a few days, and it is more precise than the 9S85 but not that much, you will hardly tell it when you wear them. Common mistake is when people are winding their GS's on a daily basis, but they should not do that, or I would say it is not necessary - if it is an automatic. I am a software engineer, and I never wind my watch and it has been working - never stopped yet. I think when Grand Seiko are testing their watches they try to achieve an average torque in the mainspring - because an average person won't wind it each day just wears it - and they try to regulate with this torque in several positions.
I you are fortunate you will get the best regulation for you lifestyle but you probably won't, it is rare. But if your watch super-consistently keep +2 sec / day you will be satisfied :)
What I like about the 9S85 is that it is basically a very simple movement, no fancy escapement or even silicon balance spring, no microstella screws etc. It has "only" these simple features:
The main spring is made from an alloy (SPRON 510) of chromium, cobalt and nickel which is probably the hardest metal on earth (https://www.newscientist.com/article/2350789-toughest-material-ever-is-an-alloy-of-chromium-cobalt-and-nickel/)
The balance spring is made from a modified/stronger version of it (SPRON 610)
Exceptional metal quality
Cutting edge technology and precision with semiconductor technology (MEMS)
Every surface has been polished which are contact with each other
There are not screws on the balance wheel but it's weight is adjusted to tolerances of one ten thousandth of a gram - so it is basically perfectly balanced
The pallet fork 25%, the escape wheel 5% lighter - it does not seem significant but it is!
They added an additional wheel for stability
... and you get this movement.
I think this construction is could not be simpler - and at higher level - especially in this price range. As an engineer, I think there is beauty in an elegantly simple work. No fancy stuff, just a simple result at the highest level.
Yes, it is oscillating at a higher rate with more torque but all the elements are more lighter and harder so I think it is durable enough. Since GS has no time limits on full servicing even with parts replacements I am assured (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8JSfcccbCIo&t=11s&ab_channel=GrandSeiko)
And a quick fun fact: Rolex chronergy escapement introduced in 2015. The Grand Seiko 9S85 in 2009. So basically the 9S85 is older than the chronergy 🙂
... and Rolex used a Seiko patent when they were developing the chronergy escapement: https://watchesbysjx.com/2021/05/rolex-chronergy-analysis.html
They are history.
9S just went 25 years old. They not just celebrated it (GS) with special editions but they are still keep selling it without any significant modifications - after 25 years! I think the 9S85 is well tested and it really should be durable :)
... and go back to the 9Sa5: yes, it is a young movement, but I think they have the expertise and the dual impulse escapement reduces wear radically, so it should be more durable over a longer period of time. Buy it and use it until you can...
I purchased the white birch hi bear yesterday and just stumbled across this comment. Amazing write up and back story on each brand’s respective movements. The Rolex vs GS debate will continue for many moons, but I vertically fall on one side of it. Excited to see what watches the 9sA5 makes its way into this year!