Movement / Timegraher Question
So I have a question for those out there with more experience than me and maybe a more diverse collection than me. I currently have about 45ish pieces -most- divers and field watches. Of that, the majority, probably 75 to 80% are Seiko movements (NH35, NH36, 6R35, etc). I've just picked up my first few Swiss powered pieces. On my timegrapher, what I'm seeing is that both the Swiss powered pieces and the Seiko pieces keep comparable time, mostly right out of the box (New Squale 1521 came in today & overall, running about 4.3+ spd. Steeldive SD1952, about +4spd) But what's interesting, is that on the Swiss pieces, the differences between crown up, crown down, 12 up, etc - won't vary a lot. The Seiko movements may vary WILDLY but average out to be easily comparable to my Hamilton, Squale, etc.
Is this normal?
I'm Not Right. In The Head.......
I'm not the most experienced, but I have a timegrapher and have regulated quite a few of my watches, Swiss and Japanese. I can't say I've noticed too much drastic difference in the overall variation of movements in the same general price range. I would agree that there is often a bit more positional variation in Seiko movements, but they are still capable of keeping great time on the wrist. What I have seen a big difference in is higher end movements. My Tudor and Omega are much more consistent across all positions than probably any of my Seiko, Miyota, or Sellita movements, etc. I haven't had the opportunity to test many luxury watches, but the Omega 8800 is the most consistent movement across all positions I've ever seen on my timegrapher and has run pretty much spot on at +1.5 spd on the wrist every day.
This is called positional variance & is due to the effect of gravity on the balance wheel. If the balance wheel is not perfectly round the effect will be more pronounced. I've noticed this too with my cheaper Seikos with the 4R36 movement for example.
Just to confirm, did you user the correct lift angle?
Personally, I find that most of the variance from manufacturer to manufacturer has more to do with the amount of work done by the vendor to regulate the movement. An nh35 can be regulated to +-5 spd. And the ETA grades has more to do with how many positions it's been regulated.
IMHO, I'll put up the nh35 long term durability against any Swiss movement.
Lift Angle Setting on the Timegrapher doesn't affect the time reading, only the Amplitude.
Positional Error comes from the balance wheel, that's not 100% balanced. But that's totally normal, my Poljot has like 25-30s difference from one to another position, while my Omegas almost have 0.
If you want to know how that is corrected, there are super informational YT Videos out there on how to "poise a balance wheel". ;)
I listened to a podcast recently which discussed this very question. I think it was the 40 and 20 podcast and it was an episode from a couple of years ago.
To summarise they said that in general Swiss movements kept much better accuracies when placed in different positions when compared against seiko/ Japanese movements.
I never knew this was a thing before!
Yes, this is normal. The positional variance with 4R Seiko movements/ NH35s is a thing, and I regulate mine for the dial-up/desk dweller position.
This is the reason I do a dynamic regulation.
What a watch does on the Timegrapher is great, but what it does on your wrist while you're wearing it is another, especially with less refined movements.
I track the accuracy over a period, usually a week. Then I adjust it on the timegrapher based on the real time measurement. Sometimes it takes a couple of cycles of this, but usually it's pretty close after the first cycle.
I've had the same experienced particularly with positional variation on the 6r35 Seiko. However when worn it doesn't seem to make very much of a difference.