Jump to content
  • Sign Up to reply and join the friendliest Watch Forum on the web. Stick around, get to 50 posts and gain access to your full profile and additional features such as a personal messaging system, chat room and the sales forum PLUS the chance to enter our regular giveaways.

Bulova Precisionist


Steve's Dad
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 33
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

i am no authority on this but i think that making quartz sweep is quite attainable its just that it seriously negatively affects the life of the battery, like a lot

i might be wrong

as to why they're so ugly christ i can't imagine. it is mind boggling though, that they would introduce this range of ultra accurate quartz watches with the very desirable feature of a sweeping second hand and then do that

Edited by Rod Stunt
Link to comment
Share on other sites

ok that ones not as bad

and hey hey it's cool man it's cool. it takes all kinds to make a world

Tis true, - some people don`t even accept that the non-Lite Seiko Monster is really fugly :blink: :lol:

With apologies to the members of the Ban Monster Banter Party :sorry:

i agree the monster is an ugly beast and not for me but as before it's all cool if they like it

hey if you're a precisionist guy and you have a couple of them, do you know if i was right when i answered (tried to answer) the op's question?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i am no authority on this but i think that making quartz sweep is quite attainable its just that it seriously negatively affects the life of the battery, like a lot

i might be wrong

well, I've had mine since they first came out (can't quite remember when this was, but its more than a year ago) and its running on its original battery. So, not quite sure what you mean?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i am no authority on this but i think that making quartz sweep is quite attainable its just that it seriously negatively affects the life of the battery, like a lot

i might be wrong

well, I've had mine since they first came out (can't quite remember when this was, but its more than a year ago) and its running on its original battery. So, not quite sure what you mean?

i said i might be wrong, i'm completely prepared to be wrong

a year is not a long time time for a modern quartz though is it it?

i may still be right, but it is looking like i may well have been wrong

Link to comment
Share on other sites

well, I've had mine since they first came out (can't quite remember when this was, but its more than a year ago) and its running on its original battery. So, not quite sure what you mean?

I think he meant you can buy a quartz clock that plugs into the mains.

The power source means you can afford the power to sweep the second hand, but a wristwatch battery would soon drain trying to do that.

But Bulova seem to have found a way, well they definitely have going by your experience.

Edited by Steve's Dad
Link to comment
Share on other sites

i am no authority on this but i think that making quartz sweep is quite attainable its just that it seriously negatively affects the life of the battery, like a lot

i might be wrong

well, I've had mine since they first came out (can't quite remember when this was, but its more than a year ago) and its running on its original battery. So, not quite sure what you mean?

i said i might be wrong, i'm completely prepared to be wrong

a year is not a long time time for a modern quartz though is it it?

i may still be right, but it is looking like i may well have been wrong

I don't think you are wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

hey if you're a precisionist guy and you have a couple of them, do you know if i was right when i answered (tried to answer) the op's question?

I`ve only had them for a few months so don`t know yet how long the batteries last.

& I can`t see how anyone could call this ugly...

BulovaDSC_0040_zps84cbd6bb.gif

That's not too bad. Your watch Mach? Do you have a model number?

Yes it is mine & I usually add the model details to my photos :rolleyes:

Here`s another pic with the info you asked for...

Bulova Precisionist 96B159 Langford, cal. P102 8 jewels.

BulovaDSC_0041_zps38a6156c.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, I`ll accept that the Cylon (as I call it) isn`t going to win any beauty contests but IMO it has a certain charm... Are you sure?

BulovaDSC_0152_1.gif

BYC_Cylon-ByYourCommand.png :lol:

Specsavers time, Mach....that's 100 times worse than a Monster...... :yucky: :bad:...even the the date thingy's showing three days at once...do you really need to know what the date was yesterday, and what it's going to be tomorrow?...and why does the second hand look like a a pair of scissors? And there's no point in having a knurled bezel if it can't turn due to having four totally un-necessary screws embedded in it.

Edited by Roger the Dodger
Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, I`ll accept that the Cylon (as I call it) isn`t going to win any beauty contests but IMO it has a certain charm... Are you sure?

BulovaDSC_0152_1.gif

BYC_Cylon-ByYourCommand.png :lol:

Specsavers time, Mach....that's 100 times worse than a Monster...... :yucky: :bad:...even the the date thingy's showing three days at once...do you really need to know what the date was yesterday, and what it's going to be tomorrow?...and why does the second hand look like a a pair of scissors? And there's no point in having a knurled bezel if it can't turn due to having four totally un-necessary screws embedded in it.

Hilarious :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yep the Precisionist is as ugly as sin. Here is mine:

precisionist50.jpg

I have not been able to find out what movement is in the chrono, the only thing I do know is that the second hand moves 16 times per second.

Later,

William

I likes it, I wants it, my precious! :wub:

I like this one! How long does the battery last if it's running so fast?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yep the Precisionist is as ugly as sin. Here is mine:

precisionist50.jpg

I have not been able to find out what movement is in the chrono, the only thing I do know is that the second hand moves 16 times per second.

Later,

William

I likes it, I wants it, my precious! :wub:

I like this one! How long does the battery last if it's running so fast?

I don't know about the battery, I've only had it a week or two, beyond that, I think the chromos only came out last fall.

Later,

William

Link to comment
Share on other sites

precisionist50.jpg

I do like that a lot, in fact I think this movement is going to make a difference to how other manufacturers view their quartz ranges. ... What does really annoy me though is that despite coming up with such a great bit of technology via their research and development chaps, that no-one in the firm has yet worked out how to rotate the printing on the date wheel a bit so that the blooming date is facing the right way.. !! :shocking: :shocking: :wallbash: :aggressive:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, it looks like I got mine on the 14th October 2010.

http://www.thewatchforum.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=54891

Still going strong on its original battery, though to be honest in all that time (2 years 5 months and a few days) I've only worn it 4 times.

So, despite concerns that moving that second hand 16 times a second might result in a reduced battery life, I'd say not.

I did intend to keep tabs on its accuracy, but to be honest I haven't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The technology is actually very cool, I think they use a different cut of quartz crystal, if I remember it right it has three prongs instead of the two prong tuning fork shape or some such. Using different cuts is what the legendary Omega Marine Chronometer did, though that's a different cut again, and another level of accuracy, that's extremely hard to achieve. The Bulova one is a very good compromise.

It's actually quite revolutionary, as they can clearly do it quite cheaply and get very good accuracy and stability, if not quite the accuracy you'd get from eg a Seiko 9F thermocompensated quartz, or The Citizen. But it is in a similar range to an Oysterquartz. The smooth second hand is also great for changing people's preconceptions that somehow there's something evil about quartz and the one second tick!

So given all that it is a bit of a mystery that Bulova have so completely cocked up the marketing of one of the most interesting new calibers in watch making. They've chosen to make it in the cheapest possible plastic, rather than doing a GS and creating a decorated matel caliber with some longevity, and by all accounts the crown action feels quite unconvincing. And in terms of styling, with apologies to any owners on this thread.... Well, let's just say that Bulova have made some lovely classic looking quality watches in the past, but for some reason have chosen to do something else with this range.

It's an absolutely tragic missed opportunity as far as I can see, as in their back catalogue they have a Genta designed Royal Oak clone, and plenty of other classic vintage templates, and they now also have a patent on one of the most interesting technologies in the world. They could completely disrupt the market with those ingredients if they made a classic, quality mid-priced watch. But for some reason they have decided to aggressively attack the Christmas Cracker market. It's beyond understanding.

Edited by itsguy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, I`ll accept that the Cylon (as I call it) isn`t going to win any beauty contests but IMO it has a certain charm... Are you sure? Yes! :yes:

BulovaDSC_0152_1.gif

BYC_Cylon-ByYourCommand.png :lol:

Specsavers time, Mach....that's 100 times worse than a Monster...... :yucky: :bad:...even the the date thingy's showing three days at once...do you really need to know what the date was yesterday, and what it's going to be tomorrow?...and why does the second hand look like a a pair of scissors? And there's no point in having a knurled bezel if it can't turn due to having four totally un-necessary screws embedded in it.

Well,neither could be called `attractive` but the (non-Lite) Monster is clearly far worse then Champlain,obviously you & anyone who agrees with you is wrong & I`m right so there!! :tease: :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...