[time-nuts] Am I the only Time Nut who doesn't wear a watch?

[Michael Poulos]

On 7/10/2011 4:10 PM, Hal Murray wrote:
> omniryx at gmail.com said:
>> Then there is this little number...
>> http://forums.watchnet.com/index.php?t=tree&goto=415170&rid=0
> > From their web page:
>
>    The power reserve is 52 hours, and the watch is actually very accurate
>    at about plus or minus 4 seconds a day.
>
> 4 seconds per day?  I'd expected better from a very expensive watch.  Are
> belts nasty when it comes to keeping good time?
>
I wear a $50 watch that is a radio controlled "atomic" watch. Less than 
1/2 a second off at any time, it's plenty good enough for normal human 
affairs. It's the only watch (so far) that I found to be satisfyingly 
accurate. I use it as my "ship's chronometer" when I drive and 
potentially have to use one of Chicago's parking pay boxes or to 
deliberately time my arrival into a free parking spot that depends on 
timing to get. (i.e. the school zone parking tactic)

4 seconds off a day? If it's a Rolex, I'd (understandably) be PISSED!!! 
I'd expect a watch that damn expensive to be off less than the 5 
milliseconds to grab the WWVB signal! After all, isn't the whole purpose 
of a watch is to keep time? Unless, I suppose, you really want the bling 
factor... (and I'm not into bling)