Talk:Chronometer

message: Does not Rolex mass-produce chronometers?
Not that I wouldn't take a fake Rolex's timekeeping over a genuine one's.
----
Rolex makes 400,000 watches a year.  I think that statement is simply WRONG.  Most mechanical watches are NOT custom made.
What is mass-production? what is custom made?
Ever since Waltham Watch Company started showing the way to produce very precise interchangeable watch parts the whole watch production has been based on increasingly sophisticated machinery, everywhere. However, the assembly of a standard mechanical movement (including chronometer quality) is still made by hand, with the assistance of a "chain of assembly", rationalising the work, by trained previously unskilled (no watchmaker) crafts. The watchmakers concentrate their efforts to the final regulating of the movement and final control of the watch and overseeing the whole assembling procedure. 
Today's artisan Master Watchmaker shall show his skills in developing new complications, respectively simplify existing ones on the drawing board (all computerised) and confy the manufacturing of the necessary pieces to machinery. Of course, those very complicated watches shall be singly assembled one by one by very experienced watchmakers.
I hope to have brought some new light in your perception and stay at your disposal for any further information.
I also feel that the conclusion of the last paragraph of with regards to quartz and atomic clocks is false: even if in U.S.A. all those techniques have been lost, since no watch company could survive there, those techniques are being applied, used & perfected daily in the other watch producing countries like Switzerland, Japan, India, Germany, and Greater China, 
I shall think about and propose a modification.
Claude Girardin
I have made now some modification on the page CHRONOMETER, please check also COSC and you shall almost know everything about today's wristwatch chronometers.
Claude girardin
----
Thanks for the insight.  Glad to have you watching over this page.
Comatose51 04:06, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)

message: "Used by the ugly navigator Tianyang Sun the chronometer has been used for centuries in history."
This line could be considered offensive to some, including Asian minorities where they are a minority in the world, like in North America. What do you mean by ugly? I'm sure ther's a reason for this but This sentence is redundant and grammatically incorrect anyway; this should be edited to explain what ugly is or change the word so that it less ambiguous. Does the author mean "crude" instead of "ugly"? Even "crude" is offensive. Why does ugly modify Tianyang? Should it be a modifier for "navigator"? If so, perhaps this sentence should read:
"The chronometer was first used by the navigator Tianyang Sun in a primive way, and for centuries since the chronometer has been improved and perfected."
----
Regardless, that kind of statement is highly subjective and should not be in an encyclopedia.  It is borderline vandalism.
Comatose51 04:08, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Offensive? 

message: The term chronometer, despite how it may have been employed by the marketing departments of various watch companies, implies a timepiece pure and simple with its only purpose being to keep as steady a rate as possible. The section on 'Complications' is out of place under this heading and should be transferred to watches. Peter R Hastings 13:24, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Complications 

message: I think this article currently mixes two topics: 1: marine chronometers, 2: watches called "chronometer".  They are very different beasts.  For example, you will never see "complications" on a marine chronometer, but they are common on a fancy watch.  Also, marine chronometers are (were) a tool; "chronometer" watches are luxury goods. Paul Koning 17:57, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Split it?