Why do so many perpetual calendar models lack a seconds function?

[BigAppleBill]

I consider a seconds function essential to a watch. Without a seconds function it’s impossible to keep track of the precise time and to be able to set your watch accurately. Yet it seems there are so many perpetual calendars without a seconds function.

To their credit, Patek does offer two PC’s with a seconds function - the 5320 and the 5496. But why not the 5327 or the now-discontinued 5940? I consider these two PC’s incredibly compelling, but seriously diminished by lacking such an essential function. Even FP Journe’s Quantieme Perpetuel lacks a seconds function, which I believe is his only offering without one.

I’ve heard it argued that a sweep seconds hand would make a PC less attractive and too busy looking. Really? I think of a sweep seconds hand as innocuous to a watch dial. After all there are plenty of PC Chronographs out there that seem to sell just fine with a “busy” dial.

Do any resident experts have an explanation for this phenomenon? I’m genuinely curious to know the answer.

[Ichiran]

I'm no expert but I think most of the PC except for the 5320/5496 use the 240 movement to keep their cases slim. The 240 does not support a centre second.

[Russell996]

Originally Posted by BigAppleBill

I consider a seconds function essential to a watch. Without a seconds function it’s impossible to keep track of the precise time and to be able to set your watch accurately. Yet It seems there are so many perpetual calendars without a seconds function.

To their credit, Patek does offer two PC’s with a seconds function - the 5320 and the 5496. But why not the 5327 or the now-discontinued 5940? I consider these two PC’s incredibly compelling, but seriously diminished by lacking such an essential function. Even FP Journe’s Quantieme Perpetuel lacks a seconds function, which I believe is his only offering without one.

I’ve heard it argued that a sweep seconds hand would make a PC less attractive and too busy looking. Really? I think of a sweep seconds hand as innocuous to a watch dial. After all there are plenty of PC Chronographs out there that seem to sell just fine with a “busy” dial.

Do any resident experts have an explanation for this phenomenon? I’m genuinely curious to know the answer.

In addition to a seconds hand if you want accuracy it needs to hack, I don’t believe the 5320 or 5496 hack?

[raclaims]

I've never bought a watch without a seconds hand...I enjoy watching the motion.

[jon_jon]

Patek's 240 micro-rotor is a classic movement and is inside so many of their watches. There are some variation of the 240 with an off-center seconds subdial (e.g. 5712 or 6006), but most watches with a 240 movement do not have a seconds hand.

So the 3940/5140/5327 and their torneau shaped case cousins do not have the seconds hand as they all use the 240Q movement.

[watchucallit]

IF no seconds or chronograph -- a non-starter for me... Over the years I have succumb to crossing the line on specific preferences.. but this one will never cross :)

Originally Posted by raclaims

I've never bought a watch without a seconds hand...I enjoy watching the motion.

[Ba Ba]

Originally Posted by jon_jon

Patek's 240 micro-rotor is a classic movement and is inside so many of their watches. There are some variation of the 240 with an off-center seconds subdial (e.g. 5712 or 6006), but most watches with a 240 movement do not have a seconds hand.

So the 3940/5140/5327 and their torneau shaped case cousins do not have the seconds hand as they all use the 240Q movement.

Same goes with 5940. If you don’t see a seconds hand moving how would you know the watch is running (on top of accuracy).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ba Ba]

Originally Posted by raclaims

I've never bought a watch without a seconds hand...I enjoy watching the motion.

I need my watches with seconds hand (preferred center seconds) and a date (a must for me unless it’s a zeitwerk). Without noticing the watch is moving and what date is today I feel something is missing...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[martinr]

AP 15202 doesn’t have a seconds hand.

[jon_jon]

Originally Posted by martinr

AP 15202 doesn’t have a seconds hand.

I suppose above posters who can't wearing a watch without a seconds hand would not get a 15202. Even in the AP sub-forum, discussions come up now and then about why the 15202 doesn't have a seconds hand and it being a detractor for some.

IME it takes some getting used to wearing a watch without a seconds watch. But as with everything in life, you get used to it.

[Calatrava r]

I prefer a seconds hand with a hacking feature. As stated, it is the Patek 240Q which does not support a seconds function with the PC module. Their other PC have the seconds hand. I think most PCs are now made with seconds hands, The Lange, Moser and Urban Jurgensen come to mind.

[BigAppleBill]

Originally Posted by Calatrava r

I prefer a seconds hand with a hacking feature. As stated, it is the Patek 240Q which does not support a seconds function with the PC module. Their other PC have the seconds hand. I think most PCs are now made with seconds hands, The Lange, Moser and Urban Jurgensen come to mind.

The Urban Jürgensen 1741 is the cat’s pajamas! I wish FPJ would add a seconds feature to his QP. That would be the one I’d really want.

[kneedeep]

Originally Posted by raclaims

I've never bought a watch without a seconds hand...I enjoy watching the motion.

This

[GreenLantern]

It's weird for me to say, but I do find it annoying that many perpetual calendars from the sport watch stalwarts don't have seconds (either center or sub). This applies to PP and AP, both.

[BigAppleBill]

Originally Posted by GreenLantern

It's weird for me to say, but I do find it annoying that many perpetual calendars from the sport watch stalwarts don't have seconds (either center or sub). This applies to PP and AP, both.

Yep. Seeing the seconds moving either on a center hand or subdial indicates that the watch is alive. Without it I’m sure I’d be putting the watch to my ear or checking the case back for motion.

[d11n]

I'm likely in the minority... but I love setting my watch before wearing (no winders for me) and I love 'checking' on my 3940 by holding it up to my ear...it makes me appreciate the mechanisms of the mechanical watch.

[GB-man]

Surprisingly the lack of a seconds hand was not a problem for me at all owning the 15202. I actually enjoyed it as it felt like time was slowed down

[Billfav]

Not too digress from the OP's point on PP PC lack of seconds hand and since the AP 15202 was raised I was wondering would I purchase another watch without a seconds hand. I much prefer having a seconds hand especially on a caliber that hacks (stickler for accuracy). But this is the only watch I have that does not have a seconds hand, but it line with it's original design - the JLC TT 1931. Please forgive the hairline scratches - this watch has been a worn regularly particularly when I travel.

[Pongster]

Why is this so?

I always thought dress watches didnt have second hands as a matter of design aesthetics. To have a cleaner look. And since a formal occasion does not have to be times to the second.

In fact, in more formal events, a watch is not expected. You dont need to tell the time as supposedly there is no other event where you should be.

But for PCs, the cleaner look aesthetic is not present.

[jon_jon]

Originally Posted by Pongster

Why is this so?

I always thought dress watches didnt have second hands as a matter of design aesthetics. To have a cleaner look. And since a formal occasion does not have to be times to the second.

In fact, in more formal events, a watch is not expected. You dont need to tell the time as supposedly there is no other event where you should be.

But for PCs, the cleaner look aesthetic is not present.

You are correct that many dress watches only have 2 hands, without a seconds hand. I own a 2-hand Calatrava that I only wear on "formal" occasions.

The discussion above is based on Patek's 240Q movement which houses the 3940/5140/5327 and their torneau-shaped cousins. They do not have a seconds hand.

However Patek has produced the 5050/5059/5159/5496 series of PCs that have a seconds hand, with the 315/324 movement. More recently produced 5320 also has the 324 movement with a seconds hand

So I would say Patek PCs with the 240Q movement has historically been more popular than those with a 315/324 movement due to the thinness of the case and the micro-rotor.

[Tony64]

Originally Posted by jon_jon

You are correct that many dress watches only have 2 hands, without a seconds hand. I own a 2-hand Calatrava that I only wear on "formal" occasions.

The discussion above is based on Patek's 240Q movement which houses the 3940/5140/5327 and their torneau-shaped cousins. They do not have a seconds hand.

However Patek has produced the 5050/5059/5159/5496 series of PCs that have a seconds hand, with the 315/324 movement. More recently produced 5320 also has the 324 movement with a seconds hand

So I would say Patek PCs with the 240Q movement has historically been more popular than those with a 315/324 movement due to the thinness of the case and the micro-rotor.

Agree 100%

[Pongster]

Originally Posted by jon_jon

You are correct that many dress watches only have 2 hands, without a seconds hand. I own a 2-hand Calatrava that I only wear on "formal" occasions.

The discussion above is based on Patek's 240Q movement which houses the 3940/5140/5327 and their torneau-shaped cousins. They do not have a seconds hand.

However Patek has produced the 5050/5059/5159/5496 series of PCs that have a seconds hand, with the 315/324 movement. More recently produced 5320 also has the 324 movement with a seconds hand

So I would say Patek PCs with the 240Q movement has historically been more popular than those with a 315/324 movement due to the thinness of the case and the micro-rotor.

Thanks. It still begs the question though. Why did Patek build the 240Q without the seconds hand? Deliberate? Since a thin movement so meant for dress watches without a seconds hand?

Since as you mentioned they can and have built PCs with seconds hand. Even with a more complicated retrograde date function.

[benzng]

Originally Posted by Pongster

Thanks. It still begs the question though. Why did Patek build the 240Q without the seconds hand? Deliberate? Since a thin movement so meant for dress watches without a seconds hand?

Since as you mentioned they can and have built PCs with seconds hand. Even with a more complicated retrograde date function.

curious on this as well, they dont have a seconds hand because of aesthetics or limitation of the movement?
my favorite the 5550P which i think is also a 240Q
I really love a second hand but the face is more important to me.

[jon_jon]

Originally Posted by Pongster

Thanks. It still begs the question though. Why did Patek build the 240Q without the seconds hand? Deliberate? Since a thin movement so meant for dress watches without a seconds hand?

Since as you mentioned they can and have built PCs with seconds hand. Even with a more complicated retrograde date function.

Originally Posted by benzng

curious on this as well, they dont have a seconds hand because of aesthetics or limitation of the movement?
my favorite the 5550P which i think is also a 240Q
I really love a second hand but the face is more important to me.

Since the 240 movement is used in the 5712 with a off-center subdial seconds hand, it is possible to add a seconds hand. However with so many existing subdials on the 240Q, my guess is there wasn't room to add a seconds subdial.

If there are any watchmakers here reading this thread, perhaps they can answer the question better.

[Tony64]

I think many are missing the bigger picture. Why ruin the perfect watch with the addition a second hand?

Owners of such a fine timepiece should hardly concern themselves with something so trivial.

A perpetual calendar that tracks the day, date, and moonphase through the year 2100 doesn't care about your "seconds", and neither should you.

[Offline99]

Originally Posted by Tony64

I think many are missing the bigger picture. Why ruin the perfect watch with the addition a second hand?

Owners of such a fine timepiece should hardly concern themselves with something so trivial.

A perpetual calendar that tracks the day, date, and moonphase through the year 2100 doesn't care about your "seconds", and neither should you.

Who needs to track seconds on an ultimate dress watch???

[GreenLantern]

Originally Posted by Offline99

Who needs to track seconds on an ultimate dress watch???

Me, because I like to set my watches precisely.

[Platypus]

Originally Posted by raclaims

I've never bought a watch without a seconds hand...I enjoy watching the motion.

Me too. I also need a date function, which many Patek models lack.

[Platypus]

I respectfully disagree. I would prefer a seconds complication to any of the more "advanced" complications above.

Originally Posted by Tony64

I think many are missing the bigger picture. Why ruin the perfect watch with the addition a second hand?

Owners of such a fine timepiece should hardly concern themselves with something so trivial.

A perpetual calendar that tracks the day, date, and moonphase through the year 2100 doesn't care about your "seconds", and neither should you.

[Tony64]

Originally Posted by Platypus

I respectfully disagree. I would prefer a seconds complication to any of the more "advanced" complications above.

Well I was being a bit cheeky I admit.

I guess my point was simply that for some who do care about "advanced" complications, the lack of a seconds hand is hardly something to lament.

The good news is that there are plenty of other references from Patek that provide either a central or subdial seconds hand.

Individual taste and preferences may differ, and I certainly respect yours as well as the many others who may disagree. My opinion, for grand complications such as a PC, is that a seconds hand is unnecessary. Timing precisely to the second may be essential for chronographs but, for a watch capable of accurately measuring time in decades, 1/60th of a minute becomes less meaningful.

In my opinion, every version of the PC that included a seconds hand appears significantly less elegant. I do however think many of their PCC are stunning with a seconds hand, but unfortunately the added thickness, for me, is a deal breaker.