Same subject as last

[Synchroserious]

No watch that i know of had a Titanium band with it's Titanium line back then(before 1990?) ED.And yes the Synchronar was and still is ahead of it's time with also being lighter for what is inside but Not the standard "CHEAP" watch as you mislabel it.If it's lighter and 5-10 times more durable thEn the competion it is always considered a good thing dude .Plus as the 1990's came even the Synchronar was considered to heavy as light and cheap was in fashion with watches.I agree with the fist 2 posts as to why one wornout Black watch did not sell for as much as a decent SS with HEAVIER type band. BTW there is no secret that all rounded Synchronar cases are GREAT QUALITY STAINLESS STEEL UNDERNEATH no matter what Ed is unaware of.He must be confused with the flat cornered chrome plated Sunwatch cases which were not SS underneath.I am waiting for the day for all his Synchronar errors on the net of his to be updated so there will not be any of this confusion.

[retroleds]

Howard:
AS usual you have totally mischarecterized what I said because you don't like this electronic "Consumer Reports" style collector site.. I never said the watch was cheap(expensive as all hell, actually) - I said people have commented to me that it feels light and cheap. My comment on the titanium was to underscore my opinion that it wasn't that big a deal to go looking for, as it is only a few grams of weight taken off an already incredibly light watch. Re the "ceramic coating" - manufacturers have found that ceramic coatings must be carefully matched to the expansion rates of the underlying material. So your Dad tried a new material and it didn't pan out over the long haul - it's not very good but we salute him for trying. You seem to miss that aspect of my commentary on the Synchronar(and the Pulsar and most of the other early watches) - I respect what the people tried but I don't fool myself that it was all good. I think they are all CRAP compared to what could be made today, if people were as enthusiastic about making a digital watch of quality. But even though they are full of bugs,glitches and miscalculations, they can still be kept running, possibly for hundreds of years with proper care. They did the best they could, with what they had available at the TIME.

Now as far as your comment that it is lighter and durable, I have to disagree: there a fair number of fairly light LED watches, made in equally small(actually smaller in most cases) numbers, that have had ungodly better performance records over the year than any of the Synchronar line. I'll name some since you might not have been exposed to many of these: Modulus driver, Gireard Perragaux driver, Pulsar Sport, Pulsar Green LED, Bulova one button driver with 3 part display(infinately better product). The Pulsar Sport has such a quality built module, I have NEVER seen a broken one - nada, zip! All built in super small numbers, all being super durable!

And what is the point of talking about the 90s? - the Synchronar is and was a holdover from the 70s and ALL the 70s watches are considered heavy compared to the modern digitals.

Finally, for the price difference between a Synchronar and a brand new Bulova driver with three part display, I can buy batteries for a few hundred years. The permanent battery idea didn't work then, it doesn't work now - name me a product with a permanent battery inside that is made today, other than throwaways. And don't make us collectively[pun intended] laugh by replying, "Synchronar".

Re: trying. I salute those who felt to attempt scaling K2 and died last week. I salute people who tried to bring us better timepieces in the 70s.

Dude, you must have watches to ship. I know I have watches to fix.

So, Peace be with ya - this ain't nothing personal, and certainly not against the dead. Their work is done.

[Synchroserious]

MAN HAS SEARCHED FOR A TIMPIECE THAT CAN WITHSTAND EXTREME SHOCK,TEMERATURE,NO NEED FOR CONSTANT WORRY OF BATTERY REPLCEMENT(REWINDING) AND EXTREME ACCURACY,AUTOMATIC CALENDAR WITH ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY ETC.


I WILL NOT COMMENT ON ANY PARTICULAR BRAND AS WE ALL KNOW MANY WERE CHEAP SPIN OFFS OF THE ORIGINAL DIGITALS THAT ENTERED THE MARKET. IF THE WATCHES YOU MENTION WERE TO EVER ENCOUNTER A DIRECT HIT WITH THE SYNCHRONAR HEAD ON THEY WOULD BE DONE!!. THEN S0ME GUY LIKE YOU WOULD HAVE REPAIR WORK TO DO JUST TO BRING IT BACK TO LIFE AND FOOL US ALL.

[Synchroserious]

IT SHOULD ALSO BE NOTED THAT ED NEVER OWNED A SYNCHRONAR,ALL HE HAS IS DEAD EVIDENCE AND SOME SPECIAL THINGS I MADE FOR HIM. so...HE HAS NO CLUE OR OPINNION BECAUSE HE IS NOT A VALID TESTER WHO WORE A SYNCHRONAR YEARS PAST ALL OTHER DIGITALS IN FRIDGID DEMANNDING CONDITIONS.IN FACT ED HAS SO MANY WATCHES THAT HE ALMOST NEVER WEARS AS A DAILY ROUTINE HE IS IN NO WAY SOMEONE TO ASK ABOUT RELIABILITY OR DURABILITY. HE RAMBLES AND JUST DOES NOT KNOW OF THE EXPERIENCE SO MANY GREAT SYNCHRONAR OWNERS GOT TO EXPERIENCE AND ENJOY.AND NO ED I AM NOT SAYING THERE WAS OR IS NO ENJOYMENT EXPERIENCED WITH OTHER WATCHES.LETS GET THAT STRAIGHT BEFORE YOU MAKE ANOTHER ATTEMPT TO PUT WORDS IN MY MOUTH.

[retroleds]

.. ED I AM NOT SAYING THERE WAS OR IS NO ENJOYMENT EXPERIENCED WITH OTHER WATCHES.LETS GET THAT STRAIGHT BEFORE YOU MAKE ANOTHER ATTEMPT TO PUT WORDS IN MY MOUTH.

Howard, if I was going to put words in your mouth they would be, " I admit, 30 years and counting, and it's still a piece of shit". Solar powered and bio-degradable.

I'm glad to have missed out on the early years of the "exploding battery , Jelly Belly watch" - it's bad enough flushing their colon to see if I can find their head. And yours.

Go fix some SYnchronars - if you can! !

[clockace]

i feel i need to reply to this controverscy. i am the owner of one of roger's early mkII's which i recently resurrected. see posts on that. it is working fine, i wear it daily as well as the rwr legacy #23 i just received from howard. i have always been happy with the synchronar. it is one of the coolest watches around for avant garde style. i thought that when i bought the first one in 1975 and i think my new one is just as cool. [is that a dated word]? i am 66 yrs young. synchronar is not everyones watch, just as a rolex is not. there are different colors of cars for the same reason. howard is right now building a mkIV module to replace one i sent him for a friend who bought his before i got my first one. his original was also a mkII. i am the one who showed him the article about it in pop. science mag., and he too just had to have it. to sum it up, yes there were many growing pains related to the watch, delivery being probably one of the foremost. also i guess there were reliability problems too. both my friend and i had to return our first ones for warranty work. however we both think synchronar is one unique timepiece. it has never been copied by anyone, not even the chinese, who have copied everything else. i really like my synchronars. i also have a black ceramic case i got from howard. it is not perfect NOS, but it perfectly usable. in fact i occasionally change my mkII module into it so i can wear it as such. the bracelet is not ceramic, but black coated. this will scratch. even the RADO ceramic watches do not have ceramic bracelets. they are steel with a ceramic piece attached to each link. i think i have said enough in defense of howard and his father's product. peter p/s, i also have a bulova driver 2 button that i had ed rebuild for me. i like that one as well, but there is no way that you can see the display when you are outside in bright daylight. i don't have that problem with the synchronar. sorry ed, i do likethe driver style tho'. peter

[retroleds]

Clockace/Peter: Nothing to apologize for, this is the place for people to air their opinions on the various watches, so others can ponder them, if only from a spectator's standpoint. It's not like I hate the Synchronar, I've bought two off Howard and over 60 unopened ones from various sources. I've resurrected 8 so far and 10-12 remain unopened,maybe on a rainy day I'll resume opening and I certainly haven't delved into the ones I've opened thoroughly enough to declare them all total scrap. My ire is a direct function of Howard's rabid approach/attitude that the Synchronar is the be-all & end-all of digital watches. I doubt Bill Ford goes around defending the Model T as the ultimate car! The design is certainly cool to look at, the switches giving it a dated mechanical feel, the trimmerless speed adjustment interesting -and it works. But I'm also thinking they had/have some construction aspects that have proved the source of an unreasonably high fatality rate; primarily, the use of the potting gel and the rechargeable batteries, inside of a [virtually] permanently sealed case. As a guy who has fixed a lot of things in my life, I have a certain level of disdain for a product INTENTIONALLY made in a fashion that prevents any reasonably anticipated level of maintenance, despite its obvious need for the same. I hope/suspect that the Synchronar's Howard assembles will last much longer than those built earlier, due to better batteries, better gel.

Howard is correct that I don't wear a watch everyday(no need with several clocks and X number of watches around me); however, I do get to see several hundred watches each year, of various construction, worn by people who do things with their watch I would never think of. Doesn't make me an expert, but does give me perspective. I wear my vintage watches for style/fashion, rarely as the last word on what time it is. Whilst doing manual labor I generally rely on a $1 LCD carabiner watch or my cell phone - dinner out might be a gold-filled TC1 or a Synchronar.

[bruce wegmann]

This whole discussion reminds me of another situation where the designers and builders of an LED had WAY too much confidence in the longevity and reliability of their product...the P1 Limited Edition. No glue or potting compound here; they soldered these things shut and sealed them up like Tut's tomb...no real provision for servicing the electronics at all [the module was supposed to last a hundred years, after all!]. And of course, no sooner did they get out into the real world, than they started to fail...and not just a few, but a lot, maybe most of them, in any event, enough to prompt a recall of the entire run of 400 watches. At least, it was successful enough that among the 45 or so specimens in collections, there is no known example of a fully working 2800 module. Certainly, any new technology carries with it the potential of unexpected and catastrophic failure [remember Challenger?], especially when engineering decisions are made under pressure of time. Equally certainly, in 1971, the race to get the first digital watch on the publics' wrist led to some hasty and questionable production decisions.