Seconds hand

It suddenly struck me this morning: almost all my second hands are small! Of my nine IWC watches only two have a large central seconds hand: the Porsche Design Ultra Sportivo, and the Ingenieur Automatic. My very first watch, an Avia boys watch, had a small seconds hand, and of course my next, first grown-up, watch should have a large seconds hand. At that time I thought small seconds hand were utterly old fashioned and boring. At the moment I think such a small seconds hand adds a nice touch to the dial. Of the seven IWC watches with a small seconds hand three are indicated by the functions of the watch: one perpetual calendar and two chronographs. So, four watches have a small seconds hand by choice. Those are all classic looking dressy watches. To break the rut, my latest watch, a dressy diver, has a large seconds hand, but most of my prospects (will it happen in 2011?) have a small seconds hand: only the Vintage Collection Ingenieur has a large seconds hand.

I wonder how important the seconds hand is to you. I have no watch in my collection that has no seconds hand: I find that a bit awkward, I like to see that the watch is running, some visible movement. For me, the size of the seconds hand was not a knock-out criterium the last twnty-five years, but with hindsight you may say that my preference for dressy watches the last ten years has led to the dominance of small seconds hands in my collection.

Kind regards,
Paul, wearing VC Pilot's watch, of course with small seconds hand

I used to care about the size of the seconds hand but it does not matter that much now. A few of my watches have a large seconds hand or a chrono function which, at the press of a pusher, accomplishes the same thing.

Hi Paul,

Well it depends upon what I am timing? If I need to see to the second, I prefer a long S.C. seconds like the BP has or digital. In a very classically designed piece, I prefer the full sized subdial of a Marine chronometer. However for general activities Thomas Jefferson had it right. He removed the seconds and minute hands on a 12 h dial, and simply used the hour hand. Saying, nothing was so important that +/- 15 minutes mattered.

Cheers from Isobars.

Paul, really interesting line of thought. Here's another thought for you......how about, the 2010 Ref IW504402 as your first 2011 watch? no small second hand, no large second hand...but definately plenty of vissible movement ! And no matter how one slicers and dices it....that watch would make a great addition to your collection, as well as a great #10 !

mvg
Mark

I am glad I looked it up, Mark, and it is a beauty: I would opt for the rose gold white dial version. In a way it has a seconds hand, there only is a lot of other stuff attached to it. At first I thought you would have liked to make it expensive for me, I thought you meant one of the skeletonized Portuguese watches.

I hope you can get your PPC pretty soon, keep up the good spirit!

Kind regards,
Paul

I've always wanted my watches to have a large seconds hand, which is why I have just one chronograph (a Breitling Skyland), I guess. My BP, Ingenieur 3227 and Aquatimer 2000 all have
wonderfully large second hands, which I love to watch make their eternal journey around the dial...I must be sick:-)

Steve

I do enjoy watching the sweeping of a good automatic large second hand. Yet for my IWC, I prefer the primary second hand to be the small one due to the chronograph feature. I just activate the stopwatch when I want to see a sweep.

Interesting topic! I really like the big seconds hands on my Ingenieur and Big Pilot. Just like Paul, I want to see at a glance that the watch is ticking.

I have nothing against small seconds hands either and I think the symmetry on the Portuguese Automatic is a very nice example.

Kind regards,

Clemens

Historically, movements were (a) manual winding and with (b) small (subsidiary) seconds. Although there are exceptions, in fact the development of central or center seconds was itself a horological development in the 1940s, and there are are two distinct ways to accomplish that (direct or indirect). A good article on this is at

www.timezone.com/library/horologium/horologium631670098360080701

The famous IWC B-Uhr watch from 1940 was really a converted small second Cal. 52 pocket watch movement to central seconds.

I think there is no doubt that central seconds are more legible. To my thinking, small seconds in a subsidiary subdial makes sense when
--there is a manual movement
--there is an attempt at a retro design
There is no compelling reason for the above, other than tradition. But I would argue that heritage is at the essence of mechanical watches.

The only contraindication I see in central seconds is the movement gets thicker but it's impossible not to get fascinated by IWC movements adopting the Puthod brevet.

From an aesthetic point of view I don't like small seconds at 9 in "solotempo" but that's just me :-/