Quote:
Originally Posted by M0FYA Andy
Quote:
Originally Posted by paulsherwin
Of course, clock purists hate quartz conversions, but done properly it's largely a cosmetic issue for most people. If you like the clock as it now is, then enjoy it and don't worry too much about it.
|
The same could be said about throwing the innards of a valve radio away and replacing them with a new DAB 'chassis' in the old cabinet...…………………
Andy |
Yes, but it's not quite a fair comparison, as many plastic-based clock movements can fail in such a way that even a clock expert can't fix them. In contrast, most of us could fix the most common faults on most valve radio chassis. However, your analogy works very well when describing those people who rip out a perfectly mendable spring-powered or synchronous electric or slave movement and fit quartz, just because it requires minimal skill.
Interestingly, Barrie Smith's book states:
Quote:
|
In 1963, when Smiths produced a battery operated movement using transistors, they named it the "Sectronic". The name was sometimes also used, it seems, for their later battery movements with a moving magnet"
|
...which implies that this clock could have originally used the moving magnet movement, introduced in 1972.
It also states that Smiths started using quartz movements in 1975, and from 1978, these movements weren't made by Smiths themselves.
So, if it is a "new", replacement movement, it might only be 6 years younger than the clock, and might have been sourced from Smiths as a spare part
