So the argument goes:
A 12-hour second-time-zone display with no day-night indicator doesn't tell you whether that time from back home is AM or PM, and so any dual-time watch just must include some means of showing that information. Thus, the popular design for most dual-time watches is a 24-hour GMT hand and a 24-hour bezel. And either the hand is movable separately, or the bezel is.
Countering that argument is: A 24-hour hand requires mental fiddling to read, and really how hard is it to know whether the time zone in question is AM or PM?
But I think there are two use cases at work here. The first is the person who needs to know UTC time. There are not many people left in that category, but one group in which I participate are radio amateurs. Radio amateurs generally log things in terms of UTC, and many buy desk clocks with two displays for the purpose. A watch that displays true GMT (=UTC) is a fun thing for such people to own.
The other use case are for travelers. Sure, some people are constantly traveling to distance lands some large fraction of the distance around the planet. But even when I've been in Japan or Dubai, I've known whether back home was AM or PM. But it's nice to glance at the watch and know what time it is at home. And for the traveling I do these days, which is nearly all domestic, it's nice to be able to read time in two time zones no more than five hours apart.
Thus, I gravitate to the type of watch with a conventional hours and minutes sub-dial showing a second time zone. The classic example of this, for a watch that I could dream of owning someday, is the JLC Reverso Duo, where the second time-zone side of the watch also includes a 24-hour sub-dial. It uses a pusher to jump the hour hand on the reverse side. It's the best of both worlds.
![]()
(Image linked from JLC web site.)
It's also iconic and classy. It's definitely on my list of desires. These are priced at just under $10K, and I've seen them used for maybe half that or a bit less. At that price point and higher, there are other options, some of them quite elegant, but frankly those waters are too deep for me. I show it here to give a sense of what I think is the best dual-time watch on the market that I can even dream of owning.
But there are cheaper alternatives. At lower price points, most watches with a second time zone use a GMT hand. Many are based on the ETA 2893, but Zenith has a model based on their Elite movement and Rolex, of course, has their GMT offering. But I think that for most applications (radio amateurs excepted), that's an easy complication but not necessarily a good solution. What has been drawing my attention lately has been the use of a 12-hour sub-dial for the second time zone.
There are a couple of movement options for middle and lower price points: The Soprod A10-2 with second time zone modul, the 9351, and an ETA 2892 with a Technotime TT651 module. The newer version of both include a day-night disk that rides around the sub-dial hand. But there are even less expensive models using the older versions without that extra feature. Both include a big-date display at 12 O'Clock.
I have not found a watch that (admits to) using the Soprod movement. I can't determine how it works, but it's probably the same as the 2892/TT651, where the crown, in the outer position, sets both dials in one direction, but doesn't move the sub-dial hour hand in the reverse direction.
But I've found a number of watches that use the ETA/TT combination. Here's the module:
![]()
(Image linked from Technotime website.)
Two examples of these made until recently are the Louis Erard 1931 GMT:
![]()
(Linked from louis-erard.blogspot.com)
And the Ebel Classic Hexagon Dual Time:
![]()
(Linked from Ebel Classic Hexagon GMT Rose Gold Watch: Two Times Done Well - A BLOG TO WATCH)
These just seem to me more useful for traveling than a GMT watch with a 24-hour hand.
I have a line on the Ebel for a very good price, NOS from AD with warranty, on black alligator instead of the calfskin pictured above. It's a monster (45mm) but after wearing my 42mm Zenith and my larger sport and dive watches for a while, I'm getting used to it without dulling my appreciation for smaller watches. And I just plain love black-dialed steel watches that are not trying to look like they were made in 1930. I have to say, my love for the Reverso notwithstanding (it is truly timeless), watches styled to look like they are from the 30's don't rock my world. I find 60's designs more appealing, and also some modern designs if they show really good design. The Louis Erard is clearly calling up the deep past, while the Ebel is a modern design with a dial reminiscent of the 60's--very much my taste despite the huge size. The Ebel is also thin, and curved, and elegantly shaped, and just doesn't look monstrous.
So: Educate me. Is this ETA/TT combination flawed? Am I violating the Sacred Screed by considering a dual-time watch without an AM/PM indicator? Is there a better way to spend $1500 for the dual-time function, with a watch that won't make me sorry I left my Zenith at home when I traveled?
Rick "subject to sudden temptation" Denney
A 12-hour second-time-zone display with no day-night indicator doesn't tell you whether that time from back home is AM or PM, and so any dual-time watch just must include some means of showing that information. Thus, the popular design for most dual-time watches is a 24-hour GMT hand and a 24-hour bezel. And either the hand is movable separately, or the bezel is.
Countering that argument is: A 24-hour hand requires mental fiddling to read, and really how hard is it to know whether the time zone in question is AM or PM?
But I think there are two use cases at work here. The first is the person who needs to know UTC time. There are not many people left in that category, but one group in which I participate are radio amateurs. Radio amateurs generally log things in terms of UTC, and many buy desk clocks with two displays for the purpose. A watch that displays true GMT (=UTC) is a fun thing for such people to own.
The other use case are for travelers. Sure, some people are constantly traveling to distance lands some large fraction of the distance around the planet. But even when I've been in Japan or Dubai, I've known whether back home was AM or PM. But it's nice to glance at the watch and know what time it is at home. And for the traveling I do these days, which is nearly all domestic, it's nice to be able to read time in two time zones no more than five hours apart.
Thus, I gravitate to the type of watch with a conventional hours and minutes sub-dial showing a second time zone. The classic example of this, for a watch that I could dream of owning someday, is the JLC Reverso Duo, where the second time-zone side of the watch also includes a 24-hour sub-dial. It uses a pusher to jump the hour hand on the reverse side. It's the best of both worlds.
(Image linked from JLC web site.)
It's also iconic and classy. It's definitely on my list of desires. These are priced at just under $10K, and I've seen them used for maybe half that or a bit less. At that price point and higher, there are other options, some of them quite elegant, but frankly those waters are too deep for me. I show it here to give a sense of what I think is the best dual-time watch on the market that I can even dream of owning.
But there are cheaper alternatives. At lower price points, most watches with a second time zone use a GMT hand. Many are based on the ETA 2893, but Zenith has a model based on their Elite movement and Rolex, of course, has their GMT offering. But I think that for most applications (radio amateurs excepted), that's an easy complication but not necessarily a good solution. What has been drawing my attention lately has been the use of a 12-hour sub-dial for the second time zone.
There are a couple of movement options for middle and lower price points: The Soprod A10-2 with second time zone modul, the 9351, and an ETA 2892 with a Technotime TT651 module. The newer version of both include a day-night disk that rides around the sub-dial hand. But there are even less expensive models using the older versions without that extra feature. Both include a big-date display at 12 O'Clock.
I have not found a watch that (admits to) using the Soprod movement. I can't determine how it works, but it's probably the same as the 2892/TT651, where the crown, in the outer position, sets both dials in one direction, but doesn't move the sub-dial hour hand in the reverse direction.
But I've found a number of watches that use the ETA/TT combination. Here's the module:
(Image linked from Technotime website.)
Two examples of these made until recently are the Louis Erard 1931 GMT:
(Linked from louis-erard.blogspot.com)
And the Ebel Classic Hexagon Dual Time:
(Linked from Ebel Classic Hexagon GMT Rose Gold Watch: Two Times Done Well - A BLOG TO WATCH)
These just seem to me more useful for traveling than a GMT watch with a 24-hour hand.
I have a line on the Ebel for a very good price, NOS from AD with warranty, on black alligator instead of the calfskin pictured above. It's a monster (45mm) but after wearing my 42mm Zenith and my larger sport and dive watches for a while, I'm getting used to it without dulling my appreciation for smaller watches. And I just plain love black-dialed steel watches that are not trying to look like they were made in 1930. I have to say, my love for the Reverso notwithstanding (it is truly timeless), watches styled to look like they are from the 30's don't rock my world. I find 60's designs more appealing, and also some modern designs if they show really good design. The Louis Erard is clearly calling up the deep past, while the Ebel is a modern design with a dial reminiscent of the 60's--very much my taste despite the huge size. The Ebel is also thin, and curved, and elegantly shaped, and just doesn't look monstrous.
So: Educate me. Is this ETA/TT combination flawed? Am I violating the Sacred Screed by considering a dual-time watch without an AM/PM indicator? Is there a better way to spend $1500 for the dual-time function, with a watch that won't make me sorry I left my Zenith at home when I traveled?
Rick "subject to sudden temptation" Denney
