If the objective is to be able to have a timer that measures 12 hours, and we are settling for a 30-minute recorder, isn't it really 4.16% of a chronograph (with the 45 minute register getting you to 6.24% and the 60 minute recorder getting you to 8.33% of a chronograph)?

In a word, no.

A chronograph with a 12-hour counter is a full Chronograph. A watch lacking one isn't a full chronograph (period). Since most instances of chronograph use can be handled with a 30-minute register, I call them half a chronograph. The added advantage of a 45-minute register is that it can actually time sporting events (read Soccer or Football to non-Canadians/Americans, so it's closer to 2/3rd's to 3/4er's of a chronograph. It's not about strict mathematical ratios.

Which reminds me -- What do you think of the Omega Chronostops, which have a one-minute recorder (similar to the usefulness of this Heuer sky-diving timer)?

A Chronostop is 1/10th of a chronograph, in my book. Not very useful in my book, hardly more than a watch.

As for the Sky-Diving timer, it's a timer... different rules apply.

On some chronos, I think the designer may need to sacrifice a recorder or two to achieve a clean look.

If that's the designer's goal, that may be true. Doesn't necessarily change my opinion though.

Then again, maybe it goes to the question of whether I am a lawyer, using my 12-hour recorder to record the billable hours in a day at the office, or a sky-diver (or ebay sniper), measuring some shorter event.

It would be my observation that anyone freefallin' from a height that would require the use of a 12-hour register would probably be doing so from orbit, close to the moon's orbit, actually. And any Lawyer who only needs a 30-minute register to record billable hours is probably either time-slicing to much, or is massively under utilized. But that's just my observation! =)

The ,,in all seriousness,, answer is, you pick your tool for your task at hand. Or you pick a tool that can handle all of them.

Jeff

-- Chuck