So, not to mention any names or share any links, but an online chess supplier has a sale going on. For a limited time, there are offers on higher-end chess clocks we might not see for awhile. I don’t ‘need’ a new clock, but I dearly miss my old Chronos and have heard great things about the DGT 3000.
For those in the know, which would you choose: A full-length Chronos II for $91.99 or a DGT 3000 for $79.99?
Oh, the temptation.
I own both and I would say the Chronos II would be better.
It has a less cluttered and better contrasted display. And the Chronos is a lot more solid with better action feeling buttons.
I just received my beta test V-Tek 300 which is really an improved version of the Chronos.
There still is a big place for the Chronos for my play.
I have to sell something and unless I get hit by lightning I will keep the Chronos and sell off the DGT.
What’s the difference between the original Chronos (which I have), and version II?
THE original Chronos ???
There must have been at least six versions of the Chronos, dating back at least to the early 1990s. Mine is from about 1994, and has a switch on the bottom. Everybody who tries to turn it off ends up wondering why it stays on after they press the middle button once and a side button five times.
If the current model is the Chronos II, then those others must have been I-a, I-b, I-c, I-d, I-e, etc.
Bill Smythe
As I understand it, the full-length version of the Chronos—which for years was the only version—is now known as Chronos II. The shorter version that came along some years ago is known as Chronos GX.
Before the shorter version hit the market, as far as I know there was only “Chronos.” Everyone knew what you meant.
There were small differences between the oldest models and the newer ones, such as the switch on the bottom that Bill S. mentions, and slight tweaks to the modes. My 1998-era Chronos did not have a switch, but also did not have the modes newer clocks do, that support increment with clock-press counters.
I prefer the full-length Chronos with the buttons, not sensors. The shorter clock and the sensors are OK—there is no such thing as a bad Chronos—but if I am paying close to full price for a new one it’s gonna be full-length with buttons.
Tradition plus function.
I do not know exactly when they named it “II”.
The Chronos I use for blitz and skittles is one with the original paint. I stripped and/or sanded off the paint and it is the aluminum only and brushed. I remember sanding it when new over the Labor Day weekend in 2002, making that clock 13 years old. It still works perfectly and looks as good as new.
Later they started coming out with the different colors, anodized, and also with the touch sensors as an option. I think this is when it got the “II” designation.
And Eric, I find the longer clock has the buttons closer to the players making the reach a bit shorter and slightly easier during a blitz game. I know that sounds a little crazy but when playing it is somewhat noticeable.
Some players, like one I encountered in Washington Square Park, use the touch model to gain an advantage. Many blitz player like to capture a piece and hit the button whilst holding it. That won’t work. The touch pad need a human touch. A few seconds gained equals an advantage…
That said, I have the narrow version GS in touch sensor and I like it very much for blitz, quick and longer tournament games. Especially since learning to program the darned thang. 
I guess my version is I-? 
I’m not fully convinced they continued to use the II moniker. A quick google shows that the Chronos II is out of stock and what is available is $299, but you can get a “regular” Chronos for about $120 unless someplace has it on sale. Maybe the manufacturer decided the II was too confusing, making people think it was a major upgrade to it’s flagship model.
You can get a long-model Chronos with buttons that is advertised as “Chronos II” on sale for less than $100 for a few more days. Given the draconian anti-advertising regs here I cannot say much more than that, except that the vendor is not USCF Sales.
I do not know how Chronos clocks were classified for advertising purposes over the years. There was no point until the short version appeared, maybe 6-7 (?) years ago. To me a “Chronos” always meant, and still means, the original form-factor long version that looks like a shop project, as Al Lawrence once said.
If there is any ‘major’ difference between a “classic” Chronos and a Chronos II, I am not aware of it, and would be surprised to find it’s true. If I decide to spend the cash for one this weekend I will report back once I receive it.
Despite all this praise of the Chronos over the DGT, one might want to keep in mind that the DGT may be more likely than the Chronos to meet FIDE standards.
For example, in increment mode does the new Chronos add before, or add after? The former is the FIDE standard.
What happens if there are two time controls, initial and final, and the move counter is set to display and to initiate the final control? In the event of an apparent time forfeiture at the end of the initial control, the clock should keep running BUT should still display a flag (or something similar) on one side only for five minutes or so.
Is the Chronos in compliance here?
Bill Smythe
I bought the DGT 3000 to hook up to my DGT e-board. I had a Chronos but after having sent it back for repairs 4 times, they had to refund my money because it was unfixable. What a frustrating time that was.
The 3000 is quite nice and I like the flexibility of being able to set whatever time control comes along. I’m surprised however that the rocker arm is noisier than my DGT NA and as loud or louder than my Excalibur which is supposed to be the noisiest. Because of the loud rocker arm, I probably won’t be using the 3000 OTB (if I ever get to play OTB again but that’s another story). I’d probably use the DGT NA.
I also have a ZMF with touch sensitive controls, but the display is weird counting down delays, one has to use a move counter in multi segment time controls and worst of all, it is about 12 seconds fast every hour. Not much but it’s enough to make me feel uneasy using the ZMF.
If the new Chronos clocks are now reliable, that’s probably the way to go but I just can’t trust them. 
The new V-Tek 300 is just out in beta testing and I think should be available at your friendly neighborhood Chess retailer in October or so. I am a tester and have had mine for about a week.
The aluminum body, display, and design is identical to the Chronos, and I do mean identical. If you didn’t know better you would swear this was a Chronos made clock.
The body is a bit bigger, but not much.
The display has a line added to it making it a bit bigger than the Chronos. However the color and contrast of the displays are the same, making me believe they are made by the same manufacturer.
The programming is vastly improved and easier than that of the Chronos. Everything is in Chess terms and easy to set. I only looked at the manual to learn how to save and delete favorites. Everything else I could set with the information on the clock display during the setting process.
In my opinion, this new clock is an updated and improved version of the Chronos.
I am also using my new V-Tek 3000 and far like it… It does have a bigger base than the Chronos, which is not necessarily a benefit. More testing this weekend.
I agree, the bigger footprint and the slightly taller height of this new clock is not necessarily a good thing. I plan on using it as my main, slow tournament clock when there is a lot of space on the table for the board, clock and other things.
With less space I will use my Chronos GX that I just bought about a week ago. I could have kept my DGT 3000 but I do not like the lower contrast of its display compared to the Chronos and now this new clock, so I sold it and some others to buy the GX.
The size of this new clock is reminiscent of that Saitek digital from the late 1990’s or so. Remember it was kind of a metallic gray color with the small, round silver buttons. We actually called that clock a door stop.
In increment mode, does the V-Tek add before, or add after?
Bill Smythe
It will do either.
They have a USCF Play mode that puts it after and has the move counter in effect.
There is a FIDE Play mode that puts it before and does not have the move counter.
I don’t like this idea of combining one real or imagined FIDE-vs-USCF feature pair with another. What if someone wanted to set feature A the FIDE way, and feature B the USCF way?
DGT NA tried to do something similar, by implementing halt-at-end in increment mode but not in delay mode. Apparently the thought was that FIDE uses increment and halt-at-end, while USCF uses delay and no halt-at-end.
This didn’t work out well, because increment is now used frequently in USCF events as well.
Now, instead of increment-vs-delay combined with halt-at-end-or not, we have add-before-vs-add-after combined with move-counter-or-not.
In the case of add before vs add after, all clocks (in all modes) should add before, because that is the correct way.
In the case of move counter or no, that argument exists internally within both FIDE and USCF. The only really bad thing is when the clock halts at end after the primary control of a two-control event. In that case it should instead display a flag (whether triggered by the move count or by the expiration of the first control) on one side only but it should keep running.
I really hope FIDE and USCF rules can be made more compatible in this area. In most cases, USCF needs to be more willing to change than FIDE does.
Bill Smythe
Take it easy, Bill.
The clock also has a Custom Play Mode where you can set the clock and settings, any way your heart desires.
Also, you can set the increment individually.
I see the USCF Mode as making it easy. All you have to do is choose that Play Mode and you are fine for a USCF tournament. By the way, in that Play Mode you can set either delay or increment. And the increment time is not added to the beginning time.
It is in the FIDE Mode (and you can choose either delay or increment) that the increment time is added to the beginning time.
From my understanding with Chronos, The “Chronos I” is the button version and the “Chronos II” is the touch version.
To answer the question that started the forum, I would go with the DGT 3000. DGT uses better displays and is better constructed. Sound weird to say, but I would trust the clock with the plastic case compared to the Chronos with the metal case. The components and tech in the Chronos is 15 years old and has barely changed.
Another benefit to the DGT is customer service. This is not a slight on the re-sellers of the Chronos. If for some reason the clock you buy has problem and have to send it back to Chronos the can be up to a 6 month waiting period. You have to send the product back to the address on the manual but there is no way to contact the manufacturer by email or phone.
DGT is totally different. If for some reason there is a problem with the product you buy it is easy to contact DGT North America. Emails and Phone calls are quickly handled.
Disclaimer: I do not sell either of the clocks at American Chess Equipment.