is that an Appeal to Authority I hear?

Oct 19, 2006,04:16 AM
 

Hi Jeff,

First off, I'm not sure we were discussing "whether continuous running minute counters on chronographs represent a simplified solution when compared to jumping minute counters".

Wait, let me step back. First off, I'm not sure why you insist on incorrectly identifying semi-instantaneous minutes counters as jumping minutes counters. There are already perfectly appropriate and proper names for both semi-instantaneous and jumping minutes counters and your insistence on confusing the point by misusing the terms is completely baffling.

So, I'm not sure we were discussing "whether continuous running minute counters on chronographs represent a simplified solution when compared to [semi-instantaneous] minute counters". Actually, what I was discussing was the assertion that a continuous minutes counter was "cheaper". To tell the truth, I don't even object to the idea so much as how it was phrased and the extent to which it misleads more than informs. Would it be equally fair to condemn the Blancpain in comparison to a Breguet Type XX because it a vertical clutch design is cheaper than a traditional horizontal clutch?

A vertical clutch is undeniably a simpler way to manufacture a chronograph (why do you think Seiko chose a vertical clutch design in 1969 (and met with such great success with the design I might add!)?), but it's also more functional and reliable in a host of other ways, making the statement that it's "cheaper" a little absurd even. This is basically what I was objecting to in the first place.

For some reason I find it a little difficult to engage in a debate with the second-hand comments of anonymous watch gurus. It's even more difficult when their comments are paraphrased out of context, but when they seem seem to make sweeping generalizations about the esteem in which a design detail is held, well, I'm just about stumped. Not completely however, so lets take a look at the comments as relayed.

"Held in lower esteem." Whatever. Let's move on.

"They are vastly easier to build, vastly easier to design." Hmm, I don't generally fault designs that are easy to build or design on that basis alone, and I'm guessing this anonymous "Dean" doesn't/didn't either. We can only assume that he/she was exhibiting the general tendency to believe that more expensive and classical solutions are more appropriate in very expensive watches. It's a position that does have some merit IMHO although it is pretty hard to defend in the specifics and, if taken as a guiding principle in design, results in some very bizarre evolutions and elaborations as far as engineering is concerned.

"Moreover they depart from classic design." Whatever. We are talking about vertical clutch chronographs, so let's not pretend that we're discussing classical watchmaking exactly or that this is a particularly relevant point in context.

I don't suppose you bothered to ask him/her about his/her feelings about the specific movements in question did you? It would be interesting to hear how he/she might've felt about the implication that the Patek Philippe movement is inferior to the Blancpain.

So let's grant that a continuous minutes counter may be less expensive to build than a semi-instantaneous minutes counter (bearing in mind that I believe that this statement is true in some specific instances but not instructive in the least as a generalization). It is also arugably more reliable (simpler designs generally are, you know, as a generalization), less parasitic to the mechanism where running precision/consistency is concerned and much better suited to being run continuously. Patek has made it clear that they intend for many of the wearers to run the chronograph continuously to use the sweep second hand for running seconds, so this makes the continuous minutes counter make a lot more sense for this reason alone.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not a big fan of continuous minutes counters, especially when they are housed in a sub-dial. I find them much more difficult to read (excepet when they are centrally located with a much larger minutes track) personally. That said, I applaud the recent trend in movement design towards increased reliability and robustness above all and I think that was the guiding principle behind the continuous minutes counter in the Cal. 28-520. At least I absolutely refuse to allow that saving a few pennies was Patek's major motivator in that design decision in particular.

All by way of saying, I stand by my guns as well.

_john





  login to reply

Comments: view entire thread

 

Continuous vs. Running Minute Counter Chronos

 
 By: jkingston : October 18th, 2006-03:15
Well John and I got into it a few days ago about whether continuous running minute counters on chronographs represent a simplified solution when compared to jumping minute counters (and here I am using the term to mean chrono minute counters that move as ... 

is that an Appeal to Authority I hear?

 
 By: ei8htohms : October 19th, 2006-04:16
Hi Jeff, First off, I'm not sure we were discussing "whether continuous running minute counters on chronographs represent a simplified solution when compared to jumping minute counters". Wait, let me step back. First off, I'm not sure why you insist on in... 

Reasons For The Vertical Clutch

 
 By: jkingston : October 19th, 2006-08:20
There are a number of reasons to choose a vertical clutch design. First I am not going to dissect the original Seiko design. I am working on that task separately. However, there are several performance reasons to go with the vertical clutch design. 1. The... 

Precisely!

 
 By: J.Chong : October 20th, 2006-04:04
A vertical clutch has functional/performance merit. The fact that it is "a simpler way to manufacture a chronograph" (as John mentioned above) is an additional bonus. The key here is that something that is simpler to manufacture isn't always worse (as ill... 

John, I agree with you. To me, simpler is better...

 
 By: Ling Hua Keong : October 20th, 2006-07:19
Dr. Ludwig just needs 9 parts to achieve annual calendar function. I think it is a major breakthrough. It is much much cheaper and easier to build. However, it is certainly not inferior to other annual calendar watches which have higher standard of finish... 

The THEORY behind your comments are well noted (and known) with thanks. But...

 
 By: ThomasM : October 20th, 2006-09:09
Hi, Jeff, I've long been fascinated (and obssessed by) the often wide chasm between theory and practice; between how things are supposed to work and how they actually work. I'll let Suitbert, John, and others with bench experience and watchmaking schoolin... 

a few comments

 
 By: ei8htohms : October 20th, 2006-04:16
Hi Thomas, You raise some interesting questions and certainly a lot of food for thought. I'll take a stab at one or two at least. 1.) Regarding the pointy tooth problem in traditional chronographs, I personally don't have the experience to know how much o... 

Some examples.....

 
 By: SuitbertW : October 20th, 2006-06:06
just to illustrate some more "traditional" continuously running minute counter designs. More "classic" is hardly possible, I think - Gourdain stop watch/clock from the middle of 17 hundreds, 60 sec and 10 minute counter: Vacheron & Constantin grand comp, ...  

A question, if I may...

 
 By: nickd : October 21st, 2006-11:11
Hi Suitbert, I shall shamelessly take advantage of you while you're in one of your wonderful mega-informative moods How many problems with a classic columnwheel chronograph could be solved by overcoming some of the underlying issues of the "control mecham... 

A big thank you to all participants of this thread ...

 
 By: Gazman : October 23rd, 2006-04:16
I have learnt leaps and bounds in this one thread than in any other horological fora on the Internet. Thank you all for your stimulating and thought provoking points and counter points. ThomasM's discussion on theory vs. reality was particularly interesti...