Chopard - L.U.C Calibre 1.010 - is it a "tractor" movement

L.U.C Calibre 1.010 - is it a "tractor" movement

Jun 30, 2011,03:57 AM

Hello, fellow Purists,

For a while now, the 1937 has arrested my attention and lust for a proper high-end piece. With the price tag and possible decision to spend that on a single watch, come a lot of thoughts and also need to dig deep and justify it (in front of myself, no other).

In the past months, I have been reading a lot here on Purists and came across an article on JLC, where they explained that complicated movements may be hard to design, but designing and producing simple and robust, lasting movements are actually a *far* bigger challenge. They spoke about developing "tractor" movements - simple, easy to maintain, steady performers. Hence the tag in the title of the thread...

This is my question - considering the 1.010 was developed to be a cailber for the Geneva Watchmaking School, is it safe to say that - despite being cleaner and (somewhat) simpler than other calibers, like the 1.96 for example, the 1.010 is actually THE tough workhorse in the Chopard engine stable?

I am walking on egg shells here, trying to be careful with my words qualifying movements as "clean", "simple(r)" - bear with me and chalk this on my first steps more than anything else

Thank you for your comments and feedback!

Comments: view entire thread

Maybe mixing up the 2 movements

By: MTF : July 1st, 2011-07:40

tom_hanx, The movement for the Geneva watchmaking school (Ecole Horologie Geneve) is the calibre L.U.C. EHG. it is used also in the tribute pocketwatch issued in 2010. The L.U.C. 1.010 is a central rotor automatic movement made by the Fleurier manufacture...

I obviously am, mixing it up... Hard task at hand is to compare it to a VC 1226

By: tom_hanx : July 2nd, 2011-09:17

I am facing a task too big for my current level of movement understanding - trying to figure out which of the two: - Chopard 1.010 or - VC 1226 is the more robust and reliable movement. See, in my head I am "clashing" two watches, two of my current fav wa...

Now I understand your question

By: MTF : July 2nd, 2011-11:17

tom_hanx, The LUC 1.010 movement is designed to be more robust and with stronger torque than other LUC self-winding (automatic) movements. I can only speculate at the moment why Chopard chose to make another automatic movement in the LUC range...... The o...

Got the answer I needed. Thanks, MFT

By: tom_hanx : July 2nd, 2011-14:20

I think this was indeed designed as "workhorse" or solid base that can be used in many ways: alone, finished by machine; alone finished by hand, base + module machine/hand finished, etc, etc. It is more of a "platform" movement, like a car chassis - one s...