Horological Meandering

Now, between the two watches, the AP is made more traditionally while the VC has an arguably more modern (or different) approach - not surprising as the movement was released only recently in 2018. The construction is made such that the tourbillon carriage is driven at its periphery, which means there is no large overlapping gear to drive the cage, which normally obstructs the view. This kind of construction also allows a thinner movement, such as used in the Breguet Ultra Thin Tourbillons, however the VC here is ironically thicker than its AP counterpart which has a more traditional design. This is perhaps due to the thick peripheral rotor on the caseback, which still has to overlap the tourbillon cage and doesn't clear it. 

In addition, attention was paid such that the motion works of the hands were designed with tinier gears, for the same reason (the rest of the motion works are hidden under the dial, away from the tourbillon cutout). 

Meanwhile, the AP uses a traditional tourbillon construction. A large gear on the movement side, drives the tourbillon cage via a central pinion. Since the gear drives the cage from the back, rather than the periphery like the VC, this is supposedly a thicker design. Nevertheless, AP had managed to keep the movement thin, also thanks to not having the issues of the automatic rotor. Let's also appreciate the nice, black polished bridges that holds the tourbillon cage from -both- the dialside and movement side, while VC only uses one black polished bridge with rounded arms on the dialside. As a consolation however, the VC at least gives a gold chaton for the jewel holding the tourbillon carriage.

A shame I felt is that the motion works have large gears, which overlaps the view of the tourbillon on the dialside. But given the number of large gears that overlap the tourbillon, the intention may perhaps be to evoke a sense of "mechanical density" and intricacy with all the gears crammed into the view.

Personally however, I prefer VC's execution here which reminds me more of a carrousel construction and has an airier look to it. The only downside is the lack of extra mile of finish compared to the AP, which uses a black polished bridge even on the movement side. Also, the idea of a magic lever winding while efficient, seems to lack the feel of an elaborate mechanical complexity for a luxury watch - something reminiscent to the IWC Pellaton winding for example, may feel more substantial.

Regards,

skyeriding

  login to reply