Horological Meandering

halgedahl
1333

• Show profile
• Show other posts

I think you're on the right track. A little perspective, here, for all...

As CNC machines have been mentioned in the OP, let’s all be aware of this:

“Our tour started in the basement, where components manufacturing takes place. Like any full-fledged watch manufacture, this involved multiple-axis CNC machines, spark erosion machines, metal lathes, and other machines.”

The Horophile, Dec. 19, 2013; A Visit to the F.P. Journe Manufacture  

***

“After machining, the calibre components are all hand- decorated like works of art.” 

“The initial bars of a range of raw materials are turned, drilled, and tapped by automatic lathes at over 6000 rpm.”  (Accompanied by photo of such a lathe with the automatic oiler liberally bathing the part in question to prevent over-heating.)

 Jaeger-LeCoultre website: The Art of Design,by Cristina

***

“Every component has to start somewhere. For things like springs and gears, CNC (computerized numerical control) machines etch the raw forms out of thin plates of metal, while larger pieces like the case are stamped out of larger blocks with industrial presses.”

From Bloomberg, Oct. 21, 2015; A Rare look inside Patek Phillipe’s Geneva Headquarters, by Stephen Pulvirent

***

Thus, it may be time to stop fretting about the degree to which computerized machinery (or materials, e.g. silicone!) is used in today’s top watch manufactories (if that’s the proper configuration of that term). Certainly the degree of consistency achieved, and the fantastic complexity of many of today’s finest timepieces would be patently impossible on any sort of large scale without updated technology. However, IF, like Roger Smith, a watch maker may content himself with the sale of only ten pieces per annum… Well, then; each will have its own minor differences, which will reflect the truly individual character of each piece. And for that slight bit of “roughness” one must be prepared to pay a pretty price, indeed. (Not an unfair one, I might add. IMHO, John Harrison earned every penny of the ~$20,000bps he wasn’t paid by the British government for his 19 years of perfecting that allowed his marine chronometer to guide Captain James Cook’s second and third world voyages. “Our never failing friend,” the celebrated explorer called it!)

At the other end of the scale, it seems to me the problem with Frederique Constant’s “philosophy” (crudely stated, “an $8K watch for $4K”) is that such a trumpeted boast invites negative blow-back from those of us who value quality, and therefore brings out the wrong sort of examination of its work. Which is, in fact, quite fine. Not on a par with Grand Seiko, no; not with Jaeger, nor with Vacheron. But FC produce quite nice time-keepers nonetheless—very well-executed, with an accurate and robust in-house movement developed long before everyone else at this price point decided it was necessary to formulate one of their own. Your FC Slimline PC’s leaf hands are particularly lovely; its dial has some welcome breathing room over the Montblanc (which it mimics; 42mm case vs 39mm), and the admirably accurate FC 755, while not the most beautiful caliber available for less than $10K is nonetheless “its own man.”  This is the point at which “Buy what you like, for heaven’s sake!” is really the only argument that makes any sense. 

Enjoy the hell out of owing a technical marvel!    FH

Site Info.