quattro
[Moderator]
19958
Thank you very much for your insight.
According to Patrick, in his 2020 post, the 1003 would be based on the 849 (which seems strange because, AFAIK, the 1003 was introduced way before (1955) the later 849 (1994)). But I didn't yet find a lineage leading to the FP21: will be digging some more!
Two magnificent ultra-thin calibers
Today, I'd like to draw attention to two beloved calibers and to some of the watches which have them: Vacheron Constantin caliber 1003 (introduced in 1955, developed by JLC and finished by VC) JaegerLeCoultre caliber 849 (introduced in 1994) Absolutely st...
Lovely this 1955
I have thought of this one many times, it just doesn't fit my dress style.
Yes, lovely piece.
I was tempted, but preferred to save the money for the LF micro-rotor.
It was a key criteria in my hunt for one!
(although some purists prefer closed case. In my case, I wouldn't leave only to watchmakers the priviledge to see that beautiful movement) Glad to see yours, I'm super pleased when I wear mine, I guess it is the same with you! Best, E.
Similarity not a coincidence
AFAIK all of these calibers share the same lineage: the F. Piguet cal. 21. If you use the search function you should find a few threads that discuss the development of these movements and the relationship with the FP21 in some detail. The IWC movement mig...
Thank you very much for your insight.
According to Patrick, in his 2020 post , the 1003 would be based on the 849 (which seems strange because, AFAIK, the 1003 was introduced way before (1955) the later 849 (1994)). But I didn't yet find a lineage leading to the FP21: will be digging some mor...
No
Sorry but if the JLC and VC calibres are twin brothers, the FP 21 has no link. For Instance if you look at the 21 the winding crown and balance wheel axle form a 90 degree angle with the center of the calibre. This is not the case with the 849 and 1003 wh...
Perhaps you are correct
However, there is lots of scholarship that has been written about this that contradicts your assertion, including not just in forums such as this one but also in sources well known for scholarship in these matters such as the NAWCC. While I don’t dismiss ...
I didn’t pay attention to the prices.
But now that I’ve checked, I understand what you mean: this platinum Jubilee is really very good value for money!
Indeed
JLC 849 is 1.85mm VC 1003 is 1.64mm They are twin brothers. The 849 is a redesigned version of bridges in a typical « Vallée de Joux» style of a much older calibre (calibre 839 from the seventies) to show through a sapphire case back. I just love it, alth...
I've got two of the JLCs.
The two calibers are almost identical! The VC caliber has some modifications so it would pass Geneva Seal requirements. Mainly no wire springs.
Yes, what makes a beautiful difference is the gold version of the 1003
on the Historiques 1955. Such a pleasure to look at!
great post, love the detail
gave me two V-C references I didn't know about yet. I think the JLC Jubilee might be ref. Q1296520, if that helps.
Lovely machine!
I wished it looked good on my wrist. My wrist isn't big enough for this super cool piece!
My MUT 38 and platinum Jubilee JLC are honored!
I unfortunately don't have the Vacheron Constantin version. Which I do like very much - just never got one. Have held many of them though - they are delightful. I really like the JLC MUT 38 because the size is nice (even though it's a bit big for the smal...
It’s great to read your feedback on both
MUT 38 and Platinum Jubilee. I’ve been tempted at some point by the VC but two things stopped me: the very small crown which doesn’t make winding a real pleasure and the strange indices, which are neither applied, nor painted (I think they are parts of th...
Ahh. Good rationale!
The dial on the JLC MUT 38 looks applied, but I have to see the backside to be sure! The Bulgari Octo Finissimo are sometimes applied, but they're not riveted on the dial plate with little feet. They're stuck on and then cauterized - kind of like how a de...
I don't know the technique used,
but I think I would have preferred applied indices, even if that meant an increase of 1 or 1,5 mm in thickness. Best, Emmanuel
I am glad Patrick brought this lovely post again!
I love the first "photo" showing the two movements side by side. I just realised that the JLC movement seems to have the bridges dowelled onto the main plates (you can see the empty holes on the at photo, and them being filled by dowels on my photo above)...
I think you’re absolutely right:
on the JLC the bridges are positioned on locating pegs or dowels. Probably more stable. But does it really make such a difference on a small movement like this? Are screws not enough ? Unfortunately I don’t know: would have to ask a watchmaker. Best, Emma...
Mechanically...
... A dowel is to locate two parts and a screw is to maintain them together. By definition, a screw cannot locate accurately as it had to slide through the first part to then screw itself onto the other one. But I guess the overall accuracy is the result ...
Yes, it'd be very interesting to know what a watchmaker has to say!
Have a nice weekend. Best, Emmanuel