bedbug
1
I didn't know this was a problem
Hmm, I think it's fine to use base movements or trains/escapements etc. from existing calibers, sure. Where I get riled is when makers are purposely vague or outright untruthful about the 'in-house-ness' of their movements.
I wouldn't want to see any less progress in the creation of new calibers, certainly not. What if Vyskocil or Strehler said, 'aw, why bother? I can just slap a 7001 train in here!'? That would be a real loss. If someone wants to use base movements or parts, great, just be clear about it (most are), but it would be sad for the watchmaking world to lose potential new and beautiful calibers because the buying public is happy with a 'pretty face' and a lower price.
Not that this is too huge of a problem though... creating a caliber from scratch is daunting enough that it's not going to become widespread anytime soon if ever. And having a bit of an insider's knowledge of what goes in to making a new caliber, I don't see any reason why if executed with good sense and practice the price of a time-only manual wind watch should exceed that of say a Voutilainen Observatoire. Which calls into question the price of that watch- which is not my intention!
More concerning for me would be a small independent brand that invests lots of money in their image. Walk into the workshops of Vianney, Dufour, Strehler, Gautier and others and it's clear that no money is wasted on making potential clients feel pampered
. Which makes them all the more genuine and appealing.
Merci, Philippe
By: nickd : November 2nd, 2010-07:09
Thanks for a very good reply. I'd agree 100% with what you say. When I had the pleasure of meeting you and Vianneny (and a couple of watches!) in Paris a few years ago the VERY last thing on my mind was "Is it a manufacture movement?". In the presence of ...
Don, just a remark.
By: foversta : November 1st, 2010-14:51
The 20x collection from Urwerk doesn't use the 7001. The 201 has a Lajoux-Perret base while the 202 and 203 use a GP automatic caliber. Your question is very interesting. The 7001 is a very reliable movement and powerful enough to animate the complication...
Fantastic question Don!
By: sidneyc : November 1st, 2010-16:03
.. and Damien hit it on the nail! For the question of whether a watch without a full in-house movement have it's value reduced, we only have to look at the following watches for an obvious answer, to name a few: Patek 5070/5970 Speake Marin Piccadilly, an...
Improvements?
By: nickd : November 2nd, 2010-07:23
Hi Don, Good questions. Are manufacture movements an improvement? Here's another way of thinking about it. Hope-Jones makes an interesting remark that the jumps in precision timekeeping and longterm stability from the classic Graham escapement to the Sync...
Lack of ebauche variety
By: tee530 : November 2nd, 2010-09:22
Very good discussion, and as my perspective is limited, I'll only offer a thought I don't think was covered above. As is well-documented, in the past many manufacturers used ebauches from outside suppliers and then modified or finished them to unique stan...
Great Topic
By: Meehna : November 2nd, 2010-10:36
I agree that the fervor for in-house movements has reached almost absurd proportions. Just because a movement is constructed in-house doesn't make it better or more reliable. I think everyone who commented raised valid points about the constant pressure t...
Another angle is...
By: DonCorson : November 2nd, 2010-12:11
the strange fact that the biggest alternative movement makers Sellita and Soprod, who in the meantime are producing in some quantities, are for the most part simply copying ETA movements (as are the Chinese too). More of the same? It is interresting to he...