Moka-Tiger (Ron)
1640
On the front and in full view, in my opinion
I am saying this because the turning/winding tourbillon mechanism is a thing of such beauty and fascination to me.
I want to see it moving all day long. To me, hiding it in the back seems sad and serves no purpose to me, of having a tourbllion.
From what I know, a tourbillion nowadays serves very little, if any, horological value in terms of accuracy.
The time spent to make such a complicated (AND very expensive) mechanism (complication) that moves so beautifully should be appreciated in full view.
This question is coming at an opportune time. My next watch that I am planning to acquire is going to be a tourbillion. I can't wait to see it moving on my wrist.
Dream watch
Do you like tourbillons to be front or back? flying or bridged? I personally struggle with this complication: at first, I was very seduced by the flying tourbillon designed by Vincent Calabrese for Blancpain because it displays the movement of the escapem...
Remarkable
Do you know if the small seconds is mounted directly on the tourbillon? I have to assume so. That would make it such an efficient design. EDIT: I have been obsessed by Small Seconds movements, and found this Hodinkee Article a good place to start.
I think it is mounted on the tourbillon,
but I’m not certain. Thanks for the article: I will definitely read it !
I‘m with you about the tourbillon at the back
And this is certainly a top example. Some others are GP, Patek, Journe, JLC (Reverso) and probably some more that I now forget. But clearly, the LF one is top. Certainly in this configuration without the mentioning of the tourbillon on the dial. Thx for s...
Several of my buddies have a tourbillion
From Horage. I haven’t heard any complaints; but I can ask for their experiences if you are interested. Certainly, this Lf example is magnificent.
Thanks for your kind proposition!
I didn't even know this brand, so I had to check it out and, on paper, I'm not so fond of their design. So I think I'll just keep dreaming about this LF... But thanks again!
Not mine, unfortunately.
Hodinkee photos (I forgot to mention it as I usually do). Just a pure dream watch, but owning an LF classic micro rotor, I really can’t complain!
On the front and in full view, in my opinion
I am saying this because the turning/winding tourbillon mechanism is a thing of such beauty and fascination to me. I want to see it moving all day long. To me, hiding it in the back seems sad and serves no purpose to me, of having a tourbllion. From what ...
If on the front, I think I would personally choose a Calabrese/Blancpain.
I love seeing the escapement working in full view.
Which one(s) are you considering if I may ask?
I completely understand your point. If on the front, I think I would personally choose a Calabrese/Blancpain.
The Calabrese/Bancpain is a beauty. I wish I could.
I am working with my AD and he has been searching for one I like and can afford. He found very few in my price range. The most likely will be IWC Portugieser that is NOS from several years ago. I am still debating, but it's a "good deal", relatively speak...
It depends on the model.
If it serves as a small seconds hand, I like it in the front, it gives life to the watch and a nice calming rhythm to the wearer, if there’s a small seconds hand present, I like it hidden, however, if placed in the back, I interpret it as a fancy balance ...
I see your point. Thanks for sharing.
If on the front, I think I would personally choose a Calabrese/Blancpain: I love the design so much.
Front or back does not matter if the tourbillon movement
is refined and pretty to my eyes.
Both 😂. I see merits of having the
tourbillion on either front or back. I like the dead beat seconds feature of the optimum on the back; but it is definitely something to capture your attention when on front
I completely understand your point,
but I find some dials to look a little too much like a mechanical workshop and putting the complication on the back sometimes ensures a cleaner dial.