Jaeger-LeCoultre

Clavi
788

• Show profile
• Show other posts

Also, the III has a design flaw

I agree that the III is less appealing than the I & II  (despite being more expensive).

Also, I see a big functional flaw due to design.
Tourbillon watches are in theory meant to be accurate timepieces  (i.e. chronometric timepieces). However, the 'open dial' around the tourbillon has no form of indexes against which the watch can be timed / monitored  (the second hand / tourbillon becomes merely an indicator of the watch running, but has lost its role as a good indicator of the current second).
I know that this line is more a design exercise than anything else, and that there are other toubillon and non-tourbillon watches that do indicate the running second properly, but still I think that every watch  (appart from the jewellery lines) should be designed with functionnality / leggibility in mind first, and this is obviously not the case for the III  

I have also noted that JLC in many cases now designs second hands which don't reach the second indexes  (the NSA which is pictured in the thread is a good example of this), and this is also in my opinion a design flaw  (a flaw which has started with the the first master compressor memovox watch).

If we look at watches from the past (and the Geomatic / Geophysic and Polaris of the threads below are good examples), we see that these round watches used to have second hands reaching the seconds indexes.
I think that even if new dials layouts can be very creative, when functionality is lost to pure 'design' there is something a bit wrong.
OK, I might be the only one to notice this small things but this does bother me  (same as the lack of luminous indexes in the '65 reissue    )