Horological Meandering

It is hard to miss the recurring comments about the relative desirability and value of watches with in-house versus
 purchased movements, there are so many aspects regarding exclusivity, prestige, beauty and "fitness", as well as
 the public relations/advertising side, stock, modified, decorated, renamed, unacknowledged...


As others have mentioned, the whole subject is largely a recent concern, apparently the result of the rise of
 mechanical watches as almost exclusively luxury items, prominent display backs and high pricing.  I love a watch with
 a great in-house movement as much as the next fellow, but I must admit that there are times that a manufacturer
 can justify in very certain terms that they have simply purchased the best available ebauche for the job, and
 finished in their own unique and outstanding fashion.

A few examples:

Blancpain chronometer Cal. 64-1.  Uses one of the most common simple handwound movements ever, the Peseux
 (Now ETA) 7001, but it doesn't Look any other examples!




1960s Vacheron & Constantin Chronometre Royal Cal. P1008/BS.  Built from a JLC 12.5 ligne ebauche, still one of
 the most spectacularly-finished simple movements I have had the pleasure of examining!




Roger Dubuis Condottieri Cal. RD27.  Rebridged and refinished Cyma/Tavannes 15 ligne pocketwatch movement
 circa 1940s, a fabulous effort!




Audemars Piguet Cal. VZSS, circa 1948.  Started life as an example of one of the most popular movements of the
 era, Valjoux 13 ligne, used prominently as the base for chronographs and complicated calendars, AP has
 presented a breathtaking, simple version:

Thanks, Steve.  I really enjoyed this post and the movements.
m

Hi Steve,

The whole debate amuses me, and your examples are great.  I've always particularly enjoyed the fact that Seiko and Rolex are probably the most vertically integrated of manufacturers (I love a good-old Seiko 5 being far more "in-house" than the vast majority of so-called in-house movements), but the best counter-example is Peseux ONLY making movements and so the 260 was only ever not-in-house.

Just my sad sense of humour, I guess

nick

Although Rolex is now suitably in-house, I believe historically they concentrated on their pioneering automatic
 movements, sourcing outside (as was so common) chronograph ebauches for example.  Seiko as you point out
 has always been pretty much exclusively their own designer, even for their $50 throwaways, not mentioning Grand
 Seiko and Spring Drive...

I might note that as I understand the Peseux 7001 and Valjoux 13-ligne pretty much quality also as "ebauche-only",
 their suppliers not being historically in the watch business (not counting ETA/Swatch, their late purchaser).


The Peseux 260 is now famous in fabulous Voutilainen format, although the original "factory" finish is perfectly fine
 with me too!

in that what is made of the ebauches, that's make a movement special or not.

I would suggest it's about as the same as with cars.

The best model of a car is the last one in the serie,

before the new model arrives.

The "old" model has been around for several years and been refined over time.

Of course it's the same with the fine old calibers, like Lemania, ETA, Peseux 7001 etc.

I'm glad that the "inhouse" discussion is mainly silent now,

since all watchmakers have been  "forced" to make their own movements...

But you can't stop wonder why VC and PP used the same ebauches.

It couldn't have been because they were bad!

I'm pretty sure that we will see the day, when ebauches will come back again.

It must be better basic movements if you make 10.000 of them, than if only 100.

BTW, I have a raw new Peseux 7001, that I bought from Stowa some years ago.

Just don't know what to do with it

 

Doc

--if you don't know what to do with the movement.  How about giving me a crack at it.  I promise it will be interesting, at the very least
m

No message body

They are beautiful and well finished.  They out class many of the current in-house movements.

I find it interesting that 50-60 years ago, people were doing a much better job. Perhaps, everything was not so commercialised back then. May be, today, the brands emphasizes more on aesthetics rather than good finished movements as it is more time saving and more watches can be produced.  That's why Dufour and Kari are the "rare breed".

 

Regards

Ling 

 

to me the whole is great than the sum of the parts.  But not every one sees it like this.  There are  "manufactures" that don't make the case and/or dials of their watches. That will be the next complaint.  Excellent photos as usual.

and I agree completely that it is what the manufacturer does with the ebauche that counts. As I have a soft spot for high-grade vintage automatics, here's a superb example of that genre: a Vacheron & Constantin K1072/1, based on a "reserved" JLC ebauche which was also used by Audemars Piguet for their virtually identical K2071/72 series. Both the pictured V&C movement and it's AP counterpart are considered to be among the finest automatic movements ever produced in Switzerland.

Regards,

Tony C.

I look for interesting movements as much, and probably more than, the next guy.  My desire is NOT for an inhouse movement name, but for a pretty, well finished movement that I can enjoy watching during the massive number of boring meeting that I attend.  The problem is that with the recent assimilation of the great movement makers: VJ, Lemania, F. Piguet and so on by the cartel of ETA, there is little choice for an automatic movement.  GP has limited capacity and Zenith won't sell outside LVMH.  Although the growth of some of the new companies, Technotime and STT and Vaucher and such, has helped, that's only a small fraction of the market.  for the vast majority: a non-inhouse movement means an ETA.  And I'll say this with conviction, I HATE ETA movements.  You can finish them all you want, and they are reliable and accurate(probably better time keepers on average than most other companies), and can be used for interesting complications, but nothing can make them look good as a movement. 
-a

It's certainly not showy, but its layout is harmonious. In contrast, many "manufacture" movements are (to my view) not merely neutral but outright ugly. Taste and aesthetic talent are rare commodities; the vast majority of designers would be well advised to follow ETA's lead and pursue a subtle, functional aesthetic. Instead, in trying to contrive some way to stand out from the pack, many have designed movements that lack harmony, purity or unity of design.