Glashütte Original

Hi all,

I am considering my next watch and I am thinking seriously about a GO, specifically a perpetual calendar (either Senator or Karree).  So, I am seeking some advice and answers if anyone can help.  I have been a devoted JLC fan for a while, so my first question is how GO compares to JLC as a "true manufacture".  Does GO manufacture thier watches, movements and all,  in the same sense that JLC does, from the ground up? 

I am also pondering buying a pre-owned GO.  But I have never purchased anything but new before, so I have no idea how to go about this and what the potential disadvantages are other than getting a fake or bad watch.  If you buy a pre-owned, can you still reigeter the watch with a manufacturer such as GO? Is this important?  Will the manuafacturer still service and repair a watch that was bought on the secondary market?.  Where are the best places (generally, not looking for specific vendors here) to look for pre-owned?  Any adivce on this would be helpful.

Finally, how does the GO perpetual compare to other brands?  Esthtically the GO appeals to me more so than almost any other one I have seen  -- it is beautiful, reads really well and is uncluttered.  GO claims that it is "perpetual" (note their use of quotation marks) until 2100.  Is that pretty standard for perpetuals? 

Again, any thoughts or advice woud be welcome. 

Thanks,

respo

the Kingdom of GO. JLC and GO have so many similarities. Both of them are true watch manufacturers in the sense of designing and manufacturing their movements in house; both of them have earned highest reputation for their innovative complications; both of them treat watch making as art crafting and have even made efforts to combine the beauty of movement craftmanship with enemal dials of JLC and porcelain dials of GO. The major differences between these two brands, from my point of view, are: 1. JLC has a longer history of modern watch making so has much more models/product lines than GO; 2. JLC seems to be stronger in movement design; and 3. GO is more keen in the finish of their movements.

I would suggets you to look for a Senator Perpetual equipped with a caliber 39 rather than a caliber 100. GO' s Senator Perpetual is one of the best perpetual watches so far with its clean/balanced layout and easy-to-read functions. I personally dont prefer Karree series as I always want to see a second hand moving on the watch. Caliber 39 is a proven high quality and solid base movement and was used for "old" models of Senator Perpetual whose price is far less than those "new" models equipped with Caliber 100. Caliber 100 is a great movement but has become more pricy than caliber 39. So if you can find a new or used cal 39 Senator Perpetual, it should be a best buy.

You can go to nearby GO authorized dealers to check if they stil have stock, or you can buy from internet or second-hand watch shops. In the case of buying an used GO watch, GO will provide you with free service if the watch is still under guarantee (two years from purchase new from AD). Otherwise, GO will still provide service but with a charge.

Fake or bad GO watches? Well, there are plenty fake GO watches in the market, but none of them look similar to the real GO watches not even need to check the movement or other details. So I am not so worried about buying a fake GO. But you need to pay attention to "bad" watches as perpetual movement is a very complicated one so if the pre-owners failed to use/adjust the watch properly, the watch may very likely have either functional problem or accuracy problem. Solutions? You better buy the watch from a reputable dealer or a serious watch collector.

Hope the above help.

 

Zhiming

 

 

. . . ;-) . . . it's greatly appreciated. I will only add that one should probe the history of a second hand model because many perpetuals are kept on winders; indeed, I kept mine on winders until very recently, and only took them off to avoid the unnecessary wear and tear that comes along with the convenience of having them continuously set. My first Karree perpetual was on a winder for over three years; it worked perfectly until just a few days before it seized up and had to be sent back to Glashütte for an overhaul (see glashutte.watchprosite.com for a report on the service) . . . had I put it up for sale a few weeks before it seized, I would have been in the unenviable position of appearing to sell a damaged watch, but there was no indication whatsoever that there was a looming problem. Just remember, operating a complicated watch continuously for long periods of time increases the likelihood of problems occurring sooner rather than later . . . cordially, Art

Thank you for the thoughtful comments.  I am glad you pointed out the different calibers 39 v. 100.  I'll have to take a look at both as I Iike the decoration on the dial of the cal 100 Senators.  But, of course, I have yet to see any GO in the metal.  There is no AD very close to me, so I will need to plan a trip to see one for real. 

I still am wondering whether perpetual until 2100 is the standard.  Is it? 

Also, you raised th issue of keeping a perpetual on a winder.  I intend to wear this watch a lot, but not ALL the time, and it would be convenient to keep it on a winder when I am not wearing it to avoid re-setting.  I don't keep anything else on a winder, as it is not much trouble at all to set a simple date funtion or the time.  But the comment about the watch seizing up after too much time on a winder has me a little worried. I want to have sorted this out BEFORE actually investing in a perpetual. 

Thanks again.

respo

. . . and a used one. A second hand perpetual that's been operating continuously for years is much closer to failing than a brand new one. I'm still using a winder when I intend to wear my perpetual over the span of several days with other watches in between, but I've stopped using winders to keep all four continuously wound for no purpose other than to have them ready at a moments notice. The only way to know for certain if a perpetual has been overworked is to buy a new one, of course; the downside is that if your preference is for the previous generation, then you're limited to the stock still on hand. The current Karree perpetuals still utilize the cal 39, btw, in case the 3/4 plate architecture is appealing in it's own right.

Setting a G O perpetual calendar isn't that difficult, and once you've got the pattern memorized, it becomes a pleasurable ritual. Good luck, respo, and hopefully you'll find your perpetual before February 27th so you can enjoy the festivities of the leap year ;-) . . . cordially, Art

I did notice that the current Karree production still uses the cal. 39, but I am not wed to that caliber.  I am still ignorant enough not yet to know what "3/4 plate architecture means"...sorry!  Ignorance is bliss -- well, not really, so I am trying to learn as much as I can.

I am glad to hear that it is not difficult to set the G O perpetuals...I think I woud enjoy the "ritual", so that is definitely something new for me to consider.  The clock is ticking, but I doubt that I am going to get one before February 27, so I will just have to look forward to the next leap year to enjoy the festivities with a perpetual on my wrist.  I can be patient. Best, respo

I have a few JLC models including a Master Perpetual. I also have a Senator Karree Perpetual - the old style with nuclear bunker styling and the Cal. 39 movement.

Both are great watches, keep good time, have nicely finished movements, but are completely different in character. JLC is more like a modern Audi, GO more like a classic Mercedes.

My only two negatives are the thickness of the GO, and on the Karree the lack of a seconds hand.

The round case Senator Perpetual is a great watch and every now and again I get a hankering to own one as well.

It should be great if you can post them.
Thanks in advance!
Best.
Nicolas

If not I know who might have and can get him to post here.

As a JLC fan ( wowow, that's a scoop! LOL), and a beginner in GO watches, I'm very interested in seeing these side by side...

Best.

Nicolas

PS: May I ask you...Why " Le Chef " ???

I am not sure what you mean by the "nuclear bunker style", but I do like the Audi/Mercedes analogy.  With Aston Martins out of my league, I have also likened the JLCs to Audis. 

I did note that the Senator is slimmer than the thicker Karree, so I was kind of leaning in the direction of the Senator.   The JLC Master Perpetual dial seems a little busy to me (although I like the full year indication) -- I guess I should take a look at that one in the metal as well.  Still think I am leaning towards German-made this time.  Thanks for the benefit of your direct expereince with both of these watches.

respo

. . . combine an art deco dial with a taut, angular case design . . .

. . . . that I suppose could fairly be described as being aesthetically descended from the era of 'nuclear bunkers' . . . ;-) . . . cordially, Art PS - click on the photos for the full-sized image

The original Karree was very "blocky", geometric, and substantial. It looked like it had been bolted together from steel bars. I like it a lot, despite that description and prefer it to the new Karree shape which is a bit too smooth and a bit like the PP 5135. Not a bad thing, but not as distinctive as the original.

The Master Perpetual is a fine watch, but with each year of aging eyesight it gets harder to read. The GO  Perpetuals are much easier by comparison.

If you could find one  (and I would love to find one as well) is the  Senator Perpetual Navigator that was a LE produced by an AD in LA. A great watch.

Let me indicate that I have the older JLC Master Control Perpetual as well as a Cal. 39 and Cal. 100 GO.  I like each but they have differing characteristics:

 

I believe the defining issues for me are the size (thickness/thinness) and ease of reading.  The prize goes to the JLC for its thinness and to the GO for ease of reading.   The GO large date is especilly appealing and legible.  As usual, choices must be made:  There is no one watch which combines the qualities each of us seeks.  I have often stated that if JLC made a perpetual in this case thickness with the dial arranged as in the GO, I would purchase it immediately.  Conversely, should GO reduce the case thickness to the JLC size, I would sign up right now. 

Another feature is ease of setting.  Art has mentioned the debate about winder usage for perpetuals (and other watches).  The JLC has a single pusher which sets all dial indicators (date as well as moonphase).  Setting this JLC becomes extraordinarily simple without the need to consult a moonphase chart (in fact, I use the JLC to set other watches with moonphases).  The GO has the ability to set all functions independently but once set a single pusher sets all date functions.  One has to set the moonphase independently.

The JLC does have the full year indicator whereas the GOs have only the four year cycle indicator (by color).  Many seem to prefer the actual year indicator although, in use, there is no particular advantage to a data window which changes but once annually.   Having said that, my preference is for the year window as well. 

Regarding the GO calibers.  I do not find any difference between the two in day-to-day usage.  Both keep quite excellent time.  There is some difference in layout and appeal viewed through the back.  The Cal. 100 has a new feature which allows for synchronization of the seconds without the need to stop the watch mechanism to do so (a newly developed engineering feat with some putative heuristic as well as utilitarian appeal).   Theoretically, this improves the timekeeping but it does make synchronizing the setting with an atomic clock or other signal quite simple once one learns the characteristics of the individual piece (delay from the pusher, etc.).    Setting cost aside, if one wants the latest movement, go for the 100.  The 39 is tried and true but without the newest technological features. 

The two GOs in the above photos, of course, are the Navigator Perpetual Cal. 39 in Rose Gold which is available only on the secondary market (and infrequently) and the Senator Perpetual Cal. 100 in Pt and a Limited Edition (secondary market as well).  The dial layouts differ in the two as do the dials between any Cal. 39 and Cal. 100 pieces.  I think individual preference is determining for the dials and each has its supporters. 

This became somewhat longer than I intended.  But I hope you find it useful as you contemplate purchase of a new Perpetual Calendar timepiece.  Perpetuals have a fascination for many of us and I think whichever you choose will do the same for you.

tempusfugit 

This message has been edited by tempusfugit on 2008-02-09 08:55:37

With such a pseudo, it's quite normal that you love PC! LMAO.
Yes, These JLC/GO have truely 2 different characters, two different ways to give an expression to a same complication.
That's the interest of your post, and I thank you a lot ofr that!
Best, my friend.
Nicolas.
PS: I'm still not very familiar with technical matters, so I sent your post on the JLC forum, and put a link on the GO Forum, instead of doing the contrary.
Hope theres' not a problem for you.

. . . the comparison between the two manufacturers is so much easier to make with photos. Glashütte Original's approach of using apertures instead of analog pointers lends to a simpler expression of the calendar . . . the absence of every day, date, and month on the dial is, to my way of thinking, a liberating exercise aesthetically. G O perpetual calendars - and especially the original Karrees that didn't suffer the intrusion of a seconds hand* - have more of a 'wrist calendar' presence than any other, in my humble opinion . . . most cordially, Art

*My apologies, Zhiming - what causes you consternation is a source of pleasure for me!

...when I came upon the G.O. perpetuals.  I had kind of given up on perpetuals for two reasons:  the typical cost  for watches with this complication and the also typically IMHO busy dials.  I find the analog pointers, especialy when there are several on one dial, to be just a little too much work to read.  So, I had decided to look at annual calendars as an alternative.  The idea of adjusting the date just once a year appealed to me.  But I found very few annuals out there particularly among the manufacurers I really like (i.e., I am pretty sure that JLC does not make one, for instance, but I would be delighted to find that they do).  Then I came across the G.O. and began learning more about the manufacture, which impressed me.  The design of the G.O. perpetual appealed to me instantly -- the fact that it is a perpetual rather than an annual calendar was icing on the cake.  I like the design better than almost any perpetual OR annual I have seen so far. 

I am delighted by tempusfugit's comparison of the JLC and G.O. perpetuals and of the two G.O. calibers, and the information about the reset function on the cal. 100. Very instructive and gives me a few more things to consider.  I really like the four year cycle incidcated by color through an unobtrusive, small aperture -- very clever.  Not having ever set a perpetual calendar piece, I am glad to have some insights into the differences between setting these several watches. I am not sure the reset function is that important to me if I decide I like the look of the cal. 39s . the 100s -- I have yet to see them in person to compare them.

Thanks once again for continuig to provide useful insights.

respo

the MIH watch has the bonus of its chronograph!  You likely have seen this watch on the AHCI or HOME forum but, if not, take a look:

 

The single button (monopusher) chronograph is a useful addition.  The watch has a rather interesting heritage which has been elaborated elsewhere.  A search should turn up the story behind this piece.  For a somewhat uncomplicated look with easy legibility the MIH is worth investigating. 

Good hunting,

tempusfugit

This message has been edited by tempusfugit on 2008-02-09 20:23:37

..and I believe that reading about the MIH is the one that got me started down this road (curses, MIH!).  I like its design and the achievemen of the concentric discsdisplayig the full date all at 3 o'clock.  Alas, I think this is not the watch for me for a few reasons, but it is amazing.  I may change my mind about it, however.  the photo you posted sparked my interest again.  Are you happy with it?  Any problems?

respo

like it and especially find the "stealth" aspect an asset (that is, it is not recognized except by knowledgeable PuristS and noone has recognized mine):  The titanium case, the relatively plain dial, the easily read date display all make for a functional piece--and the chronograph function is a bonus.  The negatives:  the chronograph must be read on the reverse (watch must be removed), it is limited to a 30 minute measure, and the size (it is a large watch).  You will have noted from earlier posts that the significant thickness is one aspect which I dislike.  Of course, what I see as a negative may well be a positive to another (eg. size).  The developmental history with Paul Gerber weighing in (also Oechslin, Weinmann, Gafner), the unique mechanical/movement solutions (eg. a 9 piece chronograph), together with the fact that a portion of the proceeds go for a good cause all contribute to a wearing/ownership experience that I find rewarding. 

No, I have had no problems with the piece.  My wear time for the MIH has been limited, I must say.  That is partly a function of too many watches as well as "protecting" the piece to some degree.  Many PuristS have purchased the MIH and there are several posts available.  My memory is that all who purchased the watch have viewed it favorably when it is in hand.   Like most watches, photos do not portray it in as favorable a manner as it appears "in the flesh" .

Given your interests thus far expressed, although the MIH is an intriguing watch with several unique aspects, I think you might prefer a perpetual to an annual calendar (unless the chronograph is an especially desirable complication).  Of all the perpetuals familiar to me I find the GO has the dial with the most easily read calendar.  There are others (eg. UN) easily read and with differing features but I come back to GO for the calendar display (as well as the manufacture and movement stature).  I find perpetuals endlessly fascinating.  Of course, you might just find that you would like more than one--at that point the decision as to which to add can become even more complex.

Let us know your eventual decision and good hunting.

tempusfugit

. . . "Of course, you might just find that you would like more than one--at that point the decision as to which to add can become even more complex" . . . is the perfect description of my dilemna, JB! The intoxicating magic of perpetuals can be addictive . . . cordially, Art

conundrum as well as the beauty this particular fascination holds for those of us who are smitten! 

tempusfugit