Observatory confusion, and number of models

Jan 19, 2018,22:48 PM
 

Great review of a wonderful watch!


Just wanted to pick up on a couple of points.

"6185 (A and B, VFA and Observatory Chronometers, date)"
"Cal. 4520 (no date), 4522 (date) and 4580 (VFA, Obervatory Chronometers)"
"or one of the just over 120 Observatory Chronometers from the chronometric competitions in Neuchatel or Geneva"

  • No vintage Grand Seiko movements, nor any "Astronomical Observatory Chronometer" movements were submitted to the chronometer competitions at Neuchatel.
  • From 1964 through to 1967, a total of 141 movements specially designed for the Neuchatel competition (by both Daini and Suwa) successfully passed the tests and were scored and awarded certificates. None of these movements were put into commercially available watches. There are many more movements that were built for the competitions, but either were not submitted, or were submitted and did not pass the certification process (there are only records of the movements that actually passed).
  • The "Astronomical Observatory Chronometer" is not a Grand Seiko - it is "just" a Seiko. Both 4520 and 4580 movements were used for the AOC.
  • It is believed that a number of 4520 and 4580 movements were submitted to Neuchatel outside of competition for certification from 1968 through to 1970 (note - the last chronometry competition at Neuchatel was in 1967). 4520 movement - 103 submitted in 1968, of which 73 passed and were used in AOC's. 4580 movement - 30 examples submitted in 1969, of which 25 passed and were used in AOC's. 4580 movement - 150 examples submitted in 1970 of which 128 were passed and were used in 4580-7000 and 4580-7010 Grand Seiko VFA's. But, crucially, none of this has been confirmed officially by Seiko, and indeed, in a conversation I had with Akira Oohira towards the end of last year, he expressed considerable doubt that this many movements would have made the trip to Switzerland and back. He has promised to look into this further, and I will check to see if there is any update from him later this year.
  • To the best of my knowledge, no Grand Seiko VFA, nor any Astronomical Observatory Chronometer has ever been seen with an accompanying Neuchatel certificate. That to me is extremely odd, because surely one of the key selling points of these watches - if they had been certified at Neuchatel - would have been the certificate to accompany the watch when purchased? It just doesn't make sense that Seiko would sell the watch without the certificate. I have personally seen multiple examples of AOC's complete with their "in house" certificate, and also what was claimed to be (and I have no reason to doubt the veracity of the claim) a full set 4580 VFA Grand Seiko that again had an "in house" certificate and nothing from Neuchatel.
  • The Seiko AOC, along with the Grand Seiko 6185A movement VFA's and the Grand Seiko 4580-7000 VFA, were all officially announced in the January 1970 edition of Seiko Sales. Featured alongside the text description for the AOC is a photograph of a Neuchatel Certficate, and the movement number can just be made out - it appears to be 965362. Sure enough, this matches the number of a movement that passed the Neuchatel trials in 1966, so clearly not an AOC movement. There is absolutely no mention of any movement certification at Neuchatel in the accompanying text for the VFA's.
I have to say that based on all the above evidence, I am coming round to the opinion that no 4520 nor 4580 movements were submitted to Neuchatel, and that this is an "urban myth" that has been built up over the years, probably based on a single erroneous source - it is important to note that the Dragonfly book that discusses the AOC (the one with the blue cover) is totally wrong with regards claims for movements that were submitted to the Neuchatel trials.

From a Google translation of the text related to the AOC in the January 1970 Seiko Sales newsletter, it would seem to me what Seiko were actually saying was that the movements in the AOC were made based on lessons that they learned from having competed in the chronometry trials. They may have intended to give the impression that the movements were certified, but did not actually directly say so, and nor did they provide any evidence that they were.

If someone is able to provide a more accurate translation of exactly what is in that newsletter, it would be very interesting to know what it says. The nuance here I think is very important, and Google Translate will miss that completely.

With regards the number of models in the vintage Grand Seiko range, I have done a huge amount of research on this over the last couple of years, and also checked extensively - with significant help from Anthony - the documentation of vintage Grand Seikos in both Seiko News/Sales Newsletters and Seiko catalogues.

Exactly how many models there are depends very much on how you choose to count them. For example, do you count the Grand Seiko "First" as just two watches (filled gold and platinum), or do you count separately every variant? There are three different versions of the platinum cased watch, and no fewer than nine different versions of the filled gold cased one. Do you count other dial variations, such as the early and later dial 4420's, or 6145/6's? What about the 4520/2-7010's - the early examples didn't have "36000" on the dial, the later ones did. And then there are the 62's, which would appear to exist in 8 different versions (all possible combinations of day/day-date, steel/cap gold, lion/GS medallion). Etc, etc etc.

So, putting a number on these is challenging, but if you do truly count all distinct variants, then - currently - it comes out to 142 smile

Kind regards,

Gerald.





More posts: Grand Seiko

  login to reply

Comments: view entire thread

 

Grammar of Design meets Hi-Beat - a review of the Grand Seiko 4520-8000

 
 By: KMII : January 12th, 2018-10:23
Last last year I determined for myself that high frequency watches were definitely one of my collecting topics - and after taking some time to compile a list of high frequency calibres (those beating at 36.000vph or above (here: the overview - and thanks...  

Thanks a lot, Alkiro!

 
 By: KMII : January 12th, 2018-12:59
Glad if you learned something new and enjoyed the article! Like with all things vintage the exploration is half the fun. Luckily GS is fairly well documented in the meantime, so one has good sources to consult

With 122 distinct models you need to be Blomman to cover it all ;)

 
 By: KMII : January 12th, 2018-22:11
And then there are countless other vintage brands...

Certainly not that determined...

 
 By: KMII : January 13th, 2018-06:43
Yet Maybe one day, though

Good luck 😁

 
 By: Alkiro1 : January 13th, 2018-06:45
Best wishes Alkiro

Not sure I want to go there...

 
 By: KMII : January 13th, 2018-10:38
But thanks irrespective πŸ‘πŸ»πŸ™πŸ»

πŸ˜‰

 
 By: Alkiro1 : January 13th, 2018-14:34
Best wishes Alkiro

Observatory confusion, and number of models

 
 By: gerald.d : January 19th, 2018-22:48
Great review of a wonderful watch! Just wanted to pick up on a couple of points. "6185 (A and B, VFA and Observatory Chronometers, date)" " Cal. 4520 (no date), 4522 (date) and 4580 (VFA, Obervatory Chronometers)" " or one of the just over 120 Observatory... 

Thank you so much for the corrections and clarification!

 
 By: KMII : January 19th, 2018-23:05
Very much obliged. Will correct my initial post immediately - when my children allow Btw. your posts on the subject matter have been instrumental in me making the jump into the vintage GS field, so much obliged! πŸ™πŸ»πŸ™πŸ»πŸ™πŸ»

Update - AOC's with Neuchatel certificates DO exist

 
 By: gerald.d : May 1st, 2018-10:37
Hi all - I was doing some research on a GP Observatory Chronometer that is currently up for sale, and came across this thread from earlier in the year. Just to update my above post with new information that has come to my attention over the last few weeks... 

Thanks a lot for this additional information, Gerald!

 
 By: KMII : May 1st, 2018-12:29
Looking forward to what else you will uncover in relation to the topic - very fascinating

Wow, KMII, when did you have time to do this research, man!

 
 By: KIH : January 21st, 2018-00:52
Wonderful work, wonderful writing. Even the SEIKO people would appreciate such a depository of knowledge - they are notorious for NOT recording things..... You are doing for passion and I admire it and you get my 100% respect. Some uses people like you ju... 

While you're here... :)

 
 By: gerald.d : January 21st, 2018-22:06
Hi Ken - While you're here, would you be able to provide an accurate translation of the attached image? It's the text for the AOC that appears in the January 1970 issue of the Seiko Sales newsletter. It would help to clear up exactly what claims were bein...  

Thanks for your kind words, Ken!

 
 By: KMII : January 22nd, 2018-00:19
But you do me too much honour. I just thought it would be interesting to summarise some bits for our community - luckily there are quite some enthusiasts who have put together lots of knowledge already. Always much easier to do a little contribution when ... 

Nah, your summary is great...

 
 By: KIH : January 22nd, 2018-00:57
... so, it is really a reference post all the Seiko fans to bookmark! My writing is just too long, boringfully (is this even a word?) long, so even I am lost while reading LOL! Let me know anything I can be of help for the quest of the knowledge!

If being recommended for bookmarking, then...

 
 By: gerald.d : January 22nd, 2018-05:25
... probably a few other small things should be addressed. I'd be most interested to see any examples of watches that disprove any of the below With regards the vintage Grand Seiko era, the final catalogue that the watches appeared in was volume 2 of 1975... 

You seem to be an inexhaustible fount of knowledge, Gerald!

 
 By: KMII : January 22nd, 2018-09:30
I have added the corrections in the post above

57GS

 
 By: gerald.d : January 23rd, 2018-01:20
Ok so I've just checked through the last 100 examples of the 5722-9991 to be sold on Yahoo Japan. The latest production date I could find was from March 1968.

Thanks Gerald!

 
 By: KMII : January 23rd, 2018-04:03
Has been corrected accordingly.