Baco Noir
WWF Advisor
WWF Admin
Posts: 31,274
Name: Roger
Since: Mar 14, 2011 13:09:50 GMT -6
|
Post by Baco Noir on Jan 6, 2018 13:00:54 GMT -6
Have you all seen this? I don’t know how I missed it. There’s a potential transformational shift in watchmaking upon us that could be similar to the quartz movement. Replacing 30 components with a single part made from silicon that deforms to create the motion and vibrates at a frequency of 108,000 vph! This replaces the hairspring, balance wheel, regulation assembly, and pallets with a silicon wafer 20 microns thick - shocking. If this gets adopted industry wide, it will IMHO kill the soul of the mechanical watch as we know it. What do you all think? 😧 quillandpad.com/2018/01/06/zenith-defy-lab-highlights-technology-change-future-watchmaking/
|
|
|
Post by rw16610 on Jan 6, 2018 13:40:15 GMT -6
Yeah that's cool and all but I'm not a fan. Certain technological advancements have been great in the industry but I tend to look at this much differently. Omega had Si14 for what seems like a while now and that's likely as far as I'm willing to take it (just the one component to my knowledge): For certain models it can be more acceptable but after a point it just seems to take away from the history behind these pieces. I'll always be a traditional watch person that likes things as they were back in the day. For the technology and efficiency I've got other watches that handle this aspect much better. I'm interested to see what Archer or other watchmakers think of this.
|
|
Baco Noir
WWF Advisor
WWF Admin
Posts: 31,274
Name: Roger
Since: Mar 14, 2011 13:09:50 GMT -6
|
Post by Baco Noir on Jan 6, 2018 16:15:25 GMT -6
Silicon is reducing friction and not necessarily a bad thing - and this advance may not be either, but it seems like it really could be a transformational shift in the industry. Okay, so I guess it’s still be mechanical, but it’s just so different I’m having a hard time accepting it. While the cost to produce it really high now, I imagine in 7-10 years, it will scale down significantly.
|
|
|
Post by rw16610 on Jan 6, 2018 18:25:58 GMT -6
That's what I was wondering too, as it seemed to me like saves multiple stages of production. With time it should become cheaper for them to do (one would think). If it significantly increased the service intervals that could be a game changer for me!
|
|
Baco Noir
WWF Advisor
WWF Admin
Posts: 31,274
Name: Roger
Since: Mar 14, 2011 13:09:50 GMT -6
|
Post by Baco Noir on Jan 7, 2018 0:46:35 GMT -6
This video is a great explanation of how it works and has changed my perspective on this advancement. I now see it as a new design in mechanical movements and the video host has a similar perspective that this could be a transformational shift in watchmaking and become common place in the next 10 years.
|
|
Archer
WWF Veteran
Posts: 2,941
Since: Jan 15, 2007 17:14:14 GMT -6
|
Post by Archer on Jan 7, 2018 8:16:40 GMT -6
This is a bit of a repeat conversation for me, since I had some debates with people when some of the details of this first came out a few months ago.
When I first saw the video of this movement, my first thought was "That escape wheel pivot is going to wear out in no time flat!" so that would be an immediate concern for me, but I don't know what the loads on it are like, so maybe it will be fine.
I guess I'm a little torn on this one. They present it as a breakthrough, and in a sense it is, but then again it isn't really. In the end it's a different configuration, but it's still essentially a balance wheel oscillator.
So what are the supposed technical advantages?
15 Hz frequency, better accuracy, and longer power reserve. While compared to a conventional Swiss lever mechanical watch, those are certainly advantages, they are 40+ years late. Tuning fork watches and later on quartz watches both exceed what this watch can do...tuning fork watches operate at 360 Hz, and a quartz watch is over 32,000 Hz (most quartz crystals used in watches have a frequency of 32,768 Hz). Both will have better accuracy than this, and longer power reserve using a battery, capacitor, or a quartz watch with a spring like the spring drive.
A higher level of technical excellence has already been achieved long before this new caliber came along. Performance upgrades in mechanical watches like these are striving to improve an already obsolete technology. But this is the current way that many brands in the watch world are going. Omega co-axial is the same sort of thing, along with silicon balance springs in Rolex, AP using a different escapement, etc. So in one way this is like creating a better buggy whip than the original, but still 2 steps back from the best buggy whip available.
How excited you are about this I think depends on how you see mechanical watches. Are watches a reflection of a simpler time for you, following traditions of craftsmanship and hand work? Or are you a "latest technology and materials" junky?
I think it depends a bit on how long you have been collecting, and age to an extent. I see older and experienced collectors skew more towards traditional watchmaking, where younger and newer collectors are often after the latest technology. Not saying one is right or wrong - they are just different.
Being both an engineer and watchmaker I can see both sides of something like this - to me this is more engineering than watchmaking. This is a part, like a silicon balance spring, that is made as a finished part and requires no human adjustment - it comes out the manufacturing process perfect. It's a part that can only be replaced at service, and can't be repaired or adjusted in any way so the performance you get it what you get - the application of skills will not improve it. This trend is a bit worrying because there is a potential downside to this specific sort of innovation.
Brands are already dumbing down the repair process in significant ways, and something like this or the Si balance spring that can't be adjusted, will eventually mean a loss of traditional skills. You can say who cares about those skills, but watchmakers are already getting scarce, and there are millions of watches out there that will require those skills to not become "bricks". For example I simply cannot purchase a new balance staff from Omega for any watch they have ever produced. For vintage calibers I can get some staffs on the open market, but if you snap a pivot off on a modern watch you now have to purchase a balance complete from Omega, rather than take the time to re-staff the balance. Re-staffing is something that I actually do very little of and this was once a staple of the watchmaker's skillset. It gets worse if you work in a service center - there instead of disassembling the mainspring from the barrel, cleaning the barrel, applying braking grease, and installing a new spring, they just install a new "barrel complete" that is already assembled and ready to drop in. There are countless other examples but those two illustrate the way the industry is going, right up to Tudor not servicing their new in-house movements at all at their service centers - they just swap out the entire movement (old one is sent back to the factory to be refurbished).
Do you remember a time when an auto mechanic would actually fix things on a car, rather than just be a "parts replacer" like they are now? Instead of replacing smaller individual parts on your car, they now replace entire sections of the car. This same thing is happening in watchmaking. I can tell you that in a typical service center for mid-level brands like Rolex or Omega, no one is breaking out the Jacot tool to polish pivots a few times a week like I do...that sort of skill is just not needed in a service center setting. Even the way the Swiss are training and certifying people is causing some issues this way - if I can find the article I'll post it but I read one on this topic a while back that touches on this subject and that of factory automation in the watch industry a bit.
Will the watchmaker become a profession that no longer exists? Does anyone remember having a TV repairman come to your house to fix your TV? I do, but try to find someone who can fix a TV now? Nearly impossible.
Back to this new caliber - innovation aside I have to like a watch if I'm going to buy it, and "aesthetic beauty" is certainly not the first reaction I have to this new movement (not referring to the case it's in, but the movement itself). Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but quite frankly the large wheel jiggling back and forth like that looks cool for a few minutes in a video, but having that jiggling at me on my wrist all day would get tiring pretty quick as the novelty wears off.
I guess for me the question becomes: How far away from a traditional mechanical watch do you get, before there is so little of the "tradition" left that you might as well just buy a quartz watch?
I don't have the answers, so just giving you my thoughts on this one...
Cheers, Al
|
|
Baco Noir
WWF Advisor
WWF Admin
Posts: 31,274
Name: Roger
Since: Mar 14, 2011 13:09:50 GMT -6
|
Post by Baco Noir on Jan 7, 2018 11:42:57 GMT -6
Archer - I know exactly what you mean about the traditional timepiece, as my initial reaction was seeing this as the next quartz movement too kill traditional watch making. I’m still not sure how I feel abut it, but I did find another video about the function of the new part and it does the oscillation of it very well, which is much different than a traditional escapement - again, not sure how I feel about it yet. Would I want it visible from the front side of a watch? No, I don’t think so, but if it were behind the movement would I care?
|
|
Baco Noir
WWF Advisor
WWF Admin
Posts: 31,274
Name: Roger
Since: Mar 14, 2011 13:09:50 GMT -6
|
Post by Baco Noir on Jan 7, 2018 14:11:50 GMT -6
Just had a thought on this piece with respect to service - will it get cleaned and reused or replaced at service? As thin as the parts are, will it stand up to cleaning?
|
|
|
Post by rw16610 on Jan 7, 2018 20:16:51 GMT -6
After reading Al's post it has me more unsure of this. So true what he says about the processes changing for repair and it's annoying to me! One thing I love about watches is the fact it's the one thing left in this world (or was) that goes against all of this stuff. One of the few things that are still made to last. Once a watch is vintage and they stop making parts I much rather have something a skilled watchmaker can fabricate or modify parts for to keep it going.
With zero knowledge of this new technology I'm willing to bet they'll push for a new one to be installed to increase service revenue. Less work for the staff but more in regards to parts cost at service (potentially). The fact Tudor does what Seiko would for something like the Monster is a bit troubling to me, as a collector anyway. If I read that correct and they're basically installing a new movement while sending the old one back to Switzerland to be serviced is insane. Cuts down wait times (or should) but cheapens it all to me. I'm fine with having that done with something like my Seiko or Orient but...
I'm also on the same page with seeing it work. Finally in that second video I was able to properly see this in action and don't think it's the most elegant or appealing thing to look at in my humble opinion. No chance of having it adjusted also loses me. Although they come out "perfect" there has to be some defects or issues they'll discover after and I hate the fact it'll need this entire thing changed vs. simply being adjusted. What's the actual life on that part? Makes me think they'll want to suggest having it changed at each service anyway to increase revenue. These conglomerates really ruin many things I feel, and as cool as it might be, seems like something they did from an accounting perspective vs. Horology, regardless to what they say.
I'll continue with my traditional pieces, the Omega technology at most and keep pieces like my Eco-Drive radio controlled (might even buy a Satellite Wave one day) to focus on the accuracy and reliability aspects. Having service options down the road and a piece that can be regulated seems like a given for me personally. As a world's first and engineering achievement it's very cool but ends there for me. Wouldn't want to see this technology trickle down into anything I would own.
|
|
Baco Noir
WWF Advisor
WWF Admin
Posts: 31,274
Name: Roger
Since: Mar 14, 2011 13:09:50 GMT -6
|
Post by Baco Noir on Jan 7, 2018 21:41:14 GMT -6
Rommel - the original article or video (forget which) said that there is a fork on the part that allows adjustment of up to 300 spd! That said, it made me wonder how they adjust it with that wide of a range and such a short movement for the fork - assume it requires some special laser measurement.
|
|
|
Post by rw16610 on Jan 7, 2018 21:51:58 GMT -6
That's insane! I wonder if this could be the type of thing someone would appreciate much more seeing it in person. The case material seems nice and I guess for the first of it;s kind it'll be well worth it to those that did buy it. I'm still hoping this for the time being stays in these types of pieces only though.
|
|
Baco Noir
WWF Advisor
WWF Admin
Posts: 31,274
Name: Roger
Since: Mar 14, 2011 13:09:50 GMT -6
|
Post by Baco Noir on Jan 7, 2018 22:09:20 GMT -6
That's insane! I wonder if this could be the type of thing someone would appreciate much more seeing it in person. The case material seems nice and I guess for the first of it;s kind it'll be well worth it to those that did buy it. I'm still hoping this for the time being stays in these types of pieces only though. The LVMH brands will be rolling it out in some of their watches this year IIRC. I imagine it will be limited and that will give a “data set” that can be monitored for quality and dependability. If it goes well, then I can see it expanding into more with the lines like Omega did with the silicon parts.
|
|
Archer
WWF Veteran
Posts: 2,941
Since: Jan 15, 2007 17:14:14 GMT -6
|
Post by Archer on Jan 8, 2018 8:29:09 GMT -6
Here is the article I had mentioned in my previous post: www.swissinfo.ch/eng/a-changing-profession_what-makes-modern-luxury-watchmaking-tick-/43757974 So the same problems that happen in other industries are happening in watch factories, with automation becoming very common. Some brands try to hide it as much as they can, while others show it off in fancy videos, like this one - note the machine that automatically oils the movement at 30 seconds in: And in this one, you can see they use a machine to install the hands at 35 seconds in: This leads to a lack of traditional skills being used, and although service centers are not as automated as the original production, as I mentioned previously the watchmaker becomes a bit of a parts replacer. They don't even do all the work, and only work on the movement itself in many service centers. For example at the Swatch NJ facility. they hire people off the street and give them on the job training to do a lot of the work - cheaper than having a trained watchmaker do some things. So the watch comes in and is disassembled by a non-watchmaker - the bracelet is removed, movement removed, and the hands and dial removed by these unskilled labourers. The movement is sent to the watchmakers to service, and the case goes to the refinishing department, again with people who have been trained off the street. The case and movement are done, and it's all sent back to more unskilled labourers who install the dial, hands, and case the movement. Again more and more service centers are replacing movements rather than servicing them. Omega does it with the modular chronograph movements, Cartier is another one that has done this a lot also, and as mentioned Tudor does it. I don't know if this movement will be replaced, but my gut tells me it will. So to clarify a few things from my previous post... When I say the part can't be adjusted, I didn't mean to adjust the rate - there's more to performance than simply adjusting the average rate. In a traditional balance (even one fitted with a silicon balance spring) the balance itself is tweaked after production and in service. So things I do to the balance when replacing a staff for example are that I true it if it is not completely flat, and I poise it on a poising tool, which involves adding or removing weight depending on the design. After it's in the watch I use dynamic poising to improve positional variation as part of a regular service, even if I don't replace the staff. This is what I mean by improving the performance of the part through application of skills - this is completely absent from this new oscillator. Aside from adjusting the average rate, there's nothing that can be done by a watchmaker to improve the performance of the oscillator. No doubt for those who are serious accuracy freaks, this may be a very exciting thing. The latest Omega movements with silicon springs are indeed very accurate - some attribute this to the escapement, but in reality it's the silicon spring that is the driver of accuracy. In the past accuracy was something that always required a lot of work and skill - now they just etch them out of silicon wafers. When something becomes much easier to do than it was previously, it seems to lose some of the prestige it had in the past. Today I saw a clip on the sports news about a golfer (Dustin Johnson) hitting a drive on a par 4 that was 430+ yards to within 6 inches of the hole. It was an impressive drive certainly, but with modern golf equipment it was certainly not the same as someone doing it with a driver that still has a wooden head on it... Cheers, Al
|
|
Baco Noir
WWF Advisor
WWF Admin
Posts: 31,274
Name: Roger
Since: Mar 14, 2011 13:09:50 GMT -6
|
Post by Baco Noir on Jan 8, 2018 9:26:49 GMT -6
Point taken Archer. That post tells me why I had to send my Blancpain back to Swatch 3 times each time they serviced it.
|
|
Archer
WWF Veteran
Posts: 2,941
Since: Jan 15, 2007 17:14:14 GMT -6
|
Post by Archer on Jan 9, 2018 7:31:59 GMT -6
Point taken Archer . That post tells me why I had to send my Blancpain back to Swatch 3 times each time they serviced it. It's not just Swatch Roger. I am following a customer's story on another forum about a PAM 311 that has been back and forth with Panerai for 12 months. Customer requested a routine service, but no polishing of the case. After the first service the watch stopped with 2 days showing on the power reserve (8 day movement). Second service the watch came back with a scratched bezel. They offered to polish the whole case including the bezel, but customer wanted a new bezel installed and they agreed. Bezel was replaced, but in the process they scratched the case. They offered to polished but that was refused. Then the movement would stop with 6 days of power reserve left, so back for another service. This time despite being told and acknowledging the request not to polish, they polished it. They tried to tell the customer they only "cleaned" it but clearly that doesn't remove scratches. Still waiting a year on to get the watch back again. As that article points out, the companies have expanded production while not doing the same with the after sales service. As more brands cut off independent watchmakers from parts, this problem of overloaded brand service centers will only get worse. The Swiss are shooting themselves in the foot. I suppose you could include the Swiss owned Germans in that as well - I had to send my GO back after they serviced it because last time I checked no month had 33 days... I asked again (politely) that they sell me the parts so I could service it myself, but of course that request was ignored... Cheers, Al
|
|