RobbieG

I'm working on a whole thread about it actually, but ETA bashing comes from ignorance. It has a repuation of being low end because the fanciest brands don't use them. The funny thing is, the fancy brands chose not to use them back in the day because of beat rate and availability mostly. Piguet and Lemania rose to the occasion to stay in business and gave them what they needed to survive. ETA only had a few calibers when everyone "had" to choose a supplier. People don't realize what a comitment it is when you make watches. When you launch a design and it catches you have to count on that movement being there. Once they made those original choices that was it. And at the time there was a big debate between whether a more robust, less friction 18k/21.6k movement was better requiring more skill to regulate but could last many lifetimes, or a 28.8k with easy regulation and superior rate results but with a shorter service interval and more potential risk of torque/friction damage. A lot of the high end companies chose the old school and stuck with Lemania and Piguet and the others chose the Rolex way and chose ETA or JLC. But ETA had less Calibers and was newer so JLC retained the old school glory but with a high beat rate. They didn't earn all of that though. Some and they are amazing to be sure. But not all. That said, ETA is world class in every way. It is just a stupid misconception. There is nothing better about a JLC 889 ebauche compared to a 2892 other than the highest level of finish available is only used by JLC them selves on their own watches. Companies don't buy finish spec - at least the real ones don't - they finish them themselves. That is the funny part really. When you see how say (to use an example other than UN) IWC finishes ETA, there is no difference between that and its JLC counterpart. None. Period. Not to mention that the 2892 for example is a WAY more complete and useful ebauche than its JLC counterpart. Period. It isn't even a debate. And robustness? Failure rates? Again, NO contest. Not slagging JLC, but the fact that they and Piguet get props over ETA is absurd. Let's use another example - The Piguet 1285 (derivative of the 1185) that Omega uses in the PO Chrono, etc. F'ing GARBAGE. A 21.6k movement hopped up to 28.8k with skinny bridges and fragile parts and metal shavings are flying out of the thing in 6 months. And yet noone ever says Piguet is anything but perfect. Meanwhile, take a look at how Breitling decorates and regulates a 2824 and you will blow a load. They turn it into a work of art and it is a great little movement available cheap. I'll complete the rant in a more orderly fashion later, but suffice it to say I can't stand unfounded brand loyalty based on ignorance. It is never ending how many ETA bashers have absolutely no idea what they are talking about.

...and vodka and Redbull.

Yeah, a lot do that. But if you think about it the rate issues don't figure to change with the adds unless it stops. As long as the two points of the energy leaving the mainspring barrel and the acceptance of that energy at the balance. The complications don't tap the energy source in a way that can interfere with rate which is all COSC cares about. The reason is they don't want to be responsible for fouling decorations or to be resonsible for expensive mods. As an aside, UN gives these really cool full color COSC certificates with thier watches in these cool navy leather stitched portfolios. You can see part of it under the watch in my first MMD shoot I did. Anyway, when you look at my MMD one the date my movement was certified is two prior to when my watch was built when I vetted the serial number. This isn't hard to do because of low production. The MMD is their biggest seller and they have still not made and sold even 1000 of them each year since launching them in 2004. Oh, and it is still keeping the same +.7 a day in all positions. Not bad at all.

Hublot? Oh dear God. Hang on, before that section opens let me find some pants than don't fit, a bad attitude, and my lowered Hummer... ... ... ... ... ...Just kidding kiddies, don't go getting your Hilfiger's in a bunch now...

Sorry dude, flying the flag. Hopefully it will translate to the factory dogs who are patrolling these boards to realize they would have a lot of people flocking to UN if they make more of them. But here is a key point which I think all can see from some of the other threads. The factories need to realize THE 2892 EBAUCHE connection and how UN built the whole Marine line with it's capabilities being so diverse and elegantly simple. They shoud really consider doing it right with the 2892 clone and just doing Asian modules for them if possible. It would really be perfect if they could figure a way supply wise and module wise to make that happen... .02

2894 ebauche Shundi - because it is DOPE, like Joey says... All kidding aside, see the other UN thread as I layed out how UN uses the ebauches. The 2894 might be the coolest auto chrono ever actually since it is really a 2892 and built with a modular architecture. Interestingly enough, UN uses a 2892 base technically, certs it, then builds the chrono with mods and finishes everything by hand instead of starting with the pre-built 2894 pre-finished and having to "deconstruct it".

10-4. To each their own opinions I say. I know quartz movements a a reliable and viable system. Just not my thing is all...

Both Toad, yes. Most of the high complications are in house and the 1846 line uses 2892 and 2894 ebauches. The watch in this thread is a 2892 with seconds at 6 and PR module. The way they do it is they start with the 2892 base and get the Chronometer cert on that raw. Then they build the modules and hand finish everything in house after and do final regulation in house. I make this distinction because manufactories can buy a highly finished ebauches in this basic configuration complete - almost. Let me explain: - The 2892-A2 proper has center seconds and date at 3, but... - The 2891 has center seconds and complete perpetual calendar, leap year and moonphase - The 2893 has center seconds and GMT time central disc - The 2895 has seconds at 6 and date at 3 - The 2896 has center seconds and a 2 disc Big Date at 3 - The 2897 has center seconds and PR display at 7 So as you can see you could almost just buy a high finsihed variant and get it certified and be done. But they like to start with certing the base and fitting all the modules seperately so they can layout the dials the way they want. So for this watch instead of using the 2895 they still use the 2892. This gives them ultimate flexibilty and allows them to offer so many variants of the 1846 line. It is just genius use of the whole point of what ebauches are for. I'm doing a thread soon on the whole myth about ebauches and how the world thinks only companies that use ETA ebauches are somehow substandard or something. Meanwhile everyone - Patek, AP, Vacheron et. al. use ebauches for many or all their "bread and butter" flagship watches - they just use JLC, Piguet and Lemaina ebauches but really for other reasons and NOT because they are supierior quality. For example I hear all the time people talking about some Patek or Vacheron perpetual calendars and calling them in house. Meanwhile many of those complications are bought as ebauche modules. Even ETA has a perpetual calendar movement - the 2891 for example. And they are expensive and not easy to make and they do have to be assembled and adjusted and it takes a good deal of time. But still, they are not in house. The fact is there are very little totally in house manufactories. JLC, Lange, Glashutte, Zenith, Rolex and a few more of course but not many... For these watches simply put, the design of the 2892 is the best thing by far available on the market for these designs. The line couldn't exist without it because none of the ebauches I just mentioned HAVE the parts needed to make them, nor is it practical to construct them all from scratch. Better to just figure out how to design all the placements and fit which is no picnic really. OK rant over... So anyway, they take the 2892, cert it, then PUT a seconds module from the 2896 at 6, the PR module from the 2897 at 12, and the date module from the original 2892 at 6 as well. The 2892 ebauche they buy has no date though - just the main plate, wheels and balance really - which is why they can cert them pre build really. And of course they don't buy those other ebauches but just the modules from ETA. Here is my 1846 MMD and as all can see it is the same. And as an aside, even my Dual Time is also done by the same process. They start with the raw 2892, the seconds at 6 module (2895), the Big Date module (2896) which they place at 2, the GMT disc (2893) which they place at 9, and then they build their own patented sync module that ties everything together and moves the date in sync forward and BACKWARD across midnight. The bottom line is that I don't think anyone could argue that the 2892 is an AMAZING movement. Just bulletproof and personally I would rather have it in the watch than anything not so well designed to be modular such as something from JLC like the 889 or something. Nothing wrong with it, but it isn't as complete and UN couldn't offer as much with it. ETA has just thought it out so well. But UN should really be given praise for figuring out how to make the best use of it and deliver several lines of watches with totally different designs so elegantly. Just perfect use of the system. Everyone should do this so well - no matter the ebauche. I would like to see say Vacheron do the same depth with some of the Lemania ebauches. I just have never seen anyone do something so completely in understanding and implementing as UN has here...

It has nothing to do with whether they can or not. The fact is movement fabrication is not the same task as is the rest of the watch. Why do you think so many extremely well heeled watch companies use ebauches for most of their so called "in house" creations. Movement design and manufactory is a REALLY big deal. If it weren't why would Patek, Vacheron, AP, Breguet, and countless others use ebauches as a base for most of their releases? ETA, Lemaina, Piguet, JLC, Venus, Zenith, etc. It just isn't practical for a watch company to design and build all the bases they need for their lineup. It is just way to brutal to consider for most. Neither a monkey or laborious Chinese can just replicate movements. It is not even remotely the same as doing watches. Plus there are no economies of scale. That is why 90% of reps are 7750's, 2836's, or 2824's - with most being 7750's these days. Only because they made one that they figured would cover a lot of ground. Even with the gen 7750 as a guide it was not a minor undertaking for them. And if you like quarz more power to you. I come at reps from a different angle. I'm not into getting reps of watches I can't afford so I'll take what I can get with any movement. I am also not into flawless replications. I'm just looking for fine mechanical wristwatches. In most cases I buy reps to check them out to see if I like the design enough to add the gen to my collection. We are all a little different in our motivations my friend. I don't like quartz because to me they represent the "other team" - the threat to the mechanical history in the interest of efficiency. I am in love with mechanical movements and the perfection of them through the ages. I start and end with that and the watch around it is secondary for me. I would rather have a rep of a $500 gen with a mechanical movement than a rep of a million dollar gen which is otherwise perfect but has a battery in it. Defeats the whole purpose for me...

No problem John. Glad to be of help. I know the later Longines chronos that are along the lines of the Heuer Autavia type design from the 70's are getting $2500 and up. There are tons of them from all different brands - Doxa, etc. Anyway, this one is earlier and may be worth more you never know, although not as popular. Hard to say really.

Yeah, cool movement though. Along the same lines as a Venus 175 or Lemania 2310 in terms of beat rate and layout - except being a cam/lever of course. It only came with various seconds at 6, single wheel date, and a 10 minute countdown timer of all things. For this reason I'm guessing the watch may be coveted as Longines would have has to build the moonphase module for it. It wasn't available as a base ebauche. Food for thought...

Ah, that is why. I tried to date it at Antiquorum just this minute and couldn't find it. That explains it - although I have been fooled by Breguet before as they have so many reference numbers. Keeps in in perspective though for all. Look how big that 18K spacer ring is. That is one small Caliber. I can't read it - what Caliber is that. I would like to research it and see what other pieces it is used in. It is layed out very similar to the Caliber 510DR in the modern 5907.

Just as an aside, and many may not know this, but real guilloche is very rare. Breguet is one of the only manufactures to still do guilloche by hand. It's weird, but sometimes Breguet dials will look imperfect and I have heard people making the mistake of thinking gens are fakes because of the flaws in the dials. Guilloche isn't one of my favorite looks anymore as sometimes I feel that the richness is lost since so many other companies are doing machine guilloche and it looks cheap. But one of the easiest ways to tell a gen Breguet dial is to look for the "imperfection" of hand guilloche. Look closely and you will see what I mean. You can use it in the future to instantly spot any Breguet rep...

Hahaha. No, I didn't mean to insinuate that about your watch. No rep ever has plated gold that looks that good! And Breguet doesn't always have both a serial and a reference number on the watches - although the most modern ones do now. I just meant that if you notice, a lot of reps will put the reference number on the dial in place of the serial number which is kind of a tell of sorts. Can you tell us the history of your piece and how you came to it? You don't see this particular one much...

I guess you had to know the resident hand wind chronograph parahistorian might take a crack at answering this one. I'm not a Longines historian though so you can use this to further date the piece exactly and price it accordingly. This is an at least fairly rare Longines moonphase chrono. It's movement is a Valjioux 7733 ebauche which dates the watch as made between 1969-1978. It is a 17 jewel manual winding cam/lever chrono that was the predecesor to the 7750. A little more history for you: Valjoux was founded in "Valley de Joux" in the mid-to-late part of the 19th century. Valjoux originally made timers (stopwatches) and chronograph movements. In 1890 or so, they invented the column wheel which revolutionized the chronograph movements. Virtually every chronograph movement made since then used a column wheel untill the late 40's or so when Landeron invented the cam/lever shuttle as a cheaper alternative. A majority of chronograph movements today use a cam/lever switch. Throughout the 20th century, manufacturers like: Valjoux, Lemania, Landeron & Venus made the vast majority of all chrono movements. When the watch business collapsed in the latter half of the 20th century, Venus failed and Valjoux bought them. Valjoux attained the rights to the new cam/lever and switch of the Caliber 188 that Venus had made. This was rebranded as the Valjioux 7730 and sold for a year or two until the Valjoux redesign of this movement was made - the 7733 - and variants 34, 35, 36, 37.

Beautiful!!! Enough is not devoted to classic dress watches. As a real movement freak they are a matter of great personal interest to me. Great photos and strap too. Of course the most current Breguet model like this is the 5907 which has an exhibition back, but the closed back is a previous model. Is this one still 34-35MM? Also, one thing that bug me is the reps all put the reference number on the dial. I wish they would get that simple change down and just make them different than the case back. Breguet reference numbers should always be on the back of the case with the serial number on the dial... Some similar gen models over the ages, which is why Breguet reps are so great - there are so many gens that it is impossible to keep up with unless you work for Antiquorum. That is what is so great about Breguet reps. These are all very similar with the same dial layout and slight differences to casebacks, etc.: 4507 - 50's 4805 - 60's & 80's 4519 - 90's The closest version now is the 5907 as I said earlier...

Well you are talking quartz mechanisms though now and self respecting watch nuts don't go for those so much. No mechanism is going to replicate the Freak though. Maybe the most innovative and unique timepiece ever made. @JoeyDee - you are never going to "get" that watch if not for the mechanism. If you try and judge its beauty on familiarity you are missing the whole point. It is a marvel, not a treasure. It is funny looking because the watch's mechanical movement also functions as its sole timeteller. There isn't really another aesthetic way to do it. That said, take another look at it and I think you will concur that there really isn't any other way for it to "look" Oh well as rkdk said - beauty is in the eye of the beholder...

Certainly not, although word is getting around that huge watches are finally. Giant watches are slowly becoming a fashion victim in Hollyweird now. A lot more celebs are being seen with smaller more understated watches. A lot more classic 40 and 36MM Rolex's and 38-42MM strapped dressier watches. Plenty of bracelets though - despite the sizes easing up a bit.

Nice trio. You pretty much have the DJ ground all covered there. Congrats!

Glad to be of inspiration - do you mean to take the photos or buy the watch or both? In any case, congrats! Do tell the story of how you came to get the piece. Did you have it for a while and are just shooting it now or is it new to you. And why the Blue Wave MMC? Did you want the non-dive bezel variety, or the size, color, all polishedbracelet? Give us the details man! PS: One of the things I have always loved about the 1846/Marine line is you can always get EXACTLY what you want. Bezel/No Bezel, dial tectures and colors, chrono/non chrono, romans/arabics/batons, different bracelets, different hands, brushed/polished finishes, and sizes - 38, 41, 42.7, 43, 44, 45MM. Absolutely something for everyone.

There is really no way for them to ever do it as a working watch. I really can't see how. I suppose they could have a regular Asian movement in there and then glue wheels and jewels onto the single hand to make it look like a movement but I don't see how else...

Plus if you buy a movement for say $120 then pay another $50 for the swap and postage they thing still might die in 4 days. No, it isn't better to just swap the movement assuming it is a known good Asian movement. They just come either dry or over oiled and all are pretty much asking for trouble - even that brand new one for $120 you can buy. A high beat movement with considerable torque and friction is an accident waiting to happen if dry and/or dirty. You can sometimes get away with a little more with the 21.6k and 18k stuff but not the 28.8k stuff. They may have easier to achieve superior rate results at that frequency, but they also have a shorter service interval and it is critical that they don't run dry or dirty for too long. The fact is this is why most rep watches fail, not because the movements are crappy. Many, if not most standard time and date or time, date, chrono Asian movements are just as capable of lasting a lifetime as a gen AP with a JLC or Piguet ebauche. No, I'm not joking and I mean that wholeheartedly. They may not be pretty but as long as they are serviced right and have no inherent friction problems like the seconds at 6 complications, etc. they are just as sound mechanically really. So the only question really is whether or not you will keep the rep. If yes then service it right away, don't swap it. In fact, if you are really serious about the hobby do both. Buy a couple A7750's to keep around for repair parts if they are needed, but if you service the watches right away it is much less likely anything will wear out. .02

But rep AR is inferior usually. In fact, what factories call single AR in many cases like the PAM's for example is nothing more that blue tinted crystal. It doesn't stop reflections at all really. Chiefs is the real deal and colorless. I recommend everyone just plan on having him do it for you and scrap the rep AR. You will be pleased. The fact is his is superior to most gen AR as well in strength and is also colorless. It used to be more rare but now more and more manufactories are using colorless AR on watches less for looks but for the scratch phenom. Still alot to go. In theory if AR has no color you wouldn't really see a scratch, where if it its tinted it shows up real well at angles and looks terrible. Of course one solution is just to sacrifice some strenghth and coat just the underside of the crystal. As I mentioned in Lani's recent thread, the only gen I have that has colorless AR is my Nardin MMD. I am confident that if I scratched it the coating would be pretty tough to spot...

I guess in the end it didn't make money? It doesn't seem possible. I can't imagine what the bar was ringing in a weekend but it had to be staggering. I do know RR has had troubel attracting fine dining crowds as it is known more as a drinking and partying spot. But that may have changed? And yes, Azure McCall -