Co-axial escapement.

[zany]

New to the forum and this is possibly a silly question but, is there an Omega Replica with a co-axial escapement?

[Rolexman]

Nope. Co-axial is marketing bullsh!t anyway. Don't fall for it.

[ceocorona]

Nope. Co-axial is marketing bullsh!t anyway. Don't fall for it.

 

+1, life is better without it!

[SSTEEL]

Its a name for George Daniels escapement creation.

[zany]

I know what it is! I take it the answer is no.

[bones]

The answer is no. And those that claim it is marketing [censored] should take the time to actually learn what it is, what it does and how it's basically the only advance on the traditional escapement in over a hundred years. Do yourself a favour and read George Daniels autobiography. An incredible man and a genius.

Sent from my HTC Desire S using Tapatalk 2

[gran]

[Rolexman]

The answer is no. And those that claim it is marketing [censored] should take the time to actually learn what it is, what it does and how it's basically the only advance on the traditional escapement in over a hundred years. Do yourself a favour and read George Daniels autobiography. An incredible man and a genius. Sent from my HTC Desire S using Tapatalk 2

How often have you disassembled a co-axial?.....Me 6 so far and when I say it is marketing bullsh!t I CAN say that. Why? Besides the fact I am a watchmaker in the evening for this board and 2 local jewellers I have a daytime job as marketing manager for a huge multinational. So in this case I know all the insides of the movement, the design, it's flaws and the marketing gimmick that is behind it.

[bones]

So what flaws exactly have you found in the design of of the co-axial escapement?

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk HD

[Rolexman]

What's the #1 selling point of a co-axial? Who?

[bones]

As far as George Daniels was concerned it was all about efficiency and reducing friction with the escapement and pallet wheel. His coaxial escapement reduces friction to the point where lubrication is no longer needed, although I believe omega might still lubricate the jewels. Daniels designed it to be as maintenance free as possible with a service life on his watches of at least 10 years. He spent decades not only designing it but trying to bring the Swiss watch establishment round to his way of thinking. Rolex, patek phillipe both turned him down. Omega finally saw job good it was and decided to use it in their watches. Roger Smith is carrying on his legacy and I would consider him one of the premier watch makers of this generation. I don't know of you have it but I recommend you get both Daniels autobiography and his book Watchmaking.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk HD

[ceejay]

I'm off to a seminar presented by Roger Smith in a couple of weeks, any questions you would like answered guys?

[SSTEEL]

I'm off to a seminar presented by Roger Smith in a couple of weeks, any questions you would like answered guys?

 

Lucky sod, I have been in touch with him only via email, well Caroline, his wife actually.  Enjoyed watching him interview Daniels.

[icoopernicus]

 it's basically the only advance on the traditional escapement in over a hundred years. 

 

Would Jules Audemars escapement not be considered an even bigger departure from traditional pallet fork escapements?

[Rolexman]

I'm on iPhone so I will make it short. You are very well informed Bones and you are a100% correct. Yes, the escapement is well designed and it does reduce friction BUT.... All the co axials I have seen (you can also google it) have the train gear jewels oiled + all your regular wear spots like the keyless. Fact is that no oil or grease lasts 10 years......

[bones]

I'm on iPhone so I will make it short. You are very well informed Bones and you are a100% correct. Yes, the escapement is well designed and it does reduce friction BUT.... All the co axials I have seen (you can also google it) have the train gear jewels oiled + all your regular wear spots like the keyless. Fact is that no oil or grease lasts 10 years......

Modern oils should last 7 years. We're not far off 10 years and probably nanotechnology will bridge that gap. You could say the Daniels was far ahead in his design than current lubrication technology can handle.

But the point of my original post is that I don't understand why you think the coaxial escapement is a gimmick and that we would be better off without it? It reduces friction and Wear, increases accuracy and longevity of the balance components.

Daniels and Roger Smith both design(ed) for longevity, robustness, ease of maintenance as well as optimising the technology. Modern computer aided design has come a long way in designing mechanical watches. But those end pieces remain hugely expensive and impractical for general use.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk HD

[bones]

Would Jules Audemars escapement not be considered an even bigger departure from traditional pallet fork escapements?

There are a good many different escapement designs. I'm not familiar with the JA escapement so I cannot comment further on it. I will make a point of looking at it though.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk HD

[Rolexman]

The escapement works with radial friction yes...and it therefor needs no oil. So it is a better design of the escapement mechanism you won't hear me say anything different. But like I said before, all the other parts do need oil and service like every other movement! Some oil may have a life span of 7-10 years but that is theoretical. I have torn apart 100s of watches, Pateks, APs, Rollies etc and after 5 years of wearing all the oil and grease has either dried up or gummed up. And these brand also use the best of the best when it comes to oils. So why do people buy a co-axial? Because of the whole story of Daniels behind it and the the way they marketed it as 'the' biggest invention in watch history the last decade'. Sure at the AD they tell you it only needs service once every 10 years or so but that's also a marketing gimmick. I truly truly believe and promote as much service intervals on a co-axial as on a regular movement. You should see how the keyless works looks after 3 years... all the dirt and debree that comes in with the crown operation will contaminate the whole movement. Not to mention non-movement related parts like seals. No co-axial escapement will safe your watch from dirt, water or gummed up oils.

[fraggle42]

It seems to me that whilst someone in Omega recognised this as a big advancement in escapements, changing just this is only a small step in the evolution of the movement as a whole.

 

And sadly, the marketing people have heard about it and are blowing the (real) advantages out of all proportion, e.g. the "Co-Axial" movement branding, etc.

 

So the co-axial excapement itself is real and a brilliant idea, the advertising and Omega marketing crap surrounding it is stupid.

[kbh]

Seems strange nobody's mentioned that they had to drop the movement down from 28.8 bps to 24.6 (or was it 21.x??) because the co-axial couldn't' take the higher beat rate. Easier, I guess to make it run slower so it would last longer.

[bones]

The escapement works with radial friction yes...and it therefor needs no oil. So it is a better design of the escapement mechanism you won't hear me say anything different. But like I said before, all the other parts do need oil and service like every other movement! Some oil may have a life span of 7-10 years but that is theoretical. I have torn apart 100s of watches, Pateks, APs, Rollies etc and after 5 years of wearing all the oil and grease has either dried up or gummed up. And these brand also use the best of the best when it comes to oils. So why do people buy a co-axial? Because of the whole story of Daniels behind it and the the way they marketed it as 'the' biggest invention in watch history the last decade'. Sure at the AD they tell you it only needs service once every 10 years or so but that's also a marketing gimmick. I truly truly believe and promote as much service intervals on a co-axial as on a regular movement. You should see how the keyless works looks after 3 years... all the dirt and debree that comes in with the crown operation will contaminate the whole movement. Not to mention non-movement related parts like seals. No co-axial escapement will safe your watch from dirt, water or gummed up oils.

 

I never said anything to the contrary. You claimed it was marketing [censored]. On the contrary, the number of people who know of Daniels and buy an Omega specifically to have a co-axial movement is miniscule. Most people when told about it will just glaze over in incomprehension. They can advertise it, brand it, but the portion of people who even understand why it is better is a minority. I guess rather than the increased service life / reduction in wear that comes from the reduction in friction we should look at the increase in accuracy that comes from it as well. I also agree that taking their word on a 10 year service schedule (which I must admit my Omega AD has never mentioned) would be silly. Seals must replaced and re-greased much more frequently than the movement needs serviced and the rest of the watch needs maintained and serviced at regular intervals as well.