Eta Movement Confirmatin

[dvn]

Here is picture of the supposingly an ETA movement from SiChuan's $100 Rolex ETA special, can any movment experts here confirm it? how good the condition of this movement is?

thank you Bjarneb of RWI for the excellent picture:

[r11co]

This looks suspiciously like the 17 jewel movements that were popping up in Subs from Abay (now Aspire) and Silix about 10 months ago. They were identified as an ETA design that had been out of production for almost a decade.

Silix stopped supply immediately when they were alerted and refunded/replaced watches already shipped to customers, and Paul offered to exchange the movements for 2824's at the time.

[Category 5]

Iyt definitely isn't the 2824 or 2836 movement that we see in most good reps (and expect to see). It is missing the screw regulator.

[chrgod]

Interesting.. I must have missed this post about supisious "ETA" movements 10 months ago... I am monitoring an online auction where this movements is advertised as ETA.. It has the same [censored] engravings on the rotor, but obviously it has the ETA-engravings under the balance wheel, and a proper regulator...

By the way... What is the story behind the "1940 S.A."??

[Bignasty]

That doesn't even look like the 17 jewel version I have seen. Here's link to the 17 jewel 2824-2. It still has the ETA regulator w/ screw mechanism.

http://www.christophlorenz.de/watch/moveme...2824_2.php?l=en

To be 100% sure you'll need pictures of the engravings on the main plate below the balance wheel.

Jon

Oh and as far as the supposed engravings on the rotor. Those are engraved stickers that could be applied to any movement.

Edited June 26, 2006 by Bignasty

[dvn]

That doesn't even look like the 17 jewel version I have seen. Here's link to the 17 jewel 2824-2. It still has the ETA regulator w/ screw mechanism.

http://www.christophlorenz.de/watch/moveme...2824_2.php?l=en

To be 100% sure you'll need pictures of the engravings on the main plate below the balance wheel.

Jon

Oh and as far as the supposed engravings on the rotor. Those are engraved stickers that could be applied to any movement.

@Bignasty

the following thread in RWI has more pictures, can you take a look:

http://www.replica-watch.info/forum/about4319.html

[bigpops]

It looks like an ETA 2846 to me, but without the usual engraving on the rotor.

They're 17 jewels, and 21,600bph, and look very very similar to that.

[r11co]

It looks like an ETA 2846 to me, but without the usual engraving on the rotor.

They're 17 jewels, and 21,600bph, and look very very similar to that.

That's the ones! There's actually nothing wrong with the movement per se, and it is actually a good choice for a vintage rep which requires the lower beat frequency.

Pretty stinky though if you were expecting a 28,800bph 2824 though....

[ubiquitous]

It looks like an ETA 2846 to me, but without the usual engraving on the rotor.

They're 17 jewels, and 21,600bph, and look very very similar to that.

2846 is actually 21j...

[ubiquitous]

For some reason, the more and more I think about it, the more I seem to recall the prior 'ETA Debacle' with the watches from Paul and Silix involving some Racine (Enicar spelled backwards) movements...

Does anyone else remember this? Or maybe I'm taking crazy pills

Edited June 26, 2006 by ubiquitous

[bigpops]

I stand corrected.

It does look like a 2846 though right?

[Pugwash]

2846 is actually 21j...

If these are 2846 ETA movements, doesn't this mean they may be better for Co-axial reps and vintage reps?

[ubiquitous]

It does look like a 2846 though right?

It does look like a 2846, except for the rotor; the rotor in the original post is more characteristic to a 2836 than a 2846. But, that's not to say that rotors can't be swapped

But, to be fair, the 2846 is basically the same mainplates and bridges as a 2836; if you look at ETA's schematics, they list the 2836 and 2846 on the same spec sheet.

If these are 2846 ETA movements, doesn't this mean they may be better for Co-axial reps and vintage reps?

They would indeed! As a matter of fact, I do this very swap in all of my MBW vintage Rolex watches

[cwai02]

So it's a better movement for the vintage.

Do you think I can put this movement in the MBW?

[ubiquitous]

So it's a better movement for the vintage.

Do you think I can put this movement in the MBW?

Yes. I've installed 2846's into these (all MBW):

[dvn]

So what is the verdict? can someone give me a summary of the whole discussion?

[that_watch_guy]

Wow, I thought that deal was a little too good to be true, and it looks like it was. That movement looks like it was alive and ticking back during the Nixon administration.

[Bignasty]

If it is the 2846 I wouldn't mind having it for my 1680 sub!

Jon

[Category 5]

It does look like a 2846, except for the rotor; the rotor in the original post is more characteristic to a 2836 than a 2846. But, that's not to say that rotors can't be swapped

But, to be fair, the 2846 is basically the same mainplates and bridges as a 2836; if you look at ETA's schematics, they list the 2836 and 2846 on the same spec sheet.

They would indeed! As a matter of fact, I do this very swap in all of my MBW vintage Rolex watches

Vintrage Rolex's indeed, but it would be up in the air whether or not you'd want these for a co-ax rep. The first and second edition co-ax movements ran at 28,800bph. they switched to 25,200 to "add to the power reserve", but I've heard the real reason is mfgr. tolerances for the co-axial escapement. The co-ax movements are so accurate, they do not lose accuracy by dropping the beat rate.

[r11co]

If these are 2846 ETA movements, doesn't this mean they may be better for Co-axial reps and vintage reps?

Helloooo!! Am I invisible or something?? Did I not say that?!

PS. There is a 17j version of the 2846 also...

Edited June 27, 2006 by r11co

[Pugwash]

Helloooo!! Am I invisible or something?? Did I not say that?!

You implied it, whereas I wanted unambiguous confirmation.

I wonder if we'll see a flurry of movement trades now.