RobbieG Posted September 6, 2008 Report Share Posted September 6, 2008 My source in GZ confirmed the answer to this question that we have been kicking around. Apparently, there are two reasons. First, the construction of the inner rotating bezel in Ti is very tricky as compared to the Steel. The second is that Ti is EXTREMELY expensive in China for some reason right now. He has asked some makers about this and their answer is no-more titanium watches of any kind unless they are confident the demand will be so high to warrant the high materials cost. The Steel sell through was very good for this watch and that plus the Cousteau versions is evidence that many people who already have one of these may not want to double up and get the Ti version also. Makes sense to me now. Also on another note, I asked why no Seagull 2892 clone movements in many of these reps that have gens based on the 2892. My thought was that they should be very plentiful and inexpensive in China. I have always heard they are good movements. His answer was that the bulk 2892 batches have some quality issues and the makers don't have confidence in it as a result. He said something about the movement being thin? Maybe he is refering to some flimsyness in the construction? Bridge construction/thickness? I have no idea. Anyway, RobbieG reporting in on the AT and 2892. Hope this helps clarify a few things we have been discussing. My source has always been reliable with this sort of info but feel free to draw your own conclusions. Cheers, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Watchmeister Posted September 6, 2008 Report Share Posted September 6, 2008 Interesting info. Titanium has been more expensive than SS for some time. It is also more difficult to work with. For starters ti is formed in a pressurized environment. It also is much harder and thus harder to work with so what you say is not surprising. On the 2892's I am guessing the thin comment relates to the movement itself. 2892's are very thin relative to other standard ETA and rep movements. The base movement is often used with various modules (chrono, PR, etc.) for exactly that reason. It is no surprise that PAM's first auto watches were largely 2893/3 based as it allowed them to use the same standard handwind case. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobbieG Posted September 6, 2008 Author Report Share Posted September 6, 2008 Sorry, I dropped this post into the wrong section. Mods, please be so kind as to move it into the IWC board. Thanks... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sam_tgg Posted September 6, 2008 Report Share Posted September 6, 2008 Interesting info. I wonder me also, why have not seen new IWCs, like the Ingy with ceramics (the answer about the back of the watch is a joke) or the new vintage models, that will be very easy to produce, and at least on the boards, very well sell... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_brian_ Posted September 6, 2008 Report Share Posted September 6, 2008 Thank you, great info. Ti seems to be great for watches: "The two most useful properties of the metal form are corrosion resistance, and the highest strength-to-weight ratio of any metal. In its unalloyed condition, titanium is as strong as some steels, but 45% lighter." (wikipedia) I was just wondering why Ti is so expensive there. It Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest avitt Posted September 6, 2008 Report Share Posted September 6, 2008 The reasoning doesn't make too much sense, since the inner rotating bezel doesn't even have to be Ti. It could just as well be steel, because it's completely painted. Also, the Seagull is known to be a high quality movement. I think that the real (simple) answer is that both of these items are just too expensive for the high margin rep industry. Sounds like your source is just making it up as he goes along... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobbieG Posted September 6, 2008 Author Report Share Posted September 6, 2008 Uhh...if he is already admitting the cost concerns I'm not sure why he would make up the part about the manufacturing issues to boot. What does he gian by lying there? It makes no sense. The reasoning doesn't make too much sense, since the inner rotating bezel doesn't even have to be Ti. It could just as well be steel, because it's completely painted. Also, the Seagull is known to be a high quality movement. I think that the real (simple) answer is that both of these items are just too expensive for the high margin rep industry. Sounds like your source is just making it up as he goes along... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjfesq Posted September 6, 2008 Report Share Posted September 6, 2008 This is too bad because for a while the GST Ti was the best IWC Rep. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest avitt Posted September 6, 2008 Report Share Posted September 6, 2008 (edited) Uhh...if he is already admitting the cost concerns I'm not sure why he would make up the part about the manufacturing issues to boot. What does he gian by lying there? It makes no sense. Uhh, giving you specific reasons makes it appear like he's "in the know". If he just told you that these components were too expensive (something that anyone could deduce for themselves), he wouldn't come across as having any "inside information". Edited September 6, 2008 by avitt Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
takashi Posted September 6, 2008 Report Share Posted September 6, 2008 It all boils down to more $$$ for the rep manufacturers. As for tooling, difficult machining, etc... are just additional reasons which are not the topmost concerns for them. PS: Indeed, the inner rotating bezel for aquatimer is not made of metal. If he is referring to the rotatable crown mechanism, he can easily use the SS part and then just make the crown cap in Titanium. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
takashi Posted September 6, 2008 Report Share Posted September 6, 2008 Uhh, giving you specific reasons makes it appear like he's "in the know". If he just told you that these components were too expensive (something that anyone could deduce for themselves), he wouldn't come across as having any "inside information". This I can buy too... and we will soon start another argument with Rob like on JandrewGate last time. Anyway Rob, why not you share your source to make it very credible. Like that, there would be no more doubt about your stand. If you are not comfortable, you can PM me personally. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjfesq Posted September 6, 2008 Report Share Posted September 6, 2008 Uhh, giving you specific reasons makes it appear like he's "in the know". If he just told you that these components were too expensive (something that anyone could deduce for themselves), he wouldn't come across as having any "inside information". Do you have anything against the poster? You seem to be a little aggressive towards someone who is admitting up front that his info is just hearsay. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest avitt Posted September 6, 2008 Report Share Posted September 6, 2008 It all boils down to more $$$ for the rep manufacturers. As for tooling, difficult machining, etc... are just additional reasons which are not the topmost concerns for them. PS: Indeed, the inner rotating bezel for aquatimer is not made of metal. If he is referring to the rotatable crown mechanism, he can easily use the SS part and then just make the crown cap in Titanium. Agree, with one correction, Taka. The inner rotating bezel of the Aquatimer is indeed made of metal. (I've got a genuine piece here in my hands, so I know this to be true.) Because it is geared, metal is the only material that would hold up over time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
takashi Posted September 6, 2008 Report Share Posted September 6, 2008 And for Seagull ST18, I don't see the problem on this movement mechanically... Infact I own a few watches with this movement and none of them has problems. Again... reason is more $$$ for the repmakers. This movement doesn't come cheap at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
takashi Posted September 6, 2008 Report Share Posted September 6, 2008 Agree, with one correction, Taka. The inner rotating bezel of the Aquatimer is indeed made of metal. (I've got a genuine piece here in my hands, so I know this to be true.) Because it is geared, metal is the only material that would hold up over time. Got it. But this doesn't have to be in Titanium... No visible parts or not? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
takashi Posted September 6, 2008 Report Share Posted September 6, 2008 Infact they have done it here. Just need to change the case and the dial (marker should be full white lume, without SS part): Picture courtesy of TrustyTime, my favourite place to window shop. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest avitt Posted September 6, 2008 Report Share Posted September 6, 2008 Do you have anything against the poster? You seem to be a little aggressive towards someone who is admitting up front that his info is just hearsay. No, not at all. But the original poster did state that his source confirmed these reasons. He also said that I should draw my own conclusions, which is what I'm doing (and you should too ). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobbieG Posted September 6, 2008 Author Report Share Posted September 6, 2008 You know what Taka, you and I got a real problem. My contribution to this thread was no different than last time in the thread you are refering too. Why is everything I say taken so far out of context. Christ. I mean every post where I try to share anything valuable just has to get challenged. Un-friggin-real. Even my posts in the so called Jandrew thread were merely presenting another way of looking at something none of us could ever possibly understand - and admittedly myself included. I even made it clear I wasn't defending them and yet it persists. I don't even own a replica at the moment from any dealer nor do I have any vested interest in any of it. Just trying to look at all the angles an understand this interesting world we live in. And yet there, as here, I am perceived as taking a side of something. Look, EVERYONE who contributed to that thread as in this one seems content on taking some imaginary side, taking a "stand" as you call it and finding an absolute answer EXCEPT me. And regarding this thread...I mean, I own the gen of this piece for Christ sakes, what do I care about it except trying to help the membership and ask my guy questions to find out why this great watch hasn't been repped since it is a likely candidate? And this is what I get in return? Isn't it ironic that I am the one called out as grandstanding and being a know it all when I am only communicating what I heard and have no personal interest in it whatsoever. Everyone but me who has posted in this thread knows something specific about Titanium or construction or whatever EXCEPT me. Good for that. I know nothing about it and simply asked a Chinese guy close to the factories why he thinks they never repped it. Again, let me make this clear. The guy I know in GZ says this stuff - not me. Just sharing it as usual. And as usual sorry that I did. I'm sure you will be pleased to know that I have officially learned my lesson and will never communicate ANY ideas or info to this effect ever again. My posts will be limited to facts suitable for the knowledge base and/or my pictorials. Maybe you might like to PM me Taka and explain why it is you seem to have such a hard on for me lately... Regards, This I can buy too... and we will soon start another argument with Rob like on JandrewGate last time. Anyway Rob, why not you share your source to make it very credible. Like that, there would be no more doubt about your stand. If you are not comfortable, you can PM me personally. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjfesq Posted September 6, 2008 Report Share Posted September 6, 2008 No, not at all. But the original poster did state that his source confirmed these reasons. He also said that I should draw my own conclusions, which is what I'm doing (and you should too ). Good! I'm glad we are all getting along! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobbieG Posted September 6, 2008 Author Report Share Posted September 6, 2008 Thanks man. It is good to know that someone actually READ what I wrote. I appreciate that. I clearly am not the one "in the know" but rather one who ISN'T, which is why I made it clear that I asked a guy a third party what he thought and just wrote what he answered. God help me... Do you have anything against the poster? You seem to be a little aggressive towards someone who is admitting up front that his info is just hearsay. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
b16a2 Posted September 6, 2008 Report Share Posted September 6, 2008 My source in GZ confirmed the answer to this question that we have been kicking around. Apparently, there are two reasons. First, the construction of the inner rotating bezel in Ti is very tricky as compared to the Steel. The second is that Ti is EXTREMELY expensive in China for some reason right now. He has asked some makers about this and their answer is no-more titanium watches of any kind unless they are confident the demand will be so high to warrant the high materials cost. The Steel sell through was very good for this watch and that plus the Cousteau versions is evidence that many people who already have one of these may not want to double up and get the Ti version also. Makes sense to me now. Also on another note, I asked why no Seagull 2892 clone movements in many of these reps that have gens based on the 2892. My thought was that they should be very plentiful and inexpensive in China. I have always heard they are good movements. His answer was that the bulk 2892 batches have some quality issues and the makers don't have confidence in it as a result. He said something about the movement being thin? Maybe he is refering to some flimsyness in the construction? Bridge construction/thickness? I have no idea. Anyway, RobbieG reporting in on the AT and 2892. Hope this helps clarify a few things we have been discussing. My source has always been reliable with this sort of info but feel free to draw your own conclusions. Cheers, That's a rela shame, there are so many nice Ti watches that could be repped, including this one, at least your safe in the knowledge your gen will stay unique though! As for some of the posts...lets keep it on topic, no need to shoot the messenger. Good grief Robbie has the real thing, Im sure he could care less about the rep, this is for OUR benefit. This is info from one source only, so balance that with other views we have heard from our trusted dealers...oh wait we haven't...thanks for the info Robbie. As for some of the posters, use some common sense, this isn't necessarily gospel for all factories, it is information from ONE SOURCE - his reasons for why they haven't been made. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest avitt Posted September 6, 2008 Report Share Posted September 6, 2008 I have absolutely nothing against the OP. I simply clicked on this new thread, because the topic interested me. However, after reading the information presented, I felt compelled to call ...not on the poster, but rather on his source...because his specific reasons are simply not credible. I will point out that there is a fine line on the board between what is presented as rumor, and what is accepted as fact. We should all be very careful to distinguish between the two when posting, particularly when starting new threads. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toadtorrent Posted September 6, 2008 Report Share Posted September 6, 2008 Interesting info. Would bi-metallic corrosion have anything to do with not wanting to mix materials on the case and bezel, or does this not apply in a supposedly "dry" environment? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobbieG Posted September 6, 2008 Author Report Share Posted September 6, 2008 Thank you. Everyone has to know by now that I try to share any info I can for the good of this community and I do so selflessly. RWG is a big part of my life. My days can be lonely as my job is essentially sitting and waiting for hours on end. This community itself is like an old friend to me and I cherish my time here. I don't think anyone can dispute my contribution to RWG over the years as I don't dispute its gifts to me. I only ask that my contributions be recognized as valuable in some and to be given the benefit of the doubt as to thier authenticty. When I post something like this the community has everything to gain and nothing to lose. It's just information. And any information from GZ is always questionable. I only ask that folks be sure to question the info - not my motivation for posting it. Regarding sources, I have two and I freely divulge them. One is my dealer. We all have our favorites and we all ask them to keep us in the loop regularly. The other is a rare find. He is a gifted C# programmer who is a Chinese national. I hired him to do a specific project for me. It turns out that he is into reps and actually has a family member somewhere down the line that works for one of the factories which I had no idea about when I hired him. There is kind of language barrier so I'm not sure in what capacity. You will all have a chance to pick his brain when he joins again. Maybe someone here that speaks Chinese can translate although his English is pretty good. He joined RWG for a short time but he did so from one of the two machines here in the office that I use for internet access. RWG has a strict policy about duplicate accounts. In fairness, there is no way to know whether it is the same person or not and as such theoretically someone could use a duplicate account to scam or otherwise do wrong. To that end I supported the policy so we agreed to have his account cancelled until he can log in from another computer and IP address in compliance with the no duplicate account rule. At the moment I have him in a hotel and as such he doesn't have a computer at home. He also is working basically around the clock with me here so he only goes to the hotel to sleep. But I am pretty sure he is going to accept my offer for permanent employment after his contract is up and if so he will of course get a permanent residence and obviously a computer at home. He intends to re-join then. I'm sure he will be a good resource for info on an ongoing basis and he is also REALLY funny, which is rare for a programmer to begin with - let alone a Chinese one who loves reps! His one fault as I see it as he really loves gangster rap music. But that is another thread. Anyway, I'm sure he will be able to share a lot of watch market stories and the like with you all when he becomes a member again. I'll let the membership know when he returns and introduce him to you. I would appreciate you all making him feel welcome. Really nice kid. Oh, and I'm certain the guy that answers his questions in China has no reason to lie. Especially since he is family... Anyway, I just wanted to let the naysayers know where some of this perfectly innocent info comes from and that there is no grassy knoll, no second shooter, and no smoking gun from RobbieG... That's a rela shame, there are so many nice Ti watches that could be repped, including this one, at least your safe in the knowledge your gen will stay unique though! As for some of the posts...lets keep it on topic, no need to shoot the messenger. Good grief Robbie has the real thing, Im sure he could care less about the rep, this is for OUR benefit. This is info from one source only, so balance that with other views we have heard from our trusted dealers...oh wait we haven't...thanks for the info Robbie. As for some of the posters, use some common sense, this isn't necessarily gospel for all factories, it is information from ONE SOURCE - his reasons for why they haven't been made. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
takashi Posted September 6, 2008 Report Share Posted September 6, 2008 Well, that will become much clearer then. However, I am still can't believe his reasoning on Seagull ST18 movement. It's not fragile and it works pretty well (on VCO, a few Patek, really early batch of SMP closed factory and FM). I believe there are more reps which use this movement but it's rare. Even cousinsuk has this movement for quite a high price (about 40 poundsterling). Yes, it's thinner than ETA2824-2 or 2836-2 but this is the attribute of this movement (ETA2892-A2 is thinner too). That doesn't mean that this is a bad movement. If you deduce from that, simply cost rather than availability that is hindering the repmakers from using this movement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.