Malaysia Watch Forum
Main Forums => General Discussion - Modern Watches => Topic started by: Godzillaz on April 18, 2013, 04:43:12 PM
-
Recently I have found out using in house movement as a criteria for watch purchase is not very practical.
The more I read about the industry the more I'm convince that even buying a watch with in house movement doesn't guarantee you get what you pay for.
Do others feel the same or is just me being tired of all the lies from these so call in house movement talk. :(
Hope to hear more all of you.
Regard
Tyler
-
For me, the question is more on proven reliability.
Brands are now churning out "in-house" movements at record speed.
I am sure most would prefer to go with a reliable movement be it in house or not.
I would be damn to spend huge amounts of money just to buy the "in house" exclusivity while having the watch suffer breakdowns every now and then.
About all the lies about "in house"ness.... I would have to sadly agree...
The use of the term "in house" and "manufacture" movement can be really misleading.
But with that being said, how many of the consumers really took the extra trouble to find out more? Not many I am afraid.
-
IMHO, it is always an advantage for a watch company to produce its own movement. They could then be a regarded as a true watchmaker rather than a company that makes nice cases for movements made by other companies (eta, etc). Brands like Patek, JLC and AP will always be held in high regards because they are a true manufacture and of course a great history and legacy to go with it. However, it is most definitely not practical to only have one criteria when deciding to buy a watch. You must first like the design of the watch, the finishing, heritage, etc...and of course the BUDGET! If budget is not a problem, I would say that it is a no brainer to go for Manufactures. If the budget is limited, you would need to prioritize on what is important to you.
Just my few cents on the topic. Cheers! :Cheers:
-
in house would be def a preferable and desire, but depend on which model especially the reliability of the movement. for some brand who were still young in in-house moment i'd still go for their ETA movement, reason why is try to reduce unnecessary frustration on a hard earn $ goes into a watch that gives problem.
rolex movement is one of best in-house known in reliability IMO, higher end would be those AP and PP etc
altho i still have a lil doubt with GS spring drive, but i do have faint on their quality control assurance, mindset ;D
-
I much prefer watches with in house movement.
This criteria has helped to narrow my selections tremendously.
For me, in house movement and brand heritage are two of the key guides in my purchases
:)
-
eh... PP & AP and their "inhouse". Ironically the one that fetches the highest prices in auctions and in terms of "collectibility" are not completely "inhouse"
for me i second Hanz' view. Reliability tops my list and if inhouse+reliability+easy access to local servicing points/agents, now that would be perfect :thumbsup:
so for me... now you might understand, that is why I and such a boring modest collection. No point being inhouse while having to spend 6 months to a year away everytime it needs servicing.
IMHO, it is always an advantage for a watch company to produce its own movement. They could then be a regarded as a true watchmaker rather than a company that makes nice cases for movements made by other companies (eta, etc). Brands like Patek, JLC and AP will always be held in high regards because they are a true manufacture and of course a great history and legacy to go with it. However, it is most definitely not practical to only have one criteria when deciding to buy a watch. You must first like the design of the watch, the finishing, heritage, etc...and of course the BUDGET! If budget is not a problem, I would say that it is a no brainer to go for Manufactures. If the budget is limited, you would need to prioritize on what is important to you.
Just my few cents on the topic. Cheers! :Cheers:
-
I believe in a similar thread here somewhere (could not dig it up)
Someone mention how do you consider a movement "in-house"?
Do they mine their own ore? Make every single part? Down to the spring bars and leather straps? As in grow their own herd of cows to get the leather to make the straps? You get the idea... the whole "in house" argument becomes pointless.
I remember Tag Heuer Mr.Babin mentioned that even their caliber 1887 is "in-house" even when they based the movement off a Seiko IP.
Tyler is correct in mentioning about all the marketing lies... I feel that way too...
It's misleading.
Sometimes it's frustrating when misinformation gets passed around by sales agents to consumers where in turn passed the misinformation to other consumers.
I have a friend that kept telling me his Oris is on an in house movement because it has a red rotor... a sign of an Oris movement.
I asked him who said so, he said the saleman said so.
Juan Carlos Torres, the CEO of one of the big three (VC) openly said in an interview that Lemania is still the best chrono movement out there and they are still using it as a base movement and do not have any plans of stopping.
That's why I still believe the most reliable and bullet proof movement that can give the owner years of problem free ownership is better than dropping serious moolah for an "in house" movement that needed to be away every couple of months in a year due to unreliability and teething pains.
Watch manufacturers are selling the "idea" that in house is better which is hardly the case.
Status wise, it offers some intangible value, but ownership experience and peace of mind is the real criteria.
-
I agree that to the non-sophisticated buyer, one can be overwhelmed by marketing speak and pay a premium just because it happens to be in-house movement. Not all in-house movements have proven reliability, while others have bullet-proof credentials. Perhaps this forum can enlighten as to which specific brands fall into either category.
-
I agree that to the non-sophisticated buyer, one can be overwhelmed by marketing speak and pay a premium just because it happens to be in-house movement. Not all in-house movements have proven reliability, while others have bullet-proof credentials. Perhaps this forum can enlighten as to which specific brands fall into either category.
Proven reliable in-house movement, easy access to local service, parts availability, resonable service cost?
(Ordinary) Seikos, nuff said.
-
i m going for reliability....
dont care is in house or not....
so end up alot of eta / eta modified...
it is easier for maintenance as well.... no part issue!
in house if not accurate and not reliable + expensive.... then basically u r paying premium for testing....
now adays can a watch company afford to design, build and test it for 10 yrs b4 selling it?
-
..... mentioning about all the marketing lies... I feel that way too...
It's misleading.
Sometimes it's frustrating when misinformation gets passed around by sales agents to consumers where in turn passed the misinformation to other consumers......
That's why I still believe the most reliable and bullet proof movement that can give the owner years of problem free ownership is better than dropping serious moolah for an "in house" movement that needed to be away every couple of months in a year due to unreliability and teething pains.
Watch manufacturers are selling the "idea" that in house is better which is hardly the case.
Status wise, it offers some intangible value, but ownership experience and peace of mind is the real criteria.
My point exactly, of course as we spend more time in this hobby, the reading and sharing among friends. Ultimately we will be able to tell the poser from the authentic.
However my dilemma is ...
In house (Spring Drive)
(http://i1079.photobucket.com/albums/w501/TdBean/credor_zps13e3e6ed.jpg) (http://s1079.photobucket.com/user/TdBean/media/credor_zps13e3e6ed.jpg.html)
Not in house(ETA)
(http://i1079.photobucket.com/albums/w501/TdBean/mdufourm91_zpsb375a4c6.jpg) (http://s1079.photobucket.com/user/TdBean/media/mdufourm91_zpsb375a4c6.jpg.html)
Here's the close up
Comparing the two you can see which one has "watchmaking" than the other. Even to an untrained eye it's easy to spot the different level of finishing and care on these two watch.
(http://i1079.photobucket.com/albums/w501/TdBean/mspringb02_zps8a340d6a.jpg) (http://s1079.photobucket.com/user/TdBean/media/mspringb02_zps8a340d6a.jpg.html)
(http://i1079.photobucket.com/albums/w501/TdBean/mdufourb02_zps135a697a.jpg) (http://s1079.photobucket.com/user/TdBean/media/mdufourb02_zps135a697a.jpg.html)
All photos by Steve G
Not only that, I don't think seiko can guarantee the repair of the spring drive movement for more than 15 years because not all part are mechanical. While on the other hand the ETA can be service and maintain by any master watchmaker for a long long time.
In this case the in house is a complete no go for me.
Is a tricky subject for sure.
Regard
Tyler
-
Hmm...like almost everything in life, there are always bad apples out there. I do agree that there are many unreliable so called "in house" movements around (especially from those companies that have just started to make their own movements) but there are also proven in house manufactures such as JLC, Patek, AP, Rolex, Zenith, etc that have very reliable movements. It goes without saying that reliability is key and it will be silly to go for in house just for the sake of it. Like I said earlier, all things being equal, it is always better to go for a manufacture rather than one that uses standard ebauches. A watch company is not really a watch company if they do not make their own movements. Might be harsh but it is true.
-
I do not know the reliability of Seiko's hybrid spring drive movement but finishing is just one aspect of watchmaking. It is unfair to say that the modified ETA have more "watchmaking" than the Credor based solely on finishing. The Dufour only needs to modify a standard ebauche and place great care in finishing. The Seiko on the other hand created their own movement and own hybrid technology from scratch that is unique to them. Now ask yourself the question again as to which company have more "watchmaking" credentials?
..... mentioning about all the marketing lies... I feel that way too...
It's misleading.
Sometimes it's frustrating when misinformation gets passed around by sales agents to consumers where in turn passed the misinformation to other consumers......
That's why I still believe the most reliable and bullet proof movement that can give the owner years of problem free ownership is better than dropping serious moolah for an "in house" movement that needed to be away every couple of months in a year due to unreliability and teething pains.
Watch manufacturers are selling the "idea" that in house is better which is hardly the case.
Status wise, it offers some intangible value, but ownership experience and peace of mind is the real criteria.
My point exactly, of course as we spend more time in this hobby, the reading and sharing among friends. Ultimately we will be able to tell the poser from the authentic.
However my dilemma is ...
In house (Spring Drive)
(http://i1079.photobucket.com/albums/w501/TdBean/credor_zps13e3e6ed.jpg) (http://s1079.photobucket.com/user/TdBean/media/credor_zps13e3e6ed.jpg.html)
Not in house(ETA)
(http://i1079.photobucket.com/albums/w501/TdBean/mdufourm91_zpsb375a4c6.jpg) (http://s1079.photobucket.com/user/TdBean/media/mdufourm91_zpsb375a4c6.jpg.html)
Here's the close up
Comparing the two you can see which one has "watchmaking" than the other. Even to an untrained eye it's easy to spot the different level of finishing and care on these two watch.
(http://i1079.photobucket.com/albums/w501/TdBean/mspringb02_zps8a340d6a.jpg) (http://s1079.photobucket.com/user/TdBean/media/mspringb02_zps8a340d6a.jpg.html)
(http://i1079.photobucket.com/albums/w501/TdBean/mdufourb02_zps135a697a.jpg) (http://s1079.photobucket.com/user/TdBean/media/mdufourb02_zps135a697a.jpg.html)
All photos by Steve G
Not only that, I don't think seiko can guarantee the repair of the spring drive movement for more than 15 years because not all part are mechanical. While on the other hand the ETA can be service and maintain by any master watchmaker for a long long time.
In this case the in house is a complete no go for me.
Is a tricky subject for sure.
Regard
Tyler
-
Precisely. Which have more credentials? The old man who spend his entire life making fine watches using the tradition way or a big corporation who majority product are not serviceable.
By the way I don't know whether you aware that a few years ago Seiko invite Dufour over to Japan to seek his advice on how to improve their Grand Seiko line.
I know finishing is only part of it that's because the topic is center around movement. I didn't wanna go into the discussion of a whole watch simply due to the scope of the subject is too broad to reach an end.
Same thing could be say about movement. Just by developing its own movement doesn't automatically quality itself as a superior watchmaker.
Regard
Tyler
-
Dufour is indeed a very fine watchmaker and his services will indeed be valued by any watch companies out there. As there are many variables in watchmaking like you so rightly mentioned, the question should really be condensed into a simple question. With everything else being a constant (finishing, reliability, serviceablity,pricing, etc), would you not prefer to buy from a true Manufacture? I know I would.
Precisely. Which have more credentials? The old man who spend his entire life making fine watches using the tradition way or a big corporation who majority product are not serviceable.
By the way I don't know whether you aware that a few years ago Seiko invite Dufour over to Japan to seek his advice on how to improve their Grand Seiko line.
I know finishing is only part of it that's because the topic is center around movement. I didn't wanna go into the discussion of a whole watch simply due to the scope of the subject is too broad to reach an end.
Same thing could be say about movement. Just by developing its own movement doesn't automatically quality itself as a superior watchmaker.
Regard
Tyler
-
If other variables are taken into considerations, then there is ultimately no right or wrong answer since different people will value different aspects of the watchmaking process. Dufour is a brilliant watchmaker with brilliant ideas but you would need the financial clout and technical know how of a respected Manufacture or a specialist movement company to convert ideas into reality.
-
If all things being equal?
Finishing could be equal, reliability could be equal, serviceability could never be equal taking into considerations of parts availability of an eta movement and an in house movement, pricing could never be equal as well since brands are charging a premium for in house.
So, if we were to gauge the situation based on "all things equal", that would be unrealistic.
Yeah, i guess there would be no right or wrong answer...
Best value overall in house? Seiko
Best value swiss in house? Rolex and Omega following closely behind.
That's what i think.
-
Daylight robbery?
1. Brand X (Swiss Made SS) with ETAXXX movt = RRP RM5,000
2. Brand Y (Swiss Made SS) with ETAXXX movt = RRP RM15,000
Saint?
1. Brand Z (Swiss Made SS) with in-house movt = RRP RM15,000
-
That is a theoretical "equal" to take out the subjectivity of other influencing factors. After all, the question posted was "Do you always prefer in house movement or not in house?". It is of course unrealistic in the real world...but you would need to remove variables to answer a question directly.
If all things being equal?
Finishing could be equal, reliability could be equal, serviceability could never be equal taking into considerations of parts availability of an eta movement and an in house movement, pricing could never be equal as well since brands are charging a premium for in house.
So, if we were to gauge the situation based on "all things equal", that would be unrealistic.
Yeah, i guess there would be no right or wrong answer...
Best value overall in house? Seiko
Best value swiss in house? Rolex and Omega following closely behind.
That's what i think.
-
I agree that to the non-sophisticated buyer, one can be overwhelmed by marketing speak and pay a premium just because it happens to be in-house movement. Not all in-house movements have proven reliability, while others have bullet-proof credentials. Perhaps this forum can enlighten as to which specific brands fall into either category.
I think Euclidorus summed it up very nicely on 2 points.
(1) It is marketing speak as this provides an avenue for the more established players to drive a bigger gap between them and the lower liners. Getting "in-house" also justifies higher pricing...a much easier route to revenue growth than volume expansion.... surely attractive to a growing brand.
(2) In-house does not equate to reliability. I am sure that many "in-house" can't hold a candle against the likes of the 2824-2s and 2892s.
Interestingly, Nick Hayek said, in defending Swatch Group's move to limit/stop sales of ebauches to the independents as being driven by the need to see more players develop their own...which in his mind is for the benefit of the whole industry.....my sense is that it is to the detriment of consumers as that would lead to higher pricing on the above rationale.
-
Most reliable movt = quartz movt
PP complication movement = unreliable / prone to damage / high maintenance / high price
-
That is a theoretical "equal" to take out the subjectivity of other influencing factors. After all, the question posted was "Do you always prefer in house movement or not in house?". It is of course unrealistic in the real world...but you would need to remove variables to answer a question directly. If all things being equal?
Finishing could be equal, reliability could be equal, serviceability could never be equal taking into considerations of parts availability of an eta movement and an in house movement, pricing could never be equal as well since brands are charging a premium for in house.
So, if we were to gauge the situation based on "all things equal", that would be unrealistic.
Yeah, i guess there would be no right or wrong answer...
Best value overall in house? Seiko
Best value swiss in house? Rolex and Omega following closely behind.
That's what i think.
Difficult thing to do I would suspect in taking out variables.
The question wether or not in house is preferred? Yes, but not sacrificing reliability, robustness, ease of servicing, parts availability, cost so on and so forth.
I do believe it is interconnected somehow.
And if we were to summarize the answer to the title of this thread, it would be a "Yes" but with that answer also comes additional questions. Which is the main discussion in this thread I think.
-
I'm confuse by your conflicting point.
If all things being equal then,YES one should choose an in house movement
but
Never a situation where all things can be equal, so YES we should still go for in house movement because is a manufacturer has more credentials?
Then the final point
There are many aspect to consider when buying a watch so the question "Do you always prefer in house movement or not in house?' is an unrealistic one and reliability is the key ....
and the answer is? ???
That is a theoretical "equal" to take out the subjectivity of other influencing factors. After all, the question posted was "Do you always prefer in house movement or not in house?". It is of course unrealistic in the real world...but you would need to remove variables to answer a question directly.
-
Best value overall in house? Seiko - Yes!
Best value swiss in house? Rolex (Yes!) and Omega (eh .. really?)following closely behind.
That's what i think.
-
Best value overall in house? Seiko - Yes!
Best value swiss in house? Rolex (Yes!) and Omega (eh .. really?)following closely behind.
That's what i think.
Omega ok bah... for the asking prices... I believe they are ok...
-
Best value overall in house? Seiko - Yes!
Best value swiss in house? Rolex (Yes!) and Omega (eh .. really?)following closely behind.
That's what i think.
Omega ok bah... for the asking prices... I believe they are ok...
Given the choice to choose between Omega and Zenith, I'll go for a Zenith. ;D
-
Tyler, in your posted example, it appears that your criteria was primarily movement finishing & long term ease of servicing. I would choose differently (without the benefit of seeing the case design) here and would base my primary criteria on the fact that Seiko controls pretty much the entire value chain of manufacture and has 20 years of R&D to support any future issues that may arise. However, if you do post a picture of the other sides of both watches, perhaps I may get seduced by Dufour so much that whether it is ETA or in house does not matter any more, i.e. the heart rules over the head.
..... mentioning about all the marketing lies... I feel that way too...
It's misleading.
Sometimes it's frustrating when misinformation gets passed around by sales agents to consumers where in turn passed the misinformation to other consumers......
That's why I still believe the most reliable and bullet proof movement that can give the owner years of problem free ownership is better than dropping serious moolah for an "in house" movement that needed to be away every couple of months in a year due to unreliability and teething pains.
Watch manufacturers are selling the "idea" that in house is better which is hardly the case.
Status wise, it offers some intangible value, but ownership experience and peace of mind is the real criteria.
My point exactly, of course as we spend more time in this hobby, the reading and sharing among friends. Ultimately we will be able to tell the poser from the authentic.
However my dilemma is ...
In house (Spring Drive)
(http://i1079.photobucket.com/albums/w501/TdBean/credor_zps13e3e6ed.jpg) (http://s1079.photobucket.com/user/TdBean/media/credor_zps13e3e6ed.jpg.html)
Not in house(ETA)
(http://i1079.photobucket.com/albums/w501/TdBean/mdufourm91_zpsb375a4c6.jpg) (http://s1079.photobucket.com/user/TdBean/media/mdufourm91_zpsb375a4c6.jpg.html)
Here's the close up
Comparing the two you can see which one has "watchmaking" than the other. Even to an untrained eye it's easy to spot the different level of finishing and care on these two watch.
(http://i1079.photobucket.com/albums/w501/TdBean/mspringb02_zps8a340d6a.jpg) (http://s1079.photobucket.com/user/TdBean/media/mspringb02_zps8a340d6a.jpg.html)
(http://i1079.photobucket.com/albums/w501/TdBean/mdufourb02_zps135a697a.jpg) (http://s1079.photobucket.com/user/TdBean/media/mdufourb02_zps135a697a.jpg.html)
All photos by Steve G
Not only that, I don't think seiko can guarantee the repair of the spring drive movement for more than 15 years because not all part are mechanical. While on the other hand the ETA can be service and maintain by any master watchmaker for a long long time.
In this case the in house is a complete no go for me.
Is a tricky subject for sure.
Regard
Tyler
-
LOL. :laugh:
Some model are quite nice. The new speedmaster with 2 sub dial I like a lot. The movement is super robust I heard.
Omega ok bah... for the asking prices... I believe they are ok...
-
Best value overall in house? Seiko - Yes!
Best value swiss in house? Rolex (Yes!) and Omega (eh .. really?)following closely behind.
That's what i think.
Omega ok bah... for the asking prices... I believe they are ok...
Given the choice to choose between Omega and Zenith, I'll go for a Zenith. ;D
Zenith is a sure thing... but as u all know... I am a huge fan... can't always be seen pushing Zenith in front right? lol
-
That would be cheating. If I do post the the dial side. :)
My dilemma is primary on the new high technology/design of nowadays compare to old style make by hand approach.
As you know there's no way you can make a spring drive movement by hand. A traditional watchmaker usually source available parts, ie case, dial, hands, movement in raw/crude state and go on to modify/upgrade to a desire state to his own standard.
I have learn that this practice has been practice way before the supposedly "in house movement mania" in the post 2000s.
I mean rolex never make any new movement since they introduce their automatics in the 40s/50s until 2004 where they release the new daytona.
They are basically a 1 movement company.
The Holy Trinity? I don't think their so called "in house movement" has existed more than 35 years.
In terms of control value chain. I don't think any company would stock more than 20% spare parts of their total production. If is something too high tech it won't be forever fixable. An example would be the those electronic board in the IT industry. When old printer/DLP projector breakdown there is finite time where the manufacturer have available spare parts to fix it. After that period all we can do is throw the thing away.
Mechanical parts can be fabricate by hand even after a long period has passed but ic board and micro circuit? Who is going to open a production line to help print just one board?
Hence my dilemma. Don't get me wrong. I love the sprind drive (got one myself) but I wonder about it's lifespan.
Tyler, in your posted example, it appears that your criteria was primarily movement finishing & long term ease of servicing. I would choose differently (without the benefit of seeing the case design) here and would base my primary criteria on the fact that Seiko controls pretty much the entire value chain of manufacture and has 20 years of R&D to support any future issues that may arise. However, if you do post a picture of the other sides of both watches, perhaps I may get seduced by Dufour so much that whether it is ETA or in house does not matter any more, i.e. the heart rules over the head.
-
Precisely. Which have more credentials? The old man who spend his entire life making fine watches using the tradition way or a big corporation who majority product are not serviceable.
By the way I don't know whether you aware that a few years ago Seiko invite Dufour over to Japan to seek his advice on how to improve their Grand Seiko line.
I know finishing is only part of it that's because the topic is center around movement. I didn't wanna go into the discussion of a whole watch simply due to the scope of the subject is too broad to reach an end.
Same thing could be say about movement. Just by developing its own movement doesn't automatically quality itself as a superior watchmaker.
Regard
Tyler
The debate about in-house vs. ETA/Valjoux/UNITAS has been debated countless times in many fora but remains refreshing.
My humble observations:
(a) Reliability - 2 different brands housing the same ETA/VJ/UNITAS movement may not have equal reliability. I have experience of a watch with UNITAS movement (ristis, don't get excited, it was a daniel jean richard) which needs servicing probbaly as often as the NASA space shuttle.
(b) Ease of Servicing - Some of the movements (albeit not in-house) used by Phillipe Dufour are so well polished and sculptured that I fear you will not be able to find a watchmaker in this part of the world to repair / replace if any of these parts are damaged. You will need to send it back to Switzerland in any instance. Moreover, would you want a local watchmaker with probably lesser watchmakng skill than Mr. Phillipe Dufour to service your beautiful and expensive PD watch?? Hence, ease of servicing do not apply equally to all ETA/VJ/Unitas watches.
(c) Phillipe Dufour creates some truly beautiful watches. Yes, I read he was invited by Seiko to advise them on the finishing (emphasis added deliberately ;D) to some Credor movements. I am not aware of his involvement to improve the GS line. Perhaps Godzilla can share his source of information and what improvement PD made to the GS line (better accuracy?? longer PR??).
-
Just like F1 teams using myriad of similar engines with their own inhouse works tuners and engineers to rework it, the watch industries are the same. There are just a handful of "engine" suppliers.
It's just how much you want to rework the calibre and market it out (e.g. IWC, Omega 2500, Ressence, PSM etc) or just plonk it in with minimal works (Sinn, Bremont, Helson etc) and calling it your own (Panerai unitas and 7750)
Of course the former method requires a deeper pocket and heck load of more patience to own and when maintenance period is up. The do require a more specialised set of parts and know how of the interior workings vs the latter. The time spent away would definitely be much longer which requires sending back to the SCs and not just your neighbourhood certified watchmaker.
Caveat, like what Tyler have brought up would be the supply of parts bin by the manufacturers in time to come. Even an inhouse manufacturer like Rolex does not service it's own watches of more than 30 years. So being inhouse does not guarantee eternal bliss. So does that mean collectors should follow examples of vintage cars lovers in hoarding up rubber seals, door latches, meters and etc?
An ideal world would be having a deep enough pocket to acquire a collection of workhorses and pedigree pieces. While the thoroughbred are away at the spa, you can take the workhorses out for some adventure.
-
Just like F1 teams using myriad of similar engines with their own inhouse works tuners and engineers to rework it, the watch industries are the same. There are just a handful of "engine" suppliers.
It's just how much you want to rework the calibre and market it out (e.g. IWC, Omega 2500, Ressence, PSM etc) or just plonk it in with minimal works (Sinn, Bremont, Helson etc) and calling it your own (Panerai unitas and 7750)
Of course the former method requires a deeper pocket and heck load of more patience to own and when maintenance period is up. The do require a more specialised set of parts and know how of the interior workings vs the latter. The time spent away would definitely be much longer which requires sending back to the SCs and not just your neighbourhood certified watchmaker.
Caveat, like what Tyler have brought up would be the supply of parts bin by the manufacturers in time to come. Even an inhouse manufacturer like Rolex does not service it's own watches of more than 30 years. So being inhouse does not guarantee eternal bliss. So does that mean collectors should follow examples of vintage cars lovers in hoarding up rubber seals, door latches, meters and etc?
An ideal world would be having a deep enough pocket to acquire a collection of workhorses and pedigree pieces. While the thoroughbred are away at the spa, you can take the workhorses out for some adventure.
:thumbsup: :thumbsup:
-
Now this is the type of topic i love.
First in reply to Terrence,
Technically F1 engines are frozen for development.
Teams are only allowed to change engine mapping to suit styles of drivers and the circuit.
NOTHING inside the engine can be changed. As per the rules.
Back to topic i agree with most here.
I would go for reliability first than anything else.
But sometimes the heart takes over and i go for something else.
But dont know if i am lucky or not, usually the newer in house movt are 2x-5x more expensive than their same brand same model eta/soprod/technotime etc equiv.
I think the in flux of in house movt in the market in recent years is due to the eta effect.
Dont know how long each company took to develop their movt and if its been tested or not so thats a gamble on our own.
Do i "look down" on eta modified brands?
Well...if the brand did enough "improvements" and extra time and finishing on it, why not?
Damn...i for one paid for one hell of a an expensive eta modified 2892 watch.
-
My points are not conflicting. If all things being equal, it will be a no brainer to go for in-house. If not, we would need to decide on what is important to us such as reliability, finishing, branding, design, etc, etc. There are no right or wrong answers. I personally chose the Omega PO with ETA movement rather than their in house 8500 movement as I thought the price increase was unjustified. However, I also chose the Zenith Stratos Striking 10th over a lower end but comparatively priced Panerai or IWC with ETA movement (as an example) as I value the in-house El Primero movement and its heritage. I of course also like the design of both Panerais and IWC as much as the Zenith but I could not justify paying so much money for them as they use slightly modified ETA movements that are also used in other watches costing a fraction of the price. The El Primero is unique to Zenith (and some early versions of Daytona among others) and the fact that it is made in house with unique complications such as the 1/10th foudrayante made the decision easy for me. It really is a case by case basis if you factor in other variables. Go with what is important to you.
I'm confuse by your conflicting point.
If all things being equal then,YES one should choose an in house movement
but
Never a situation where all things can be equal, so YES we should still go for in house movement because is a manufacturer has more credentials?
Then the final point
There are many aspect to consider when buying a watch so the question "Do you always prefer in house movement or not in house?' is an unrealistic one and reliability is the key ....
and the answer is? ???
That is a theoretical "equal" to take out the subjectivity of other influencing factors. After all, the question posted was "Do you always prefer in house movement or not in house?". It is of course unrealistic in the real world...but you would need to remove variables to answer a question directly.
-
Aaaa ... ... I get it now.
Thanks to the example you gave. I was a bit lost now is crystal clear. Thanks for taking the time to explain it to a bonehead like me. :thumbsup:
I always thought using in house movement as a criteria for a purchase may not be fool proof. Your experience reinforce my thought.
Thanks again.
Regard
Tyler
My points are not conflicting. If all things being equal, it will be a no brainer to go for in-house. If not, we would need to decide on what is important to us such as reliability, finishing, branding, design, etc, etc. There are no right or wrong answers. I personally chose the Omega PO with ETA movement rather than their in house 8500 movement as I thought the price increase was unjustified. However, I also chose the Zenith Stratos Striking 10th over a lower end but comparatively priced Panerai or IWC with ETA movement (as an example) as I value the in-house El Primero movement and its heritage. I of course also like the design of both Panerais and IWC as much as the Zenith but I could not justify paying so much money for them as they use slightly modified ETA movements that are also used in other watches costing a fraction of the price. The El Primero is unique to Zenith (and some early versions of Daytona among others) and the fact that it is made in house with unique complications such as the 1/10th foudrayante made the decision easy for me. It really is a case by case basis if you factor in other variables. Go with what is important to you.
-
For example:
PAM 176 - Caliber OP X (ETA 6497)
Omega PO 232.30.42.21.01.001 - Caliber 8500
PAM pricing is higher than the Omega, IMHO I will choose Omega given that the cheaper price and with in-house movement (some argued that 8500 still doesn't consider as 100% in-house)
-
Peter, is not just an ETA movement, you also get the integrity of a master watchmaker.
It might be worthless to many ppl but I treasure such thing.
Regard
Tyler
Now this is the type of topic i love.
First in reply to Terrence,
Technically F1 engines are frozen for development.
Teams are only allowed to change engine mapping to suit styles of drivers and the circuit.
NOTHING inside the engine can be changed. As per the rules.
Back to topic i agree with most here.
I would go for reliability first than anything else.
But sometimes the heart takes over and i go for something else.
But dont know if i am lucky or not, usually the newer in house movt are 2x-5x more expensive than their same brand same model eta/soprod/technotime etc equiv.
I think the in flux of in house movt in the market in recent years is due to the eta effect.
Dont know how long each company took to develop their movt and if its been tested or not so thats a gamble on our own.
Do i "look down" on eta modified brands?
Well...if the brand did enough "improvements" and extra time and finishing on it, why not?
Damn...i for one paid for one hell of a an expensive eta modified 2892 watch.
-
Tyler,
Agreed. Sometimes to be able to put a face and know the idea and philosophy on what and why each mod is done to the base caliber is very important to me.
Out of curiosity, i seriously didnt know the PD watch was based on a eta.
Which model?
-
Haha. :Cheers:
Aaaa ... ... I get it now.
Thanks to the example you gave. I was a bit lost now is crystal clear. Thanks for taking the time to explain it to a bonehead like me. :thumbsup:
I always thought using in house movement as a criteria for a purchase may not be fool proof. Your experience reinforce my thought.
Thanks again.
Regard
Tyler
My points are not conflicting. If all things being equal, it will be a no brainer to go for in-house. If not, we would need to decide on what is important to us such as reliability, finishing, branding, design, etc, etc. There are no right or wrong answers. I personally chose the Omega PO with ETA movement rather than their in house 8500 movement as I thought the price increase was unjustified. However, I also chose the Zenith Stratos Striking 10th over a lower end but comparatively priced Panerai or IWC with ETA movement (as an example) as I value the in-house El Primero movement and its heritage. I of course also like the design of both Panerais and IWC as much as the Zenith but I could not justify paying so much money for them as they use slightly modified ETA movements that are also used in other watches costing a fraction of the price. The El Primero is unique to Zenith (and some early versions of Daytona among others) and the fact that it is made in house with unique complications such as the 1/10th foudrayante made the decision easy for me. It really is a case by case basis if you factor in other variables. Go with what is important to you.
-
That's a brilliant plan. You always strike me as a forward thinking but sensible person.
Regard
Tyler
Just like F1 teams using myriad of similar engines with their own inhouse works tuners and engineers to rework it, the watch industries are the same. There are just a handful of "engine" suppliers.
It's just how much you want to rework the calibre and market it out (e.g. IWC, Omega 2500, Ressence, PSM etc) or just plonk it in with minimal works (Sinn, Bremont, Helson etc) and calling it your own (Panerai unitas and 7750)
Of course the former method requires a deeper pocket and heck load of more patience to own and when maintenance period is up. The do require a more specialised set of parts and know how of the interior workings vs the latter. The time spent away would definitely be much longer which requires sending back to the SCs and not just your neighbourhood certified watchmaker.
Caveat, like what Tyler have brought up would be the supply of parts bin by the manufacturers in time to come. Even an inhouse manufacturer like Rolex does not service it's own watches of more than 30 years. So being inhouse does not guarantee eternal bliss. So does that mean collectors should follow examples of vintage cars lovers in hoarding up rubber seals, door latches, meters and etc?
An ideal world would be having a deep enough pocket to acquire a collection of workhorses and pedigree pieces. While the thoroughbred are away at the spa, you can take the workhorses out for some adventure.
-
Zenith is a sure thing... but as u all know... I am a huge fan... can't always be seen pushing Zenith in front right? lol
Hi, Hanz,
I guess it does no harm to push our old friend Zenith to the front a bit every now and then. When that Felix (what's his full name??) fellow pushed himself from a balloon floating dunno how many miles up the earth reportedly wearing a striking 10th stratos, I believe the interest in this brand stirred quite a bit but that itself has since died down..... :laugh:
Truly, Zenith is probably one of the least appreciated of all in-house manufacturers. Imagine, in 1999/2000 the Rolex Daytona SS black dial equipped with the EP movement was selling (at premium) close to RM38K if I recall correctly. The Zenith EP chronograph without moonphase could be bought for RM6,9000 without any negotiation and the EP chronograph moonphase for about RM8,500. Hence, the watch with non in-house movement (Daytona, with EP movement but tuned down to 28,800bph) was seling at nearly 600% the price of the watch with in-house movement (Zenith EP Chrono). ;)
Likewise, these days a basic Zenith with its well tested Elite movement (which by the way won the movement of the year award in 1994) could still be bought in the RM 15k++ region :thumbsup:, well below some watches stuffed with UNITAS based movement.
And since you are in the topic of "best value swiss in house", maybe it's also worth mentioning the venerable JLC.......
(http://i1244.photobucket.com/albums/gg574/loochunboon/jlcmastercalendar3_zpsf4ef663b.jpg) (http://s1244.photobucket.com/user/loochunboon/media/jlcmastercalendar3_zpsf4ef663b.jpg.html)
(http://i1244.photobucket.com/albums/gg574/loochunboon/jlcchrono150113_zpsc126d2c1.jpg) (http://s1244.photobucket.com/user/loochunboon/media/jlcchrono150113_zpsc126d2c1.jpg.html)
Each of the above 2 watches is priced (after the usual miserly discount....) in the same region as a boring Rolex Sub-date (after the usual ridiculous premium!!)... :D
-
No harm saying what you like as long as it is the truth. :D
Regard
Tyler
Zenith is a sure thing... but as u all know... I am a huge fan... can't always be seen pushing Zenith in front right? lol
-
But what constitute as "inhouse" nowadays?
Does one consider Breguet, Blancpain, Montblanc and VC "inhouse"? Or certain ACHI member's work as true artisan "inhouse"?
What would happen if let's say...VH passes.. who would you send to work on your pieces? Do you just keep it suspended in a vacuum glass tube with a winder and touch it with white gloves like those pieces of art in the Louvre?
Mass produced "inhouse" is just a marketing ploy to further push up the brand's prestige. But there are pros to it because of the service support it provides.
I always look at the hobby as parallel compared to buying cars. If you worry about maintenance, then buy a "generic" mass produced "inhouse" or ETA equipped watch. If money is of no limit, get yourself a Koenigsegg.
On the polished flipside would be the world of what I would call "prestige inhouse". Now, if I have the capability and cash to plonk in half a million pounds on a wrist piece, the last thing I would worry about is servicing. I would have runners and assistants finding the solution for me.
If it stops, then it's an expensive piece of paperweight that my tax accountants would take care of. Finding ways to make it run again would just be a novelty past time.
-
Do others feel the same or is just me being tired of all the lies from these so call in house movement talk.
Call a spade a spade. A lot of the "in-house movement" talk is basically exclusivity snobbery. An ETA based Tudor (cosc chronometer grade etc.) is not as valued as a Rolex. Why? Even with equivalent reliability and finishing? Being a manufacture company with a proprietary movement adds to the snob appeal.
I admit I have fallen prey to it myself, skipping over an IWC chronograph because it was "just another 7750". Knowing what I know now, I regret passing over a huge bargain for something that was not wholly relevant to the overall "value" of the watch for me.
:Blue:
The thing is, the valuation of the watch and resale price hinges on the snob appeal. So what a WIS knows as a completely reworked 7750, extensively modified with in-house parts and higher quality finishing will still be only "another Valjoux 7750" as per above to most laymen.
But does it really matter? No one expects a Tissot 7750 based watch to sell at the same price as an IWC 7750 based chronograph. Rather while a manufacture movement adds a premium to the perceived value of a watch - the brand name and reputation trumps over all. That's why IMHO, you don't see a Seiko 5 with the proprietary 7s26 movement being more expensive than a IWC with an ETA movement. Just my opinion and 2sen.
PS: my answer to the original question - I used to but not so much now.
-
Could not have say it better myself.
I'm sure when VH is not around anymore there will be other master watchmaker to take the job. It's silly to think that the VH or PD type of craftsman only exist in this era.
Another point is that just because something exclusive doesn't automatic qualify itself to be unreliable. More often it means there less or only one service center you can send it for service. Inconvenient perhaps but not entirely unreliable.
Regard
Tyler
But what constitute as "inhouse" nowadays?
Does one consider Breguet, Blancpain, Montblanc and VC "inhouse"? Or certain ACHI member's work as true artisan "inhouse"?
What would happen if let's say...VH passes.. who would you send to work on your pieces? Do you just keep it suspended in a vacuum glass tube with a winder and touch it with white gloves like those pieces of art in the Louvre?
Mass produced "inhouse" is just a marketing ploy to further push up the brand's prestige. But there are pros to it because of the service support it provides.
I always look at the hobby as parallel compared to buying cars. If you worry about maintenance, then buy a "generic" mass produced "inhouse" or ETA equipped watch. If money is of no limit, get yourself a Koenigsegg.
On the polished flipside would be the world of what I would call "prestige inhouse". Now, if I have the capability and cash to plonk in half a million pounds on a wrist piece, the last thing I would worry about is servicing. I would have runners and assistants finding the solution for me.
If it stops, then it's an expensive piece of paperweight that my tax accountants would take care of. Finding ways to make it run again would just be a novelty past time.
-
The brand name and reputation you said...wouldn't that be falling prey into the marketing hype generated by these brands. It is just moving from movement snobbery to brand snobbery. Look up the actual history of brands like IWC and even Panerai. They are not all that impressive. Brand name and reputation are generated by marketing campaigns...albeit really great ones. A prime example being B&R.
Do others feel the same or is just me being tired of all the lies from these so call in house movement talk.
Call a spade a spade. A lot of the "in-house movement" talk is basically exclusivity snobbery. An ETA based Tudor (cosc chronometer grade etc.) is not as valued as a Rolex. Why? Even with equivalent reliability and finishing? Being a manufacture company with a proprietary movement adds to the snob appeal.
I admit I have fallen prey to it myself, skipping over an IWC chronograph because it was "just another 7750". Knowing what I know now, I regret passing over a huge bargain for something that was not wholly relevant to the overall "value" of the watch for me.
:Blue:
The thing is, the valuation of the watch and resale price hinges on the snob appeal. So what a WIS knows as a completely reworked 7750, extensively modified with in-house parts and higher quality finishing will still be only "another Valjoux 7750" as per above to most laymen.
But does it really matter? No one expects a Tissot 7750 based watch to sell at the same price as an IWC 7750 based chronograph. Rather while a manufacture movement adds a premium to the perceived value of a watch - the brand name and reputation trumps over all. That's why IMHO, you don't see a Seiko 5 with the proprietary 7s26 movement being more expensive than a IWC with an ETA movement. Just my opinion and 2sen.
PS: my answer to the original question - I used to but not so much now.
-
An affordable iconic inhouse, why not?
But heard LVMH service sucks... Well....
(http://i128.photobucket.com/albums/p186/terrenceterrenceterrence/5FA87F2B-B405-49E8-A76B-E16FAF7DABAA-2098-0000006310F7B8A1_zpscb92f811.jpg)
-
Good to see it back on the wrist Terrence!
Adjusted the moonphase liao?
Lets see the Georgy strap and the buckle you bought.
Time for a Zenith owners thread perhaps? ;D
-
The brand name and reputation you said...wouldn't that be falling prey into the marketing hype generated by these brands. It is just moving from movement snobbery to brand snobbery.
....
Wearing watches is in its basic form is all about "snobbery". It is just a matter of degrees. If you want to tell time, your hand phone has a clock. If you want to tell time on your wrist, the cheapest digital watch from the nearest pasar malam will do the job adequately (more accurately in fact than most our branded automatic watches). If you want an investment, collecting the usual luxury watches gives terrible returns (even at the million dollar level - there are better forms of investments).
Just what is the degree of exclusivity (or crudely put "snobbery") are you willing to fork out money over? That is the gist of this thread. Whether it is a Zenith chronograph with in-house movement over an Omega heavily modified ETA chronograph? An older Daytona with a zenith movement vs the newer Daytona with an in-house Rolex mechanism? Lots of debate over that one...
There is a reason why WIS means Watch Idiot Savant.
-
:thumbsup: :thumbsup: well said
that is why everytime i see those more unfortunate than me.. i actually feel very bad at the amount i spend on all these things.
time to reevaluate myself.
The brand name and reputation you said...wouldn't that be falling prey into the marketing hype generated by these brands. It is just moving from movement snobbery to brand snobbery.
....
Wearing watches is in its basic form is all about "snobbery". It is just a matter of degrees. If you want to tell time, your hand phone has a clock. If you want to tell time on your wrist, the cheapest digital watch from the nearest pasar malam will do the job adequately (more accurately in fact than most our branded automatic watches). If you want an investment, collecting the usual luxury watches gives terrible returns (even at the million dollar level - there are better forms of investments).
Just what is the degree of exclusivity (or crudely put "snobbery") are you willing to fork out money over? That is the gist of this thread. Whether it is a Zenith chronograph with in-house movement over an Omega heavily modified ETA chronograph? An older Daytona with a zenith movement vs the newer Daytona with an in-house Rolex mechanism? Lots of debate over that one...
There is a reason why WIS means Watch Idiot Savant.
-
There are actually some of us who wears a watch because we appreciate the mechanical genius of the movement, a deep liking for the design of the watch, etc. It is not to show off or to feel that we are more "atas" than the non luxury watch wearing crowd. It is not about snobbery, it is about passion and appreciation for the world of hologerie for some of us. It is like some of us don't wear designer clothes for snob factors but actually buys them for the cut or the material. We are passionate about watches because we love watches...it is not because we love showing off to people that we wear expensive watches. A WIS is defined as someone who knows everything about watches but might have limited knowledge of other subjects. It has no connection to being a snob.
The brand name and reputation you said...wouldn't that be falling prey into the marketing hype generated by these brands. It is just moving from movement snobbery to brand snobbery.
....
Wearing watches is in its basic form is all about "snobbery". It is just a matter of degrees. If you want to tell time, your hand phone has a clock. If you want to tell time on your wrist, the cheapest digital watch from the nearest pasar malam will do the job adequately (more accurately in fact than most our branded automatic watches). If you want an investment, collecting the usual luxury watches gives terrible returns (even at the million dollar level - there are better forms of investments).
Just what is the degree of exclusivity (or crudely put "snobbery") are you willing to fork out money over? That is the gist of this thread. Whether it is a Zenith chronograph with in-house movement over an Omega heavily modified ETA chronograph? An older Daytona with a zenith movement vs the newer Daytona with an in-house Rolex mechanism? Lots of debate over that one...
There is a reason why WIS means Watch Idiot Savant.
-
This is an interesting and informative thread.. I wonder, based on arguments and points put forth so far, would it be reasonable to conclude that the Tudor Pelagos would be a better buy than the Sub C Date, as the Sub is priced also double of the Pelagos? The price premium appears to be based on a name (Rolex), the in-house movement (3135 vs ETA 2824), and the fact that Rolex, being the big brother, has a mountain of marketing promotion war-chest vis-a-vis Tudor.
Of course the two watches have different concepts and heritage of their creation, although I read in some blogs that both are manufactured and crafted by the same craftsmen in the Rolex factory, using the same machinery and facilities, and handled with similar passion and QC controls. After sales service is also from the same group of watchmakers and technicians, providing the same high level of service, though I would expect it's cheaper to service and replace Tudor parts.
A Rolex is a Rolex, so is Nike is a Nike.. but these days, the price premium of Nike over other brands for similar products have nose-dived. Would a person wearing a Pelagos be perceived with the same positive feelings as one with a Rolex Sub, the technical and tool watch arguments aside?
-
Rolex vs Tudor: Different steel quality
-
Rolex vs Tudor: Different steel quality
Steel quality or not, I don't think it's enough to justify the premium.
Other factors need to be taken into consideration as well especially brand value.
-
This is an interesting and informative thread.. I wonder, based on arguments and points put forth so far, would it be reasonable to conclude that the Tudor Pelagos would be a better buy than the Sub C Date, as the Sub is priced also double of the Pelagos? The price premium appears to be based on a name (Rolex), the in-house movement (3135 vs ETA 2824), and the fact that Rolex, being the big brother, has a mountain of marketing promotion war-chest vis-a-vis Tudor.
Of course the two watches have different concepts and heritage of their creation, although I read in some blogs that both are manufactured and crafted by the same craftsmen in the Rolex factory, using the same machinery and facilities, and handled with similar passion and QC controls. After sales service is also from the same group of watchmakers and technicians, providing the same high level of service, though I would expect it's cheaper to service and replace Tudor parts.
A Rolex is a Rolex, so is Nike is a Nike.. but these days, the price premium of Nike over other brands for similar products have nose-dived. Would a person wearing a Pelagos be perceived with the same positive feelings as one with a Rolex Sub, the technical and tool watch arguments aside?
A very interesting view.
I think watch vs watch (without taking into considering the brand), the Pelagos can do everything the Sub can... Which is why I think the Pelagos is one of the value buys right now.
Some might scoff at the eta 2824 but let's be honest... it's a tried and tested movement.
With after sales service handled by the same ppl at Rolex and costing 40% the price of a Sub... tell me that is not value.
As for perceiving the Pelagos wearer, I guess that differs on the individual.
I don't think wearing a Pelagos will feel inferior to wearing a sub.
-
Rolex vs Tudor: Different steel quality
You truly are a WIS if you start comparing the grade steel that goes into your watches when you decide to buy one.
:Laughing_on_floor:
I dunno, Romaine Jerome says it uses the coal and steel taken from the Titanic (from several km underwater), moon dust from the Moon(!) to make their limited edition watches.
:o :Startled:
Seriously, like I said in my above posts - it's all a matter of degrees. Whether you are basing your choices on exclusivity or or for the "love of the art". Would say, the knowledge that one ETA mechanism uses a regular escapement or an innovative co-axial escapement tip your choice one way or another? It has happened before - years ago I had to choose between a older design but new Seamaster (/w ETA mvt) and a then new Seamaster (/w 2500C Co-Axial - a modified ETA). Hard choice. I got the classic swords hand Seamaster first and later the James Bond design - but my decision was actually based on the fact that the swords hand Seamaster was being phased out, not the movement - things were not equal.
How would you characterize the TAG Heuer 1887 caliber? A Japanese design licensed from Seiko - adapted and modified extensively as claimed by TAG Heuer designers, wholly manufactured in-house at the TAG Heuer facilities in Switzerland or so TAG Heuer claims. In-House, or sub-con movement? I personally think it's an in-house movement though most people think of the Japanese origin as a bit of a cheat.
The Swiss watch industry up till the 90's were wholly reliant on sub-contracted movements and parts. The brands differentiated themselves through case and dial designs. In house manufactures that did everything (case, dial, movement) like Rolex were considered rare exceptions, not the norm. Having a sub-contracted movement in a Swiss watch was to be expected back then and marketing/advertisement materials almost always made no mention of the ebauch/movement that went into the watch. That sort of degree and detail came only much later.
What they did advertise though was what sort of shock protection went into their watches!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incabloc_shock_protection_system (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incabloc_shock_protection_system)
http://www.tztoolshop.com/page95.html (http://www.tztoolshop.com/page95.html)
At one time Incabloc was so popular and was so powerful that it was featured prominently on the dials of watches. People were so used to the ads that they thought Incabloc was the watch manufacturer! If I remember the story right, Incabloc was demanding watch makers to put the Incabloc name on the dials - which angered Rolex very much that it went exclusively with it's rival Kif (and very much much later developing Paraflex on it's own). So in the 50's to the 70's, watch aficionados were not really debating the merits of in-house movements vs non (95% were all sub-contracted - or it didn't matter or advertised), purchasing decisions were based on the shock protection system used in the watch!
Just some perspective I guess.
PS:
Just google "vintage incabloc advertisements"
http://home.watchprosite.com/?show=nblog.post&ti=655001 (http://home.watchprosite.com/?show=nblog.post&ti=655001)
PPS:
Edit: I am reminded that even Rolex "cheated" a bit and used sub-con Zenith movements in their early Daytonas. This mania for the forced vertical integration in the Swiss watch industry is the creation of the late Nicholas Hayek/Swatch.
-
Thanks you all for the input. This thread has been running longer than I have originally anticipated and I have learned a lot for all your contribution.
Regard
Tyler