This thread is about the appreciation of horology, as well as the micro-engineering and materials engineering that are required to make a fine watch, clock, or other timepiece.
>Required viewing for new people:
youtube.com
youtube.com
>Used watch guide:
pastebin.com
>Strap guide:
pastebin.com
>Watch essentials 102:
pastebin.com
previous thread:
Other urls found in this thread:
Nice my guy look forward to seeing it.
Can somebody ID the timepieces the fighters wear in this video?
Gorgeous blue dials or hands.
Under 2k
What are the best options?
CASIO GANG
I can. I'm not telling you either.
Aluminum vs ceramic inserts? Thoughts?
To me I prefer aluminum, even though it scratches and fades it at least will not shatter on impact like ceramic.
Blue hands in terms of actualled blued steel all I can think off top of head is Stowa and Nomos in that range. Probably others though. Seiko presage has some blue hands but I don't think they are heat blued just lacquered.
Blue dials there are tons of options as that is a very popular color. so really cannot help you there. I own this and personally love it.
THIS ISN'T FUCKING TECHNOLOGY.
FUCK OFF TO
no
In your personal opinion what is the best way to engineer a movement for increased magnetic resistance?
I really hope at least one other big player with access to an MEMS laboratory is working on developing a competitor to the zo342. Torsional silicon oscillators are clearly destined to be the next major leap in horology and I'd hate for LVMH to get the opportunity to disrupt the whole industry with it unanswered.
I am honestly surprised we have not even seen a glimpse of anything else. It could be more difficult than anticipated.
can you explain why people keep posting this part?
no
oh
Zenith released a new kind of oscillator we haven't seen before in wristwatches. Right now it's only been released in a big ugly limited watch but it's expected to go into more reasonable watches.
ok how is it better than a spring?
Not exactly the same of course, but it's still a silicon, high frequency, long power reserve escapement.
It isn't replacing the spring...
It beats at a much higher frequency which will tend to make it much more accurate. Zenith rates these to 10spm I believe, which is well, well ahead what any other watch without a battery has ever been rated at. It's also inherently antimagnetic but these days that's not such a major achievement.
it's replacing the spring in the balance assembly, please try to keep up.
Sure. Greubel Forsey was also rumored to be working on something in this vein. But I don't think we've seen any watches successfully sold to customers from either.
Doesn't seem very durable to me
Yea. The zenith escapement is at least going to be available in watches under $10k (or not just a concept watch, for that matter).
why? What failure mode do you anticipate?
I put a Casio on my dash.
Metal seems very thin, I'm thinking stress fractures for one
If you dont own at least $2500 worth of watches you're not a real collector
/o/ is the worst
what metal? Are you talking about the silicon? If so, you don't really seem to have a very good understanding of this and should consider learning more before offering your concerns.
v cute
nice
This is the first time I've seen it, so....yeah
Silicon has been used in escapements in mechanical watches for well over a decade at this point (with Ulysse Nardin the first to do it) and hasn't really seen any downsides at this point. And the zenith oscillator is MEMS printed, so theoretically parts will be available forever as long as the template files are kept and MEMS printers are around.
Thanks user for posting the movement...
I got you bro
What do you think about solar seiko watch escapements which run on MEMES?
Cheers user!
Given that the Daniels coaxial was considered one of the biggest changes/breakthroughs in movements in the past 100 years, will this be the breakthrough for the 21st Century? The reason I ask is because from what I understand, Daniels was looking for a way to reduce the friction problems that traditional escapements have, and thus the coaxial.
Is it possible, with a silicon movement like this one, to simply remove friction entirely, or at least to a negligible point that far outstrips movements made in metals? I don't know enough about these kinds of materials to even speculate, and thus I ask you guys. Thanks in advance, as always.
I mean I guess Seiko could build a solar quartz watch with a pallet fork escapement like the oysterquartz and the megaquartz, and make that fork out of MEMS material, but there'd be no reason to. GS uses MEMS to make their escapement components strong, light, and perfectly balanced, and there's no need for any of those things in a stepper motor-activated pallet fork.
They also couldn't really use it in a sPrInG dRiVe, since a MEMS glide wheel couldn't be electromagnetically braked, and strapping magnets to a MEMS glide wheel, again, defeats the purpose.
So I think your idea is a stupid one.
>Given that the Daniels coaxial was considered one of the biggest changes/breakthroughs in movements in the past 100 years
I am exceedingly skeptical of this claim, even if you restrict yourself to watches that don't use electricity. Maybe if you mean the 100 year period 1874-1974. You'd have to stack it up against automatic watches, synthetic jewels, and Elnivar (which I might rank up at the top).
>Memeata MX5
I was only quoting what I've read regarding the evolution and development of the escapement mechanism. It was not a statement that was meant to take into account electronic developments, of which the quartz obviously had the highest impact.
Just on the level of escapement development, the coaxial is described in this light in writing and documentaries. Granted, I don't know enough to substantiate the claim, but if it's not correct, then we can abandon it entirely.
This wasn't really the point I was trying to get to. The Zenith oscillator is obviously entirely different to what we've seen in traditional escapements, not only in materials but in general design. What I'm wondering is if the silicon reduces the friction component even further, perhaps achieving the goal that Daniels was aiming for but didn't have the technology to accomplish.
>Finally permabanned from UGWC
I've freed myself from shitter land
SARB033 or 35?
Using magnetic resistant materials is obviously superior to the iron cage thing Rolex does with the Milgauss. I know the Milgauss came first and now it's a "Rolex thing" but they should really shitcan that idea and make the next Milgauss with a nonmagnetic balance. It's sort of embarrassing how the current model is uses magnetic resistance as its unique selling point when it has a fraction of the magnetic resistance of literally any coaxial Omega and is thicker than your mom.
35
Black watch dials are a dime a dozen
Maybe I can put it another way. If the new Zenith escapement beats faster than, say, 10bps, then that obviously is an improvement towards guarding against shock and things like that (please understand that I'm a layman here). But if the movement suffers the same lubrication problems that all mechanical watches with escapements have, then does it really matter?
Whereas if the use of silicon is similar to what happens with plastics that 'self-lubricate' (maybe a watchmaker can explain how that works), then the Zenith movement might go beyond what is possible with traditional movements that are made with metals and rubies. Does that make sense? That's what I'm trying to understand...
sup
To be pedantic about it, I'd say the new zenith oscillator isn't really a development in escapements (even in my shakyhand video you can see it's basically just an anchor escapement), but rather a development in oscillators. There's not reason you couldn't have a zenith oscillator with a coaxial escapement, in principle. I don't think a solid silicon oscillator will have any major impact on the friction properties of the escapement and gear train. And we've had silicon escapements, which are designed to have better friction properties, for some time now.
again, I think these are two distinct things you're trying to conflate. The oscillator doesn't have friction against itself or whatever. The improvement is really just in timekeeping precision (and, perhaps, maintenance, repair, and replacement of the oscillator).
I don't get it. They are just dumb watches. They all have the same function. Just get a cheap one or don't get one at all. What is the appeal?
another example.
I think it's definitely fair to say that in terms of wristwatch oscillator design, the only real developments have been
> hairspring
> tuning fork
> quartz
> CSAC
> solid silicon
Obviously, there are refinements in oscillator design in each of these buckets (quartz frequency and cut, including schemes like Rolex's TCXO, hairspring geometry, like Seiko's proprietary terminal curve, changes in tuning fork design between the 214/218 and the ESA9162 to improve positional variance). But again, nothing to do with friction or escapements.
Ah, okay, thank you. This makes sense. From your cam video I assumed that the silicon piece was not only responsible as a replacement for the normal spring oscillator but also as a direct part of the gear train (kinda like a warped tourbillon). But if it's just an oscillator, then all my questions are moot.
So then, what is the improvement here with the Zenith? Just the higher oscillation frequency?
Thanks; that makes sense.
>They all have the same function.
Keeping track of time is one of the most important functions in life my dude
I mean they all have the same degree of accuracy if you forgive a second lost every few days or weeks or whatever.
It's basically just the higher frequency. I've seen some handwaving about how it has less positional variance and more shock resistance than hairsprings even putting aside its higher frequency, but nothing really firm to substantiate it (I guess I'm willing to believe it at least as far as positional variance between various hanging positions). I've also read it should have less temperature variance, which again, I'm willing to believe but haven't seen any hard evidence or reasoning. The fact that they're MEMS printed should I guess make it easier to make them all to spec, rather than trying to twist your hairspring into the perfect geometry.
35 is best. I have this coming in the mail for mine
The appeal to me is simple. The ability to segment and quantify time in a manner that is reliable has been a technological goal of humanity for many centuries, first with calendars, then with ones that charted the stars and accounted for leap years, and then eventually to clocks and portable timing machines.
A mechanical watch you wear on your wrist, even if it's a 'shitter', represents centuries of the highest intellectual thought and discipline. In my view, it's almost a 'miracle', if the word is stripped of its theological meaning. When you really think about it, it's pretty amazing what is ticking away on our wrist.
Then you factor in elements such as aesthetics and horological complexity, combined with actual issues of performance, and you get people like me.
Does that comfort you?
Mechanical watches are incredible for what they do. Just a bunch of gears and springs that can accurately tell time, It's incredible.
And quartz watches despite all the shit they get are marvels of engineering too.
When they fist came out, James Bond switched from a Rolex to a Seiko because of how revolutionary it was. Think about that.
Watch companies have been around for hundreds of years. Keeping track of time is up there with one of the most important things humanity has ever accomplished and we all take it for granted.
Virtually nothing in the digital age would be possible without accurate time keeping. Hell, anything outside of the stone age really.
lol no
fake blue screws ruin this for me
What did you post to get the banhammer?
I just think they're neat
what watch is that
>I mean they all have the same degree of accuracy if you forgive a second lost every few days or weeks or whatever.
All computers are equal, they all get you on the internets or whatever
That's an interesting and well written response.
>what watch is that
Take a fuckin' guess m8.
Awesome! Thanks for clarifying. I wonder how they'll do when they're put into mass production. Will it be like the quartz, where the technology becomes so inexpensive to make that the Chinese will be pumping them out in 2 years, destroying the hairspring-reliant movements....or will this kind of thing stay as a higher-end option in watches? Or, will it not catch on at all due to some unforeseen development (like after 2 years on the wrist the damn thing bends or something...)?
To quote our friend here, "They all have the same function"...
>what watch is that
Omega Speedmaster Professional
>I've seen some handwaving about how it has less positional variance
It should have way less positional variance than a traditional hairspring for a number of reasons. It has more mass, a larger diameter and a faster beat, so should have more inertia, and thus resist gravitational effects and shock better. Also, as I understand engineered torsional oscillators, they are designed such that they only bend in two directions and should resist oscillator movement perpendicular to the engineered direction of rotation better which should help on top of the much greater inertia.
The reduced temperature variance should be a logical consequence of the relative thermic insensitivity of silicon and the greater inertia in the oscillator, as above.
I don't see any reason these would displace quartz. They are still going to be more expensive and less accurate, and electric watches originally displaced non-electric watches not because of accuracy but because of power reserve, which would still be a problem here.
Thanks for the info. I agree the lower variance in hanging positions is obvious. I didn't know about the resistance to perpendicular movement so that's really good to know - if you have any articles or textbooks that are good intros to the subject I'd be interested in being pointed at them. Materials science is one of the areas of watch technology where I have the least knowledge.
No idea. I said something about how small wrist watches are not appealing to men who don't have small wrists. And I also posted about how only people who are extremely jealous post things about how people with nice watches don't live fulfilling lives or bullshit motivational poster garbage.
Fuck em. I don't have to see this kinda shit anymore.
does that guy think that is cool? holy shit
Something sad about a box of dead watches, even if the vast majority are the shitterest of shitters.
>These are the people who call a watch a "piece" and tell you to wear it in good health
Check this bad boy.
A box of dead watches is a synonym for a box full of watch straps
He'd probably have trouble tasting the meat after smoking. Smoking really destroys the ability to taste food properly.....
Maybe because it seems like such a waste. Like boxes of obsolete computers from the 90s, or those VHS tapes that will never see the light of day again....
But I say that too....
What a waste of perfectly fine straps.
Whoops. Wrong fake Rolex.
And otherwise it was learning the tools and the workspace. Five hours flew by.
Pics of/from the Bucherer book:
pretty cool user. Break anything?
> ST6
So is that not a 4th hand for the GMT? Is it just attached to the minute hand to make it look like there's a fourth hand under it?
how do you know it's not real?
Why do fake Rolexes always put shit on the caseback? Real ones have blank casebacks, that's like the easiest part of the watch to fake.
Only a couple of dead watches. One stem wouldn't reseat, and a pusher seal lauched itself into the aether.
Not a clue, re: the GMT. Not quite up to taking apart an auto just yet.
(You)
The fake GMT (not the fake Explorer II above) had a blank caseback, but yeah, I just started laughing when I flipped the Explorer over.
I know the likelihood of a seiko being faked is low, but would you consider ebay sellers a good choice? Or should I go with Seiya or a local shop.