WatchUSeek Watch Forums banner

Seeking tourbillon info

2K views 13 replies 7 participants last post by  Dragoon 
#1 ·
#2 ·
Chascomm said:
Posted on the main forum, but I thought there might be some worthwhile comments to be offered from the Affordable experts:

https://www.watchuseek.com/showthread.php?p=105957#poststop
A real tourbillon's an expensive complication. Most of us will have have to settle for a Chinese tourbillon or an open heart watch of Swiss or Japanese origin. That's close as we will ever get to a Franck Muller, Audemars Piaget or Breitling tourbillon watch. Its the price that makes a real tourbillon so prestigious. But its not a subject any one would go to on the affordable forum! O|
 
#5 ·
Just munching on my cheek after going to the dentist....:)

But, I think you summed it up nicely in your reply and certainly have much more expertise on the state of the chinese tourbillon than most anyone else I have heard discuss the issue.
The Chinese watch movement is very exciting right now and surely there will be some real bargains and affordable watch which are out there waiting for us.
I really enjoyed the pics of the Sea Gull Chrono 1939 that a few members recently posted. Looks like a very nice rendition and the movement looks to be finished to a greater degreee than most of the Chinese watch movements I have seen.
As to the original posters question on the Chinese tourbillon......I would invest $400-$500 in a Swiss Timepiece or German timepiece like Limes, Oris, Zeno, Tissot or other. I just think an outlay over $300 or so should be reserved for a proven product unless there is some true love involved with a particular design.
I certainly am not suggesting the different chinese tourbillons are junk.....to the contrary. They are probably quite nice and really a marvel at the price. But, if the poster really searches, I wonder if he could find a used swiss tourbillon in decent condition for around $1000-$2000 and be much further ahead.
 
#7 ·
Hi -

Actually, the tourbillion isn't a complication at all, since it doesn't add anything to the time keeping qualities of a watch. A complication means that you have a date function, a day function, moon phase, other kinds of calendars (central hand with a pointer to the dates listed on the rim), UTC functions, etc etc etc. All complications are frosting on the cake, as it were.

The tourbillion basically is the most complex addition to the basic watch that you can make: it improves the core time-keeping behavior significantly, basically removing the effect of gravity on the watch by moving the balance around while it is beating. Ideally it rotates once a minute on one axis, once an hour on a second axis and once in 12 hours on a third axis, with the axis in question determined by the design of the watch, which can determine if the x, y or z axis shows the greatest deviation from the average (this is the axis which is then assigned the fastest turning).

Now, as you can imagine, this sort of thing is fiendishly devilish not only to design and actually get to work, but is a monstrously complex thing to build. One watchmaker I know built a 100x model of his own tourbillion design as an exercise to get his master watchmaking certification in Germany; he almost had a nervous breakdown doing so, the damn thing was so complex.

Now this explains why they are so damned expensive to make: first of all, you have to make a cage within which the balance wheel will move, and this needs to weigh virtually nothing in order to itself not exert any meaningul impact on the time keeping ability of the watch. This means that you cannot automate the manufacturing (yet!), but rather it's done with highly skilled manual labor.

And that is where China comes into play, since that is what the Chinese watch industry is developing: highly skilled manual labor that costs, in comparison to a master Swiss watch maker, virtually nothing (but still more often than not a good living wage in China!); other than that, a tourbillion is a tourbillion is a tourbillion.

JohnF
 
#8 ·
badgerred said:
If I remember correctly, the purpose of the tourbilion was to correct for the effects of gravity, etc. on the accuracy of the automatic movement. Does it really work, or is this primarily a way to market a very expensive complication?
Its primarily a way to market a useless complication <| A tourbillon in the nineteenth century was useful to regulate the momentum of a pocket watch. In a wristwatch, its a fancy doodad. You can look at it doing nothing for the watch. So the reason its put in high end watches is to put in highly finished parts that a collector willing to part with the money can spend his time appreciating. I would never spend $200,000 for such a watch. If I had that kind of dough to spend, there are better uses that kind of money could go to. The Chinese are cornering the tourbillon market and you can get a reasonable approximation of a tourbillon for under a grand. If you go any higher, you're paying for the status of a prestige label. In the end, owning a brand name tourbillon watch is a way of informing others money is no object for you as a human being, that you've made it to be able to afford such an extravagance in your collection.
 
#10 ·
monster623az said:
Dragoon I dont think swiss tourbillons go new for under a few tens of thousands of dollars, I doubt you can find one for as little as that used, but if you can then that would be great, hell I might be able to afford one sometime.
Absolutely right. Swiss tourbillons go for tens of thousands of dollars, and the popular mythology is that they can't be done cheaper. The Chinese are challenging this, but the Swiss answer to that challenge is unlikely to be cheaper Swiss tourbillons.

The really significant Swiss tourbillons (e.g. bi-axial, twin escapement, remontoire etc) will continue to be made as an expression of extreme horological skill and innovation; but the plainer single-axis tourbillons, that serve as the flagship of a wide range of Swiss companies, are definitely under threat.

Some Swiss companies have even started buying Chinese tourbillons for finishing in Switzerland, which means that some 'Swiss made' tourbillons in future may be nothing of a sort. You know how it works; replace the mainspring and hairspring with generic Swiss items, and maybe swap the tourbillon flying bridge for a custom piece for that 'in-house' look (a common upgrade already on the Chinese models) and at the current exchange rate 'voila!' you've got a 51+% (by value) Swiss parts, finished in Switzerland, 'Swiss movement'.
 
#11 ·
Hi -

Bingo. I wouldn't necessarily call it a mysthology, since labor in Switzerland *is* expensive (I know: I worked there for six years), especially skilled labor, and given how much manual work goes into the tourbillion, it ends up costing a lot. That's why the Swiss won't be making the simpler single-axis tourbillions: they can't compete with the Chinese here, and why spend the time doing something someone else can while you can spend your time doing something they can't? Gotta stay on the upside of the curve, after all.

Twin escapements, though, aren't tourbillions; twin tourbillions are another thing entirely (and really are overkill when you think about it...), and you're right: there willl be more than one "Swiss" movement that is basicallly Chinese, as is the case today with the more mundane movements already...

JohnF
 
#12 ·
Hi -

Please read my post in this thread: a tourbillion isn't a complication in the horological sense, and while one might debate the true utility of putting a tourbillion in a wrist watch, stranger things have been done. :)

I know three master watchmakers here in Germany and each one views being able to make a tourbillion as the pinnacle, currently, of mechanical watchmaking proficiency. But real-world benefits? Few. But then again, if we were all merely interested in having accurate time, then we'd all be wearing the cheapest quartz watches from WalMart's clearance bin or ones we got inside of a crackerjack box or cornflakes box as a freebie.

There is no such thing as a reasonable approximation of a tourbillion: either it is one or it isn't. The open escapements and balances of many watches aren't tourbillions, merely eye candy.


JohnF
 
#13 ·
JohnF said:
Twin escapements, though, aren't tourbillions; twin tourbillions are another thing entirely (and really are overkill when you think about it
Overkill it may be, but I'm really looking forward to Master Xu in Beijing finishing his magnum opus just so we can find out how the bugger works.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top