WatchUSeek Watch Forums banner
1 - 7 of 7 Posts

·
Mod. Russian, China Mech.
Joined
·
19,543 Posts
A new firm specializing in vintage movements in new cases. Take a look:
Interesting.

To be honest I don't think I would ever be able to afford watches in this price range, but....

...if I was, then I'd still find it hard to justify buying a watch with a reconditioned Schild hand-wind alarm, considering that the Poljot copy (cal 2612.1) of the same is readily available new, and now the Schild based Sea-Gull cal ST28 is on the market, too.

Aside from that, this firm are offering some very elegant designs :-!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,655 Posts
Hi -

It's an interesting concept, to say the least. Horae isn't the first one to do so: Stowa has been putting some vintage movements into new cases and faces for quite some time, as can be seen in their Exima line of watches. There was at least one with a PUW, one with an Omega and I think the current one is with a Durowe vintage inside...

A reconditioned Schild, done properly, is mechanically well beyond both the 2612.1 or the ST28: the whole AS line of calibres, while not being the absolute top quality, were one heck of a good calibre for the money, approaching the quality of Omega and the like. Not quite, but getting there.

Just mho, of course. :)

JohnF
 

·
Mod. Russian, China Mech.
Joined
·
19,543 Posts
A reconditioned Schild, done properly, is mechanically well beyond both the 2612.1 or the ST28: the whole AS line of calibres, while not being the absolute top quality, were one heck of a good calibre for the money, approaching the quality of Omega and the like. Not quite, but getting there.

Just mho, of course. :)

JohnF
Granted, Schild cut an excellent ebauche, but their imitators at Poljot, Citizen and now Sea-Gull use the same fundamental design (with all its inherent compromises). Given an equivalent standard of finishing, would they really be that much different?

I wonder what an Alexander Shorokhoff-modified Poljot would cost? :think:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,655 Posts
Hi -

Ah, there's the point: an equivalent standard of finishing. I have several Schild movements and also some of their Poljot counterparts, and the standard of finishing is very, very different. The Schilds are simply an entire level of manufacturing quality above the Poljots, and the tiny mechanical differences make a difference in the time-keeping qualities of the watches: the AS calibres are better time keepers than the Poljots I have.

Big difference? No. I love my Poljots because they are so robust and raw and yet keep very good time, sort of an indication of how to do things really right. But the degree of finishing on the Schilds really does make a difference in the isochronism of the ebauches.

Sort of like the difference between the lowest and the highest quality ETA ebauches of, say, the 2824-2. The higher quality ebauches are the only ones used to do the COSC because they are inherently better through the use of different materials, etc.

JohnF
 

·
Mod. Russian, China Mech.
Joined
·
19,543 Posts
Hi -

Ah, there's the point: an equivalent standard of finishing. I have several Schild movements and also some of their Poljot counterparts, and the standard of finishing is very, very different. The Schilds are simply an entire level of manufacturing quality above the Poljots, and the tiny mechanical differences make a difference in the time-keeping qualities of the watches: the AS calibres are better time keepers than the Poljots I have.

Big difference? No. I love my Poljots because they are so robust and raw and yet keep very good time, sort of an indication of how to do things really right. But the degree of finishing on the Schilds really does make a difference in the isochronism of the ebauches.

Sort of like the difference between the lowest and the highest quality ETA ebauches of, say, the 2824-2. The higher quality ebauches are the only ones used to do the COSC because they are inherently better through the use of different materials, etc.

JohnF
I see what you mean. Last night I was reading a bit of Cutmore's Watches 1850-1980 again, and noticed a reference to an article published by the Schild company in 1971. Refering to the Swiss industry generally, rather than Schild specificeally, it states that as late as the mid-1950s it was customary for the plates of a jewelled-lever movement to be worked on by a single watchmaker per movement to the point at which the watch would run, in order that fine adjustments could be made. In other words, the complete interchageablity of parts, to which the Swiss had devoted such effort from the 1850s (and which we now take for granted), was actually first realized in the post-war pin-levers, where the tollerances were less critical. By contrast, movements like the one we're discussing required an expert hand to be completed even to the ebauche stage. Therefore a higher-grade product by a more 'primitive' method.

Meanwhile the Soviets dedicated the 'Pobeda' phase (1947-57) of their industry's development to expanding mass production analogous to the Swiss pin-lever industry. The development of the Poljot alarm followed immediately after this, so it is reasonable to expect that it benefitted for more highly developed 'generic' processes i.e. a medium-grade product by a more advanced method.

Based on that, and on the fair assumption that the watchmakers employed by Schild were worthy of the task, I would expect the Schild alarm ebauche to be superior.

(...but I'd still rather spend the money on a Shorokhoff Poljot :-D )
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,655 Posts
Hi -

I'll grant you that last point.. :)

It was a US company that brought the concept of interchangeable parts to Switzerland after being rejected in Germany: Gruen. They outsourced their production to that low-cost country, Switzerland, but had a major uphill battle against what was then called "American methods" of manufacturing.

JohnF
 
1 - 7 of 7 Posts
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