WatchUSeek Watch Forums banner
Status
Not open for further replies.

Current perception of Sellita?

14K views 133 replies 42 participants last post by  Bradjhomes 
#1 ·
I have been debating whether my next watch would be a Ball or Longines, but I saw the new ProPilot and I like that more than any other watch.

I looked into it and apparently Oris has gone 100% with Sellita. As far as I can tell all their watches are running Sellita.

I am aware of the gear issue with the 200 that was supposedly fixed in the 200-1.

Usually people tell me, they're both exactly equal. Sellita used to build movements for ETA. There is no difference.

But when I press them on it they admit, if given the choice they will choose the watch with ETA. That they command a higher price tag new and used. That they will choose ETA and if there's no choice for ETA they would rather just go with a Japanese watch than to choose Sellita.

All the threads I found are from 2009-2011 about this Sellita vs ETA. That the Sellita hasn't priven itself they said.

So what's the word now? Should I iust buy the Oris because I like it? Or should I stay away from Sellita and possible breakdowns?

I don't want to pay $1,400 for a watch and have it break down within the first year.

Another question, if this is still a controversial issue, about Sellita and its "geargate" fiasco, then is being an independent watch maker good at this point it is joining the Swatch Group better in order to get the ETA movements instead of going outside?

Just wondering how many people don't buy a specific watch because they don't trust the movement.

Buy Oris or stick with ETA? What's your opinion?
 
See less See more
#2 ·
They are the same for all purposes. When asked which one he prefers, Christopher Ward (of the British company) answered Selitta, because "its newer". The extra jewel doesn't hurt either. The Selitta in my C60 keeps time within COSC, the ETA in my Victorinox/Sinn doesn't (but my other ETAs do).
Also you should just really buy your third watch - you have enough info now, I think you have created half a dozen threads on this. Overthinking is just going to bite you back because you can't have everything.
I look forward to seeing what you finalize on.
 
#6 ·
I would not restrict myself to Swatch group brands simply to get a watch with an ETA as opposed to Sellita movement. Buy the Oris.
 
#8 · (Edited)
If I were u, I will get the Longines to have a piece of mind. Great brand and real swatch group movement and w/o burning a hole.

YOu can geta nice looking brand new longines hydroconquest diving watch for less than $1k with 2 years warranty from swatch group.
 
#12 · (Edited)
I was into the Conquest GMT, but it's like Ball. Upon closer and longer inspection all that shiny polish finish on the watch just makes it look "old" and a bit cheap in the case of the Ball. And a bit of a scratch magnet as well.

Conquest sure is nice, but the new ProPilot has that clean minimal look I am looking for.

If the 200-1 isn't an issue long term then I'm going for it, when it's on sale. They're selling full on retail at the AD for $1,800. I want it to come down to $1,400ish

hydroconquest and the Aquis and those types I am not interested in. They're too big for me and I don't want a diver. I have my Seiko for that.

Although i wouldn't say no to a Steinhart sub or those vintage ones. Those look nice.
 
#13 · (Edited)
Don't give it a second thought. Although the movements are 'almost' the same, they aren’t exact and the Sellita is actually an improved version of the ETA. Most notably, Sellita uses a superior, proprietary hairspring, and as a result their movements are generally more accurate. All of the Sellita based watches I own are also among the most accurate I own. They're fantastic value as a result, and I've never had an issue with them. The only thing they lack is snob appeal.
 
#15 · (Edited)
Don't give it a second thought. Although the movements are 'almost' the same, they aren't exact and the Sellita is actually an improved version of the ETA. Most notably, Sellita uses a superior, proprietary hairspring, and as a result their movements are generally more accurate. All of the Sellita based watches I own are also among the most accurate I own. They're fantastic value as a result, and I've never had an issue with them. The only thing they lack is snob appeal.
I would be interested to know where the information comes from that Sellita is using a proprietary balance spring. Sellita were one of the biggest complainants to the Swiss authorities when Swatch announced they were cutting back supply, and they stated they received all their balance springs, balance wheels, and escapement parts from Swatch. If that has changed, I would expect to see something on their web site, but I don't.

Looking at their technical guide for the SW200-1, they use a Nivaflex mainspring, and a Nivatronic collet on the balance, both made by Nivarox-FAR of course (Swatch owned). But they do not list the material for the balance spring.

With regards to accuracy, the specs shown by Sellita for the SW200-1 and ETA 2824-2 are identical across all 4 grades produced, so they certainly do not claim any greater accuracy - this is unusual for the watch world - if someone has a better product they usually scream it from the rooftops. So with the numbers published by both brands being equal, along with my own experience servicing both ETA and Sellita movements, I would say if your Sellita powered watches are more accurate than the ETA of the same model you have owned, then this is simple variation in how well the watches were adjusted by the respective brand, and not indicative of the overall capabilities of the movements.

A few more general comments for the OP:

Sellita seems to have resolved the broken ratchet wheel issues, as I have not had one in with the teeth stripped off for quite some time now. As for the movements being identical, well that's far from the case, at least from my perspective. The overall dimensional envelope is the same, and the layout is the same, but parts are not fully interchangeable between the brands as some have suggested. On a very obvious level the steady pins for all the bridges are opposite on the ETA and Sellita movements, so on the ETA the pins that locate the bridge are on the underside of the bridge, and the holes they go into are on the main plate - it's the opposite on Sellita.

As the ratchet wheel issues demonstrated, Sellita was using different tooth profiles (thinner than ETA originally, which is why they sheared off) and it was not just the ratchet wheel thatw as replaced, but several parts in the automatic winding. Although I have not checked this, these different profiles may extend to other parts in the movement. So personally if I needed a new train wheel for a Sellita, I would get one from Sellita rather than just putting an ETA part in (Or I would have to do checks to make sure the tooth profiles are the same at the very least).

The last Sellita movement I serviced (from an Oris TT1 diver) maybe 2 weeks ago had a broken jewel in it on the barrel arbor (lower) and this is unusual since the watch had no obvious damage that indicated it had been dropped or anything.



This jewel may have been defective (cracked) from the start or it could have been damaged during the assembly of the movement. I will say after replacing the jewel and giving the movement a service, it's running well with good timing results (Delta of about 6 seconds over 6 positions at full wind), but I would expect the same performance from pretty much any modern movement I worked on.

Cheers, Al
 
#16 · (Edited)
I have been debating whether my next watch would be a Ball or Longines, but I saw the new ProPilot and I like that more than any other watch.

I looked into it and apparently Oris has gone 100% with Sellita. As far as I can tell all their watches are running Sellita.

I am aware of the gear issue with the 200 that was supposedly fixed in the 200-1.

Usually people tell me, they're both exactly equal. Sellita used to build movements for ETA. There is no difference.

But when I press them on it they admit, if given the choice they will choose the watch with ETA. That they command a higher price tag new and used. That they will choose ETA and if there's no choice for ETA they would rather just go with a Japanese watch than to choose Sellita.

All the threads I found are from 2009-2011 about this Sellita vs ETA. That the Sellita hasn't priven itself they said.

So what's the word now? Should I iust buy the Oris because I like it? Or should I stay away from Sellita and possible breakdowns?

I don't want to pay $1,400 for a watch and have it break down within the first year.

Another question, if this is still a controversial issue, about Sellita and its "geargate" fiasco, then is being an independent watch maker good at this point it is joining the Swatch Group better in order to get the ETA movements instead of going outside?

Just wondering how many people don't buy a specific watch because they don't trust the movement.

Buy Oris or stick with ETA? What's your opinion?
What I've read about and experienced with both movements tells me that comparably graded Sellita and ETA movements will be equally accurate and durable. I recall from an earlier thread on WUS that there are a couple of minor differences that make the Sellita slightly better technical design. Those differences are probably of interest to someone with a background in movement design and servicing.

I have two Oris watches with an SW200 and they run just like watches with ETA movements.
 
#18 · (Edited)
I've had my Bell and Ross for years with its Sellita movement and its been an excellent time keeper. Had you never known what movement is in the watch you choose I would say you probably would never know the difference. Get what appeals to you most and don't think twice about it.
 
#26 ·
I've been happy with mine.

Had an Oris with a SW200 and it ran +6 sec/day consistently.

Currently have a TAG with a SW500 and it runs +4 sec/day. The chrono function also matched an electronic timer during a 6 hour endurance race. It was dead on at the 6 hour mark.
 
#27 ·
I'd pick Sellita over ETA if given the choice, simply because parts are likely to be easier to get in the future, what with swatch growing restrictions, therefore the watch using it easier and cheaper to repair and maintain. Other than that, I own watches featuring both, performances seem to be on par.
 
#55 · (Edited)
THANK YOU!!!!!

THIS!!!!!!!

Of course I did not conduct full COSC testing - not even the brands do this when they service a movement, so to expect that is a bit much. I very much doubt the article where they tested the 2 movements did full on COSC testing either. Please read what I wrote again, as I did not claim that I had tested them to COSC standards. I time watches to the standards set out by the brands, using a timing machine as they would do when they service a watch.
The brands set out tolerances for timekeeping, and those tolerances vary based on the movement being a COSC movement or not - what I am saying is that I can get these movements to be in the manufacturer's service tolerances for their COSC watches.

For example, non-COSC movements are typically checked in just 3 positions, where COSC movements are checked in 5 positions. I actually check all movements I service in 6 positions, because I want the fullest picture I can get of how the watch is running, regardless if it is COSC or not. I also perform extensive testing after the watch is fully assembled (that as you likely know, COSC does not do).

So for the Seliits SW200 I reference having just serviced in the Oris, this is not a COSC grade movement of course. If I look at the standards for an Omega COSC watch for example, which is a brand I service often (all of their COSC watches have the same tolerances) they allow positional variation at full wind to be as much as 12 seconds, measured over 5 positions. I measured this SW200 over 6 positions, and had it down to 5.9 seconds of positional variation, so 1/2 of what Omega would allow on a COSC watch. I then fully assembled this watch, and checked it for 24 hours in each of the 6 positions, and also 24 hours on the final test winder - this is my normal testing procedure. It averaged +3.3 seconds per day over the those 7 days of testing, with the slowest position being +2.5 seconds, and the fastest being +5.5. COSC specs that everyone on watch forums quote for average daily rates are from -4 to +6, and this watch is obviously well within that.

Another example is a just serviced an ETA 7750 (non-COSC again in a Wenger chronograph, so not particularly high end) that was 4.1 seconds over 6 positions, so about 1/3 of what Omega would allow for a chronometer grade watch, and over one more position than COSC checks to. I am starting all the 24 hour long positional checks today. Here is a shot of the timing results for the Wenger 7750 - note the Delta at the red arrow is 4.1 seconds, and average rate is 0:



So yes you are absolutely right that I have not performed the COSC tests to the letter (no service facility does and I didn't claim that I did), but I have certainly exceeded the requirements of the brands for their COSC watches, and believe I can say what I said without any concerns.

Cheers, Al
 
#60 ·
Having read this entire thread I have the following comments:

1. Archer is a legend around here and his knowledge and advice is always solid. He has always been very accurate in what he says and it's backed by a ton of training and knowledge and real experience. Trying to pick apart his statements and argue with him about something that he knows about so well, seems silly to me. Unless the point is just to troll the thread.

2. If you have a mechanical watch that keeps time within COSC daily rate on the wrist, does anything else really matter? My speedy pro is not a chronometer but Archer got it running to +3 per day, on the wrist. Do I care if it would pass several other COSC tests? Am I traveling to Antarctica or the Sahara? No. I think sometimes people get hung up on the status of having a chronometer and get upset if someone has a watch that is not a chronometer that runs within COSC timing on the wrist...so it becomes really important to say their chronometer is still "better". BTW my speedy is not a chronometer but it runs +3 per day and could take a trip to the moon and back. So there. ;-)
 
#61 ·
Having read this entire thread I have the following comments:

1. Archer is a legend around here and his knowledge and advice is always solid. He has always been very accurate in what he says and it's backed by a ton of training and knowledge and real experience. Trying to pick apart his statements and argue with him about something that he knows about so well, seems silly to me. Unless the point is just to troll the thread.

2. If you have a mechanical watch that keeps time within COSC daily rate on the wrist, does anything else really matter? My speedy pro is not a chronometer but Archer got it running to +3 per day, on the wrist. Do I care if it would pass several other COSC tests? Am I traveling to Antarctica or the Sahara? No. I think sometimes people get hung up on the status of having a chronometer and get upset if someone has a watch that is not a chronometer that runs within COSC timing on the wrist...so it becomes really important to say their chronometer is still "better". BTW my speedy is not a chronometer but it runs +3 per day and could take a trip to the moon and back. So there. ;-)
The thing is 'COSC' and 'chronometer' have very specific meanings. It's quite the opposite in your case. Your lack of proper understanding of COSC allows you to feel good about a technically inferior movement. Just like all the 'COSC spec' Seiko 5s on here. *Rollseyes*

Archer is supposed to be a professional and should know better about improperly using 'COSC'. If proper definitions are used, we won't have the continued babblings of 'COSC Spec!' $50 movement watches...

Back to the Sellita issue, didn't Zenith announce they will be using them?
 
#65 ·
Sellita movements, although misleading because of people's perception (coming mostly from its origin), are very nicely made.
I would say up to $2k price point, they are one of the best movements for the buck, right on par with ETA.
Always would recommend. Practically no difference with ETAs imo.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
You have insufficient privileges to reply here.
Top