WatchUSeek Watch Forums banner

1 - 20 of 291 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
36,279 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,370 Posts
The day they solve that bent GMT hand by using a traveler's GMT movement will be the day I take interest. That would make this a nice, low-profile travel watch.

Until then, it's just a mishmash of previous models and lesser than either one it takes cues from. At least the Skyquest could track three time zones at a glance.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,352 Posts
Love the size, not the price. Not that it is completely unreasonable, just out if my price range.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,382 Posts
The day they solve that bent GMT hand by using a traveler's GMT movement will be the day I take interest. That would make this a nice, low-profile travel watch.

Until then, it's just a mishmash of previous models and lesser than either one it takes cues from. At least the Skyquest could track three time zones at a glance.
How does a "traveler" GMT address the bent hand? What "traveler" GMT movements are available to small brands that need to source movements from an outside supplier?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
36,279 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
How does a "traveler" GMT address the bent hand? What "traveler" GMT movements are available to small brands that need to source movements from an outside supplier?
Alpina has a traveler GMT module added to the 2893.

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,382 Posts
Alpina has a traveler GMT module added to the 2893.

Alpina did a conversion to make the jumping hand a 12 hour hand and the non-jumping a 24 he hand. But, IIRC, their modified movement's date complication is still tied to the non-jumping hour hand. So if you travel someplace west of home, your date could be changing over well before midnight (local). That is, IMO, a far greater annoyance than having to adjust the GMT hand every time I adjust the local to keep the GMT on the same time zone.

Additionally, is this feature available to any watch manufacturer and would it "fix" the bent hand?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
38,919 Posts
My only real criticism is that it's very similar to their current offerings.

That said, it's still ten times better than anything Tudor have released this year.
Really soibds like I’m in the minority liking the p01
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,932 Posts
I don't think the pricing was that much out of line, considering there are other GMTs out there with ETA 2893 movements in the $2500-3000 range. Sinn, for one. At some point, the pricing is less about the movement and more about the fit and finish details on the watch. A Hamilton Jazzmaster GMT is in the same ballpark, price-wise.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
488 Posts
Forgive my ignorance, but is the problem with the "bent" gmt hand simply that it would collide with the 3 and 9 hour markers? Why don't they just make the gmt pointer a little shorter,or shrink the 3 and 9 markers? Or, just push the movement closer to the watch face so the gmt hand is clear of the markers? Or is there something I'm not getting? It is an odd design quirk, but seems so easy to fix.

Its a sharp-looking watch and I love the sizing; if I was in the market for a gmt and could get a good deal on one of these I'd consider it strongly.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,370 Posts
Is having the GMT above the local hour hand inherent to any traveler GMT design, or is that just how Rolex chose to build their particular movement?
I am not sure about the Alpina GMTs, but the Grand Seiko GMT also has the GMT hand at the bottom.

Every movement builder these days has a clone of the 2893. You'd think someone would come along and try to reverse engineer the Rolex 3186.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,382 Posts
I am not sure about the Alpina GMTs, but the Grand Seiko GMT also has the GMT hand at the bottom.

Every movement builder these days has a clone of the 2893. You'd think someone would come along and try to reverse engineer the Rolex 3186.
I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that if the design of the 3186 isn't protected by patents, it's that the design is much more expensive to fabricate than the 289x.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
20,806 Posts
I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that if the design of the 3186 isn't protected by patents, it's that the design is much more expensive to fabricate than the 289x.
It's basically because the ETA 2893-2 just requires a slight modification of a day-date complication, as it essentially co-opts the day of week complication to drive the GMT hand. The travel GMT design requires a more extensive rethink of the design. But, as I've said before, the template for doing this is the Omega 1128 calibre, which adds a travel GMT complication to an ETA 2892-A2 base.
 
  • Like
Reactions: drunken-gmt-master

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,382 Posts
It's basically because the ETA 2893-2 just requires a slight modification of a day-date complication, as it essentially co-opts the day of week complication to drive the GMT hand. The travel GMT design requires a more extensive rethink of the design. But, as I've said before, the template for doing this is the Omega 1128 calibre, which adds a travel GMT complication to an ETA 2892-A2 base.
Begs the question why nobody made a GMT version of the 2824? The day complication from the 2836 could be similarly repurposed. It's also less expensive than the 289x family.
 
1 - 20 of 291 Posts
Top