|
Agreements and disagreements Posted By: georges zaslavsky Date: 12/28/05 18:08 GMT
In Response To: Re: More about movements (Chicagoland Chuck Maddox)
Hi Chuck
I will agree with you on some points and disagree with you on others Not surprising, or anything new... =)
1)Omega also uses Valjoux/ETA 7750 based
movements with varying degrees of
modification(s), finishes and refinements.
As well as other ETA's I believe.
-That is true the Eta that are modified in the Omega range are the 2892-2, the 2893, the 2890a2 wit hdd chrono module and the piguet 1150 found in the comsic moojnphase limited edition watch I believe the Co-Axials are based on an ETA movement too, but I'm too zonked to do the research. In fact, with the exception of the c.1666 in the X-33 and a few other examples, Omega uses Swatch, ETA/Valjoux, Lemania and F. Piguet movements for all of it's movements. It used to be a manufacturer (by your definition) only the c.1666 and a few old overs keep that factually true. At least to my knowledge.
2)Rolex so tightly controls production and
sales channels that there is often a waiting
list for popular models which leads to
"minty" privately owned examples
being sold at or above MSRP for those who
choose to pay to have it quicker than the
waiting list). This is a significant reason
for the high resale value of Rolex's...
Because Rolex doesn't allow Authorized
dealers to discount more than 5-10% (if
that) and demand is high, values remain
high.
-True and it explains why on grey markets you see 4130 daytonas for over +9k$. Unless you are a very good customer, it is very rare to buy some models immediately at rolex No disagreements here.
3)Chronographs used also
include the Valjoux/ETA 7750 and in older
models, Lemania 1873 (and if you want to go
back far enough Venus and other movements).
All current models are COSC tested which is
something few other manufactures bother to
do, or even attempt. [This is in regards to Breitling]
-I disagree for these reasons. Breitling isn't a manufacture and the term manufacture should only be used for firms that make their own movements, people who buy movements and assemble the cases and put movements into them are assembleurs but not manufactures. We're quibbling on definitions. Maker, producer, however you wish to call it. As I said before Omega's ties to being a manufacture is very precarious (c.1666) at best in my opinion with their current production, product line and management.
Breitling doesn't modify the valjoux 7750 or cal 13 as Omega does with the cal 1154, Few firms do. Ventura and Ikepod (RIP) are two who do/did modify the Valjoux 775x to a greater degree than Omega does, Fortis is another with their Alarm Chronograph's.
the breitling version of the lemania 1873 is far less beautifully finished than a 1861 or a 1863. How much Breitling (doesn't) polish(ies) the Lemania 1873 doesn't mean they didn't use it, up until the time when Swatch Group cut them and others (notably TAG-Heuer who had an outstanding Carrera Re-Edition using that movement) off.
Also I will add that Breitling charges you near 2k$ for a diving watch fitted with a basic eta 2824-2 movement, I am speaking about the super ocean and the colt ocean. Correct me if I am wrong, the topic is about movements, not what firms charge for their products. What Breitling charges isn't particularly relevent, Zenith charges twice and upwards as much as three times what they used to charge for their products. Admittedly Zenith starts out with a better movement, but we aren't talking about cost-benefit analysis (i.e. value) in this thread.
Cosced or not, COSC remains something that Breiting does (or at least did last time I checked) for all of their mechanical movements. Not even Rolex does that (Air-King, no-date Sub).
Breitling has never been known for manufacturing outstanding quality movements as Omega did and does. Again, in the purest tense of "manufacture" I'm hard pressed to name a single movement save the c.1666 that Omega manufacturers... Yes, they have an exclusive on their c.33xx line (such as it is) and the Co-Axial, but those are made for them by another Swatch firm (F. Piguet, and the base movement for the Co-Axial is an ETA movement) Georges.
venus 178 was the best movement breitling proposed in its chronographs, I don't know... I own a Venus 178 (AOPA Navitimer) which has never failed me, but I think the Lemania 1873 is a match for it.
however a 321 is better built and far more reliable. Perhaps. I wouldn't bet against the c.321, but then again how many firms used that movement? Omega, Tissot, perhaps Bucherer back in the day. Who else?
4)In all fairness to TAG-Heuer, it is not
reasonable to compare an inexpensive F1 to
an Omega Moonwatch or a Daytona. On the
other hand, the New TAG-Heuer Carrera
competes decisively against the comparable
Speedmaster Date (both are Valjoux/ETA 7750
based) and makes the Speedmaster look BAD
The level of finish of TAG watches
themselves (not the movement) is comparable
to Omega, perhaps not quite as good, but
pretty close and in the same range. The
Movements... TAG typically doen't spend as
much attention to Omega (at least on the
higher grade Omega models). The Cal. 36 is
very nicely finished and comparable to the
commonaly seen higher grade Omega movement
finishes. It's a shame TAG doesn't use the
Cal. 36 on more models.
-I don't like the new Carrera but it is up to the person's tastes. Indeed, I believe I covered this topic earlier this month over at TZ: | 
