Tourbillons: I Don't Get It

[james1787]

They are mechanical works of art, as I find just about any mechanical watch. I find Tourbillons and Minute Repeaters to be quite fascinating. Both are something I'll likely never be able to afford but I can certainly appreciate.

[jhcam8]

Someone wrote a letter to the ed. in WatchTime (I think) claiming that a tourbillion isn't that hard, or expensive to make and the mfg's are over charging.

This sounds vague, I admit, and I'll try to find the letter.

[wantonebad]

Originally Posted by jhcam8

Someone wrote a letter to the ed. in WatchTime (I think) claiming that a tourbillion isn't that hard, or expensive to make and the mfg's are over charging.

This sounds vague, I admit, and I'll try to find the letter.

There might be a point to this, but it's much more than creating a complication, it has to be accommodated and integrated properly. You can't just shoehorn one into just any case and dial combo. Ultimately any Tourbillion has to completely engineered from scratch and the cost is a result of this, design bears this out also. If thought of as just the height of accuracy every maker would have one as some kind of cased gyroscope module added to existing models.

Ken hit the nail on the head, it could be construed as impractical or obsolete if taken at face value, however when thought of as elevated horology and as mechanical art then there is nothing quite so elegant as a proper Tourbillion executed professionally.

JMHO

[SMD]

Originally Posted by MrJ320

The tourbillon complication technically has a functionality, as its original intent was to improve accuracy of the watch by countering the effects of gravity by mounting the escapement and balance wheel in a rotating cage. Whether the tourbillon complication actually improves accuracy is another matter, but it was designed to serve a purpose, and not just pure novelty.

But wasn't this only really relevant in the context of a pocket watch? My understanding was that for a wrist watch a tourbillon does not really improve accuracy.

[autohorology]

It doesn't, and therein lies the problem.

If it's just art, and that piece of art is becoming easier and easier to replicate, then the challenge is really in creating some grander tourbillon than the last.

But, if the Tourbillon fails to even serve the purpose it was originally intended for, to me it's like some horological scam.

If someone asked me what my tourbillon did and I couldn't explain it with the same passion that I can with a perpetual calendar, then what's the point? Am I going to say "Oh it does nothing at all, it just looks cool? And some guy spent hours upon hours putting together something that doesn't do anything?"

At least when I explain what a perpetual calendar is to my non watch friends, their response is "Oh, wow."

Originally Posted by SMD

But wasn't this only really relevant in the context of a pocket watch? My understanding was that for a wrist watch a tourbillon does not really improve accuracy.

[QueueCumber]

Originally Posted by autohorology

It doesn't, and therein lies the problem.

If it's just art, and that piece of art is becoming easier and easier to replicate, then the challenge is really in creating some grander tourbillon than the last.

But, if the Tourbillon fails to even serve the purpose it was originally intended for, to me it's like some horological scam.

If someone asked me what my tourbillon did and I couldn't explain it with the same passion that I can with a perpetual calendar, then what's the point? Am I going to say "Oh it does nothing at all, it just looks cool? And some guy spent hours upon hours putting together something that doesn't do anything?"

At least when I explain what a perpetual calendar is to my non watch friends, their response is "Oh, wow."

Personally, I think you should stop buying mechanical watches. They are all art more than utility at this point, where the beauty is in the finishing and movement itself. Buy yourself a nice quartz watch, or just use your cell phone, and be happy. Then you won't have to be embarrassed when you feel compelled to explain to your friends why you bought an expensive watch that isn't as accurate as a $20 K-Mart Citizen.

All the complications you are mentioning will be available via cheap labor in markets like China eventually, and all pieces no matter where they are made are less accurate than a cell phone, so you are bound to be utterly embarrassed by them all down the road. All that will be left is the unique artistry of the company that made the movement and the high quality finish of the piece compared to the cheaper made versions. Since it sounds like you don't care about those things, you may want to get out while the getting is good!

[autohorology]

Eh, no. And you're missing my point.

Originally Posted by QueueCumber

Personally, I think you should stop buying mechanical watches. They are all art more than utility at this point, where the beauty is in the finishing and movement itself. Buy yourself a nice quartz watch, or just use your cell phone, and be happy. Then you won't have to be embarrassed when you feel compelled to explain to your friends why you bought an expensive watch that isn't as accurate as a $20 K-Mart Citizen.

All the complications you are mentioning will be available via cheap labor in markets like China eventually, and all pieces no matter where they are made are less accurate than a cell phone, so you are bound to be utterly embarrassed by them all down the road. All that will be left is the unique artistry of the company that made the movement and the high quality finish of the piece compared to the cheaper made versions. Since it sounds like you don't care about those things, you may want to get out while the getting is good!

[QueueCumber]

Originally Posted by autohorology

Eh, no. And you're missing my point.

I'm missing the point about as much as you are missing the point...

http://rolex.watchprosite.com/?show=...128&pi=1878396

To me it seems like you are just trolling now, but whatever...

[autohorology]

Agree to disagree. This isn't the classic "watches are useless in a world of iphones" debate. It's why can't anyone explain why a tourbillon carries the prestige and pricetag that it does over other complications, and so far no one has. Not sure why you're so offended over it.

Originally Posted by QueueCumber

I'm missing the point about as much as you are missing the point...

http://rolex.watchprosite.com/?show=...128&pi=1878396

To me it seems like you are just trolling now, but whatever...

[QueueCumber]

Originally Posted by autohorology

Agree to disagree. This isn't the classic "watches are useless in a world of iphones" debate. It's why can't anyone explain why a tourbillon carries the prestige and pricetag that it does over other complications, and so far no one has. Not sure why you're so offended over it.

And my point is that no movement will have prestige soon according to your thinking, so you may want to run for it...

[autohorology]

I don't think other complications have anything to lose. They sell themselves on brand first, complication second. You are first looking for a Patek, in my opinion, before you're looking at what complications they have to offer.

A Tourbillon, however, I actually believe however misguided, that people just want a Tourbillon and the brand is less important. When there are more of them out there and it can no longer sell itself on its exclusive image, I think it becomes less prestigious.

Maybe that's all wrong and I'm just spinning in circles, but I think a tourbillon is in a separate category from other complications.

Originally Posted by QueueCumber

And my point is that no movement will have prestige soon according to your thinking, so you may want to run for it...

[QueueCumber]

Originally Posted by autohorology

I don't think other complications have anything to lose. They sell themselves on brand first, complication second. You are first looking for a Patek, in my opinion, before you're looking at what complications they have to offer.

A Tourbillon, however, I actually believe however misguided, that people just want a Tourbillon and the brand is less important. When there are more of them out there and it can no longer sell itself on its exclusive image, I think it becomes less prestigious.

Maybe that's all wrong and I'm just spinning in circles, but I think a tourbillon is in a separate category from other complications.

I can't speak for others and why they choose brands or tourbillons. I definitely try to choose brands that I think have staying power and history if spending a lot of money, or for vintage pieces I choose watches that made a historical footnote that I find interesting.

That being said, aesthetics drive my interest in a piece. There are complicated watches that I wouldn't touch because I think they look ugly. Likewise, if a piece hits me deeply on an aesthetic level, I don't care if it is a perpetual chronograph or a tourbillon, I desire it because it is beautiful. But that's just me. Fortunately, very few tourbillons look aesthetically pleasing to me. Most of the time it looks like they were bolted on at the last second, cutting rudely across the design of the dial, or they look horrendously cartoonish in an attempt to modernize how wristwatches look. And these are top brands I'm referring to BTW!

[wantonebad]

Brian do you like Waterford crystal, or Riedel wine glasses? Why not save money and use a Dixie cup? I hear what you are saying about a tourbillion being a horological scam, not that agree with you but one could certainly make that case. It was designed for a pocket watch and it was designed more than 200 years ago. No one who is a watch collector or knows about watches thinks a tourbillion watch tells time more accurately then other high-end movements, they think their watch is like fine cut crystal or it enhances their wines aroma so to speak. They know what they are buying and they seek this kind of ornate "over-engineering" out because it speaks to them, not cause they are chumps... Because that's what they like, they like MORE than enough when most of us can settle for enough, JMHO

[autohorology]

I agree on that. And believe me I have no problem spending money on watches or I would just wear a Casio and call it a day. For me, the artistry is in a finely crafted case and an obviously superior movement/complication. I understand that a Tourbillon is for that individual who truly wants one. As I stated a couple times in this thread, I OWNED an F.A. Jones Tourbillon by IWC. I tried it. I'm just wanted to better understand the technical innovation that is behind a tourbillon and I honestly don't think anyone really knows beyond it being an expensive complication and if you like it, you like it, and if you don't, you don't.

I get that. And maybe that's the only answer there is.

Originally Posted by wantonebad

Brian do you like Waterford crystal, or Riedel wine glasses? Why not save money and use a Dixie cup? I hear what you are saying about a tourbillion being a horological scam, not that agree with you but one could certainly make that case. It was designed for a pocket watch and it was designed more than 200 years ago. No one who is a watch collector or knows about watches thinks a tourbillion watch tells time more accurately then other high-end movements, they think their watch is like fine cut crystal or it enhances their wines aroma so to speak. They know what they are buying and they seek this kind of ornate "over-engineering" out because it speaks to them, not cause they are chumps... Because that's what they like, they like MORE than enough when most of us can settle for enough, JMHO

[wantonebad]

Originally Posted by autohorology

I agree on that. And believe me I have no problem spending money on watches or I would just wear a Casio and call it a day. For me, the artistry is in a finely crafted case and an obviously superior movement/complication. I understand that a Tourbillon is for that individual who truly wants one. As I stated a couple times in this thread, I OWNED an F.A. Jones Tourbillon by IWC. I tried it. I'm just wanted to better understand the technical innovation that is behind a tourbillon and I honestly don't think anyone really knows beyond it being an expensive complication and if you like it, you like it, and if you don't, you don't.

I get that. And maybe that's the only answer there is.

Well almost but people do indeed know what a tourbillion does, it's not a secret, its a new (200 years old) mousetrap built for an escapement and balance. Does it increase accuracy? Maybe not but it's a more elaborate way of accomplishing a necessary function so it's not like it's a mystery...

[77T]

"I'm just wanted to better understand the technical innovation that is behind a tourbillon and I honestly don't think anyone really knows beyond it being an expensive complication"

The answer to that part of your post is readily accessible in many websites and books you can read.

As for the value of its marginally better accuracy, it doesn't really justify the higher price IMHO.

But I will suggest you do some real research beyond posting a question on TRF and then standing back expecting us to convince you...

Not a rant - just sharing in the spirit of communication.

[autohorology]

Thanks. Think I'll ignore the forums for awhile. Not what I was expecting to hear. Seems like everyone wants to brag about their watches and no one wants to actually discuss them in a passionate manner beyond telling people to "f off" and look elsewhere for information. Was never trolling, but I see what this is about...

[QueueCumber]

Originally Posted by autohorology

Thanks. Think I'll ignore the forums for awhile. Not what I was expecting to hear. Seems like everyone wants to brag about their watches and no one wants to actually discuss them in a passionate manner beyond telling people to "f off" and look elsewhere for information. Was never trolling, but I see what this is about...

Not trolling, eh?

Don't let the door hit you on the way out...

[lig]

Originally Posted by QueueCumber

Not trolling, eh?

Don't let the door hit you on the way out...

Pretty amusing that the fellow with a $50K watch is having difficulty with the value of a tourbillion.

[jhcam8]

Originally Posted by HL65

Tourbillons absolutely amazing looking pieces of art IMHO. As for getting them...Most outside of forum members and collectors don't get why anyone would spend $5-10k on a Rolex let alone $50k plus on a Patek. I had a JLC RG Master tourbillon and it was incredible to look at. Whether the tourbillon added to the accuracy of the watch didn't really matter to me. I just enjoyed watching it in action and staring at it as it was quite beautiful.

I think this is the crux of the matter. I've seen some incredible looking tourbillon watches and they can be things of beauty.

[vman]

Originally Posted by lig

am i the only one finding this thread to be a tad ironic?

+1

[QueueCumber]

Originally Posted by lig

Pretty amusing that the fellow with a $50K watch is having difficulty with the value of a tourbillion.

Well, honestly, when people have already answered his questions a number of times, and he keeps repeating the same question in ways he hopes will be more irritating by increasing the negative language, his true intentions start to become painfully blatant.

As far as his comments concerning bragging in his final post, I'm humored to see that kind of comment made by someone who is compelled to list every single watch he owns and has ever owned in his signature.

[jhcam8]

Originally Posted by QueueCumber

As far as his comments concerning bragging in his final post, I'm humored to see that kind of comment made by someone who is compelled to list every single watch he owns and has ever owned in his signature.

You should list yours, Queue - if you had time.

[QueueCumber]

Originally Posted by jhcam8

You should list yours, Queue - if you had time.

I'd have to go to the bank and catalogue them all. This hobby has gotten out of control for me...

[lig]

Originally Posted by QueueCumber

Well, honestly, when people have already answered his questions a number of times, and he keeps repeating the same question in ways he hopes will be more irritating by increasing the negative language, his true intentions start to become painfully blatant.

As far as his comments concerning bragging in his final post, I'm humored to see that kind of comment made by someone who is compelled to list every single watch he owns and has ever owned in his signature.

Yep - we're officially beyond the "dripping with irony" stage and well into trolling.

[jhcam8]

All is explained:
(posted on p.com)

http://msnvideo.msn.com/?channelinde...4-8ea6723a9e08

[Israguard]

Thank you for posting this amazing video. I've never seen such amazing works of art before.. Unreal.. I could sit and look at them spin all day..

[sierra11b]

Doesn't Seagull make a tourbillion for under $3K? It's obviously not up to the level of finish as other upper-tier brands but I do think there's a considerable amount of margin for the upper-tier brands.

Personally, for the money I'd much rather have an HEQ movement from Citizen or Seiko. I think as much (if not more) goes into them. I think it's a natural progression on a brand's technology... The grandfather of quartz produces the 9FXX and the watchmaker's brand (JLC) can naturally produce a tourbillion with a little R&D, except they are able to charge much much more for them.

We know raw materials isn't a reason for the premium so it must be r&d and prestige in owning the watch itself. I see the OP's point... That being said, if AP developed the spring drive they'd wrap it in platinum and charge a quarter million for it.

[FTX I]

Originally Posted by jhcam8

All is explained:
(posted on p.com)

http://msnvideo.msn.com/?channelinde...4-8ea6723a9e08

Thank you Jim. Wonderful video.

[77T]

Yes saw that video in another thread and is a wonderful example of taking things up a notch. One of the watches has a quad tourbillon in it -Wow!