Are movements overrated ?

[Frank McKay]

There’s always chatter about new potential movements being released by Rolex.
I’m no savant when it comes to movements but other than the extra power reserve, what am I missing? for those who where their watch continuously, the added power reserve is moot.

[Snake Plissken]

I guess it depends in what sense you find them overrrated:

In terms of "technology", I'd say, yes, they're overrated in the sense that people make a big deal about marginal technical advancements in mechanical watchmaking, which is in itself a technically inferior solution to time keeping. But, it's still hard to deny that there's something appreciable about the fact that these toys are being continuously improved by engineering.

In the sense of in-house vs. supplied from a mass producer, I think for whatever reason people have come to expect that in-house is a prerequisite for being able to charge certain prices. I don't have a strong opinion on this debate but I do think it's good to know that the movement has been crafted to the same quality standards as the rest of the watch.

Now, this doesn't really apply to Rolex, but for me the appeal of movements isn't in the technological advancement but in the craftsmanship. There's something deeply admirable and aesthetically pleasing about looking at a beautifully hand finished movement from the high end brands like Lange or Patek or the independent low volume makers like Dufour, etc. The amount of precision and attention to detail that goes into doing something like that just adds to the overall feeling of quality of a watch.

[eanzenberg]

Depends on the movement. In the SkyD, the movement is the star of the show for such a complicated watch. Is it pretty though? No, and Rolex is kind enough to know it and seal up the case-back.

[TankTom]

Originally Posted by Frank McKay

There’s always chatter about new potential movements being released by Rolex.
I’m no savant when it comes to movements but other than the extra power reserve, what am I missing? for those who where their watch continuously, the added power reserve is moot.

Yes very overrated IMO

[Frank McKay]

Originally Posted by Snake Plissken

I guess it depends in what sense you find them overrrated:

In terms of "technology", I'd say, yes, they're overrated in the sense that people make a big deal about marginal technical advancements in mechanical watchmaking, which is in itself a technically inferior solution to time keeping. But, it's still hard to deny that there's something appreciable about the fact that these toys are being continuously improved by engineering.

In the sense of in-house vs. supplied from a mass producer, I think for whatever reason people have come to expect that in-house is a prerequisite for being able to charge certain prices. I don't have a strong opinion on this debate but I do think it's good to know that the movement has been crafted to the same quality standards as the rest of the watch.

Now, this doesn't really apply to Rolex, but for me the appeal of movements isn't in the technological advancement but in the craftsmanship. There's something deeply admirable and aesthetically pleasing about looking at a beautifully hand finished movement from the high end brands like Lange or Patek or the independent low volume makers like Dufour, etc. The amount of precision and attention to detail that goes into doing something like that just adds to the overall feeling of quality of a watch.

Thanks for the informative post. Appreciate it.

[watchmavan]

Yes there's always interest in new calibres. What materials are they using for the hairspring and balance wheel? Is it a cock or full bridge over the balance? What anti-magnetic materials are being used? What special coatings/treatments etc? What power reserve? COSC or METAS or both? Who's making it? Exclusive or shared with others? The trade off of power reserve and amplitude etc.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[watchmaker]

For the majority of even 'enthusiast grade' collectors, I'd say yes, movements are overrated.

Other than learning a few marketing buzzwords and phrases to spout verbatim most laypeople have no meaningful idea of how a movement works, never mind what the 'improvements' translate to (or don't) in actual wear on an updated calibre.

[77T]

When a novel design is part of the new movement, one that potential changes Horology altogether, then it could be worth the ballyhoo.

But for the most part, small incremental changes in materials improvement and tolerances don’t justify the manner of hype we hear upon a new release.

It’s hard to imagine what’s next in movement tech that would stun the market. It’d be like the discovery of a new vein of gold that yields triple production of current reserves.

Disruptive, historic change like the concentric balance spring, automatics, tourbillons, quartz, coaxial, etc. might be ahead but hard to imagine them today.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[abozz]

There is the current tendency to belittle everything, I could spend years trying to understand how to make a watch, the mathematical calculations, the parts, the beauty. I'm still amazed! Not everything is a marketing hype, I have owned many watch brands and Rolex's chronometer precision is unique!

Enviado desde mi SM-G975F mediante Tapatalk

[justdate]

What even the most advanced mechanical movement achieves in measuring, storing and presenting time data is so inferior to the ability of even a simple digital device, that to get excited about it can be seen as being a little ridiculous. Like my friend said when I talked about upgrading my AC to a PC for $30,000 - “or you could just buy a $10 Casio”.

Instead we may say we appreciate it as it is harder to make a functioning watch that uses traditional mechanical technologies than modern digital ones, though we probably wouldn’t appreciate many other industries intentionally making costs far higher, functionality of the product far worse, and durability / ease of maintenance much lessened and more expensive by using old technologies!

And yet there is something intangible that draws us to the mechanical movement. The old world charm, some careful marketing and the beauty of a well finished movement explain some of it. But for me what really makes it so special is that it is the perfect balance of simplicity - unlike digital it is physical enough for us to see and understand - and complexity - enough to leave us wondering how it is achieved. By being simple enough for us to physically see and hear, the movement satisfies our desire to own and posses things, whilst the complexity of it satisfies our desire for that thing to be special.

[padi56]

Originally Posted by watchmaker

For the majority of even 'enthusiast grade' collectors, I'd say yes, movements are overrated.

Other than learning a few marketing buzzwords and phrases to spout verbatim most laypeople have no meaningful idea of how a movement works, never mind what the 'improvements' translate to (or don't) in actual wear on an updated calibre.

Have to agree in the real world its doubtful if many Rolex wearers today know how any mechanical movement works, as many just wear the name on the dial.

[Token74]

I suspect that many movement upgrades actually make life better, easier, and cheaper for the watch manufacturer rather than offering significant gains for the wearer.

However, advancements like the Rolex Parachrom hairspring which solves the magnetic field issue should not be ignored.

If all you care about is brand name and how a watch looks, sure, movements don’t matter a jot. But for many people, movements matter a great deal.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Token74]

Originally Posted by padi56

Have to agree in the real world its doubtful if many Rolex wearers today know how any mechanical movement works, as many just wear the name on the dial.

No different to the majority of people 40 years ago Peter. And likely before that, but I was too young to remember so can’t say for sure.

And just because most of us don’t understand how a movement works, doesn’t mean we don’t appreciate the craftsmanship, the design, the finish, and the ingenuity. The Atmos clock for instance blows my mind.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[watchmaker]

Originally Posted by Token74

No different to the majority of people 40 years ago Peter. And likely before that, but I was too young to remember so can’t say for sure.

And just because most of us don’t understand how a movement works, doesn’t mean we don’t appreciate the craftsmanship, the design, the finish, and the ingenuity. The Atmos clock for instance blows my mind.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I get what you mean, and certainly in relation to my comment I am in no way conflating overrated and lack of appreciation.

The gist of what I was saying is often (not always) enthusiasts appreciate movements perhaps a little too much or for the wrong reasons. And that would go hand in hand with some people erroneously deriding non-manufacture movements for reasons they don’t fully understand, just because it is the done thing.

[Token74]

Originally Posted by watchmaker

I get what you mean, and certainly in relation to my comment I am in no way conflating overrated and lack of appreciation.

The gist of what I was saying is often (not always) enthusiasts appreciate movements perhaps a little too much or for the wrong reasons. And that would go hand in hand with some people erroneously deriding non-manufacture movements for reasons they don’t fully understand, just because it is the done thing.

That’s very fair, I used to be a ‘movement snob’ which was based on ignorance! I still don’t understand it all, but I’m learning!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[77T]

Originally Posted by padi56

Have to agree in the real world its doubtful if many Rolex wearers today know how any mechanical movement works, as many just wear the name on the dial.

I think the awareness level has improved in the past few decades. The Internet has helped people understand how many things work.

It is the Li-ion battery, right? They’re safer than the old Mercury ones I heard.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[brandrea]

Originally Posted by watchmaker

For the majority of even 'enthusiast grade' collectors, I'd say yes, movements are overrated.

Other than learning a few marketing buzzwords and phrases to spout verbatim most laypeople have no meaningful idea of how a movement works, never mind what the 'improvements' translate to (or don't) in actual wear on an updated calibre.

In all honesty I’d fall into this camp Scott. Nothing wrong with that IMHO. I’m interested in knowing the basics, and if I can understand the basics that’s good enough for me. In all honesty I much prefer to leave it to the experts

In practical terms, all I care about is that the watch keeps good time.

[watchmaker]

Originally Posted by brandrea

In all honesty I’d fall into this camp Scott. Nothing wrong with that IMHO. I’m interested in knowing the basics, and if I can understand the basics that’s good enough for me. In all honesty I much prefer to leave it to the experts

In practical terms, all I care about is that the watch keeps good time.

Nothing wrong with it at all. It was an observation, in no way intended as a criticism

And FWIW I find it encouraging to see people take an interest in the technical side of watches as opposed to just the aesthetics (or worse, profitability)

[brandrea]

Originally Posted by watchmaker

Nothing wrong with it at all. It was an observation, in no way intended as a criticism

And FWIW I find it encouraging to see people take an interest in the technical side of watches as opposed to just the aesthetics (or worse, profitability)

Indeed, and not taken as one brother

[horseShu]

Forgive me, but I'm a bit jaded when some Rolex enthusiasts talk excitedly about innovations in the movement. When the watches have a solid caseback!

Sure, the increase in power reserve is a good benefit. I can see a guy wearing his Rolex on weekdays, then storing it for the weekends. A long power reserve ensures that the watch will still be ticking by the time he wears it again on Monday morning.

But I suspect that most people just talk up the new movements to build hype, in the hopes of increasing the price of the secondary market.

Remember the GMTII caliber 3186 fiasco? Very few people actually know what improvements the 3186 brings over the workhorse 3185, but that didn't stop people from hyping up the prices.

So, to answer the OP, yes some movements ARE overrated.
Not all. I'm very impressed with the movements of the Skydweller and the Yachtmaster II.

[doramas]

For me if they're overrated. I have a 3135 of the first ones that came out at almost 32 years old and it is at -0.166666 seconds a day or -5 seconds a month and I don't think many 3235s are in better values.

[enjoythemusic]

Other than added power reserve for 'imporvement', Rolex makes solid movements. That's why they can offer a FIVE year warranty while some <cough> 'prestegious' </cough> companies merely offer the bare minimum two year warranty and take FOREVER to service their proucts.

[Spoonage]

I'm fine with older proven movements. While new movements and innovative materials are nice, if I'm happy with a watch, a new movement would not be enough to purchase a watch. In terms of PR, 42-48hr is more than enough. I would actually much prefer a manual wind in any watch given an option for it.

[JChips]

Seems there is a lot of hype behind new movements and “improvements”.

From a practical point of view, I have trouble seeing the dramatic real-world difference between an “older” 3135 and a newer 3235.

At least that’s been my experience, through a couple of decades or more of every day use.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[zjd168]

For people having more than one watch, or those don't wear watch during weekends, the extra one day power reserve is very preferable.

For most models Rolex doesn't charge tangible extra for the new movement. Time will tell if they will be as robust as the 31xx. If yes (big if of course) then we are basically getting the improvements for free.

Not sure if the new movements will be as easy to service as the old ones, but that will be RSC's concerns, as I don't plan to use any corner store to service mine anyway. However for some people this might be one of the reasons they want to stick to the old models.

[JChips]

Originally Posted by zjd168

For people having more than one watch, or those don't wear watch during weekends, the extra one day power reserve is very preferable.

.

Is it that hard to wind and set a watch?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Maxy]

Originally Posted by Frank McKay

There’s always chatter about new potential movements being released by Rolex.
I’m no savant when it comes to movements but other than the extra power reserve, what am I missing? for those who where their watch continuously, the added power reserve is moot.

Yes, extra day of power reserve is no big deal. But it's not always about that. Rolex updates their movements in decades and outside it might appear just power reserve feature update but it can update minor issues or use better quality parts in their movements. I agree making so much noise for a new movement is not need by consumers but as far as manufacturer goes, I would prefer them to make movement updates every decade or so instead of making 1 movement and run it for 100 years!

[zjd168]

Originally Posted by JChips

Is it that hard to wind and set a watch?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Not really, just keep forgetting, and it is very convenient to pick it up Monday morning or after two days and it is still running accurately, isn't it? Plus you are basically getting this for free.

[JChips]

Originally Posted by zjd168

Not really, just keep forgetting, and it is very convenient to pick it up Monday morning or after two days and it is still running accurately, isn't it? Plus you are basically getting this for free.

Fair enough. That makes sense.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Seddyspaghetti]

not going to pretend to know exactly how movements work, but i do care about what the outcome is. if i get more accuracy/power reserve then that's great.