Thoughts on ROC movement

[Breizh]

Any thoughts on the ROC not having an in house movement?

Not debating how great the Piguet chrono is, I'm just wondering about the value of the watch compare to the RO and its beautiful in house movement.
As much as I love the ROC, it's bugging me knowing the movement is not in house (and can be found on a Blancpain).
But if it's ok for a Daytona or a Patek Chrono to have someone else movement, why is it bugging me?

I love the 26315 but thinking of going with the 15450 just because of that.

[Reign]

If the in house matters that much to you, would go with the 15450. It’s anyone’s guess when they go in house on the ROC. The new in house flyback is substantially larger than the current F Piguet so dimensions may be altered in the future as well

[mickyd329]

I have an ROC and the movement not being in house never bothered me. It's a beautiful piece. The movement is time tested and I have had no issues with them. The only issues I've had with AP movements have been in house movements, albeit the chrono module on the 3120 movements that are not in house. Try it on and see if you like it first.

[Breizh]

Originally Posted by mickyd329

I have an ROC and the movement not being in house never bothered me. It's a beautiful piece. The movement is time tested and I have had no issues with them. The only issues I've had with AP movements have been in house movements, albeit the chrono module on the 3120 movements that are not in house. Try it on and see if you like it first.

Thanks
I did try it and really liked it

[myporsche]

If it helps I like the old school caseback with RO logo, if (when) they make the inhouse chronos it will likely be a clear caseback and slightly thicker due to the crystal and thicker movement.

[mav3rick]

to biver the fp1185 is the best chronograph movement in the world

https://youtu.be/4wigSZSxOkE?t=4042

[steeevvvooo]

As said above an inhouse movement may be thicker when it finally arrives... The 38mm chrono is nice but to me the proportions look a little off vs the 26331 (which I own for full disclosure!)

The f piguet movement may be found in other (perceived) lesser watches but none are finished like the AP. To me, the movement is part of the whole package and while obviously important I don't see the 26331 movement as a negative.



Sent from my VOG-L09 using Tapatalk

[phow]

IMHO, I can't justify purchasing a 20k+ timepiece that doesn't have an in-house movement. I'm not saying the current ROC movement isn't great or that it's not better than AP's new movement found in the CODE. It's just a personal sticking point and it would bother me.

[bentlh]

Not having an in-house movement for that kind of money bothers me as well, hence I'd rather wait until they finally put their own movement in (things to also consider regarding the current models: the off-centre date window, the lack of display caseback and the fairly average power reserve)... But to each his own. The watches still look great and i can fully understand why so many people love it.

Sent from my HD1913 using Tapatalk

[srvrf]

I think this is a phase of watch collecting. I used to be way more of an in-house movement guy but with acquistions and mergers, I'm not sure it really matters much anymore. The ROC movement was made by F. Piguet and then bought by Blancpain of the Swatch group. I've moved to a point where if I like the watch, I buy it. So even if they make the ROC with an in-house movement, I'm almost certainly keeping my 25960.

[mav3rick]

When ap stops producing their 2385, fickle minded “collectors” will start clamouring for them as they are driven by the thinking of others. Just ask rolex n lange

People forget how hard it is to make a chronograph, much less a ultra thin chronograph (2 out of 6 grand complications)

[Sho-nuff]

Originally Posted by bentlh

Not having an in-house movement for that kind of money bothers me as well, hence I'd rather wait until they finally put their own movement in

I used to be similar. I recall rumours of the ROC moving to an in-house movement back around 2005. So I waited to see what would happen. The rumours gathered pace over the years. Look at us now in 2020...

[sgwatchguy]

I’ve had mixed feelings about the lack of an in-house movement in the 26315ST. In no way does it take away from the ownership experience. I remain in awe of the design, construction, dial, finish, bracelet as much today as I did the day I purchased the watch.
If AP had developed and delivered it with an in-house movement, it would have added to the experience. Lack of it wasn’t a deterrent to me.
I don’t see how they will get it into the ROC anytime soon.

[phow]

Originally Posted by srvrf

I think this is a phase of watch collecting. I used to be way more of an in-house movement guy but with acquistions and mergers, I'm not sure it really matters much anymore. The ROC movement was made by F. Piguet and then bought by Blancpain of the Swatch group. I've moved to a point where if I like the watch, I buy it. So even if they make the ROC with an in-house movement, I'm almost certainly keeping my 25960.

I think characterizing the valuing of in-house movements as a "phase of watch collecting" is a bit presumptuous

I could also argue the not caring about the origin of a movement is just a phase of watch collecting and you eventually will return to valuing in-house movements more...

^ That's because this is subjective nonsense and what one person values may not be what someone else values and likely has nothing to do with their level of experience.

The bottom line is that there are experienced collectors on both sides of the debate with valid points but as long as you are happy with your decision, that is all that matters.

I remain firm that if I'm going to spend 20k+ on a timepiece, I want the major components of that timepiece to be manufactured and developed by the manufacturer. If AP didn't feel this was a factor, I doubt they would have spent the time and money developing the 4401.

I just feel outsourcing manufacturing at this level is unacceptable and there are plenty of brands within similar price points that don't share this practice.

[Xerxes77]

Originally Posted by mickyd329

I have an ROC and the movement not being in house never bothered me. It's a beautiful piece. The movement is time tested and I have had no issues with them. The only issues I've had with AP movements have been in house movements, albeit the chrono module on the 3120 movements that are not in house. Try it on and see if you like it first.

Same experience !!!
ROC movement passed time test

[sgwatchguy]

Originally Posted by phow

I just feel outsourcing manufacturing at this level is unacceptable and there are plenty of brands within similar price points that don't share this practice.

Unacceptable perhaps is a strong word to use?
To the best of my knowledge outsourcing remains prevalent even in HH. I would argue that the use of an outsourced supplier that specializes in the manufacture of a component should be preferred vs an integrated operation with aspects not yet mature or yet underdeveloped.

[phow]

Originally Posted by sgwatchguy

Unacceptable perhaps is a strong word to use?
To the best of my knowledge outsourcing remains prevalent even in HH. I would argue that the use of an outsourced supplier that specializes in the manufacture of a component should be preferred vs an integrated operation with aspects not yet mature or yet underdeveloped.

I think there is a balance. There is definitely a difference between outsourcing your entire movement vs a single or even several components.

I agree that an outsourced supplier that specializes in a particular component should be preferable to an underdeveloped in-house component. However, I would argue that an outsourced supplier having a superior component to the manufacturer at this level is questionable at best.

In other words, at this level, manufacturers shouldn't have to go to a third party because their in-house components are of lower quality. That's something I expect to hear from a sub 10k brand...

[macrowatch]

Unless your competitor bought up all the good suppliers. Cue storm trooper music...

[sgwatchguy]

Originally Posted by phow

I think there is a balance. There is definitely a difference between outsourcing your entire movement vs a single or even several components.

I agree that an outsourced supplier that specializes in a particular component should be preferable to an underdeveloped in-house component. However, I would argue that an outsourced supplier having a superior component to the manufacturer at this level is questionable at best.

In other words, at this level, manufacturers shouldn't have to go to a third party because their in-house components are of lower quality. That's something I expect to hear from a sub 10k brand...

Agree a balance in everything is ultimately ideal.
The move towards a completely integrated manufacture is a very recent phenomena in Swiss watchmaking, almost modern.
Using a specialist supplier also isn’t about superior/inferior but often about making strategic decisions on whether the investment to go in-house is worth it.
The 2385 isn’t an inferior movement nor can it be said that AP can not exceed it which is why it stays away from introducing an in-house replacement - honestly I don’t know why they don’t - but the cost benefit aspect is probably largest - the ROC may be value wise not their biggest contributor.
KIV that APRP is a very accomplished shop and producing a replacement is certainly not beyond them. They remain the suppliers for RM I believe.
The FP movement also is used by VC, BP themselves very accomplished houses that produce in-house movements.
All in all, it would be great to see AP deliver a new ROC movement in-house but it will happen when it will and in the meantime the FP movement continues to serve them very well.

[C_Troy242]

Actually I think this is a great movement. Haven't been in the game for too long but I have (HH brand) in-house movements that I feel are less smooth than this one. Totally subjective. Also, if I'm not wrong, this F Piguet is one of the slimmest (if not the?) mechanical chrono movements ever made. It's pretty cool to have that. And I admit, I did not buy the RO for the movement first.

[srvrf]

Originally Posted by phow

I think characterizing the valuing of in-house movements as a "phase of watch collecting" is a bit presumptuous

I could also argue the not caring about the origin of a movement is just a phase of watch collecting and you eventually will return to valuing in-house movements more...

^ That's because this is subjective nonsense and what one person values may not be what someone else values and likely has nothing to do with their level of experience.

The bottom line is that there are experienced collectors on both sides of the debate with valid points but as long as you are happy with your decision, that is all that matters.

I remain firm that if I'm going to spend 20k+ on a timepiece, I want the major components of that timepiece to be manufactured and developed by the manufacturer. If AP didn't feel this was a factor, I doubt they would have spent the time and money developing the 4401.

I just feel outsourcing manufacturing at this level is unacceptable and there are plenty of brands within similar price points that don't share this practice.

Sure people can put as much weigh into the movement as they want, but they may think differently based on their experience and how long they've been collecting watches. If you talk about watches in the past, there are numerous desired watches from the past without in-house movements; Rolex Daytona 16520, AP 15202, and even some Patek 5970s. IWC and Breitling have also used modified ETA movements in many iconic watches.

If you bring the discussion to currently produced watches, there are some highly sought after watches where "in-house" isn't so clear. I believe most of Richard Mille's movements are made by AP, and their price points are clearly over $20k USD. Through the LVMH Group, Hublot can use a modified El Primero movement in their smaller Spirit of Big Bangs and call it in-house because LVMH also owns Zenith. And Blancpain can rightfully call their F185 movement in-house because they acquired F. Piguet. But they didn't develop it, they bought the rights. What AP's plans are I don't know. It isn't hard for me to believe that they may be purposefully keeping the old movement in the ROCs while they try to get the Codes off of the ground, not because they can't get it to work in a ROC case.

Everyone goes through different phases of watch collecting. What interests someone a few years ago may not now. After all, look at the classified ads. Most of those watches were bought because someone connected with the watch. But then over time, the watch got less wrist time and eventually ended up for sale. How many people chase their ultimate grail watch only to sell it later for a new grail? My statement that the relative importance of in-house movements may change over time is not an insult to those who value them. But the OP stated that he "loves the 26315" but is thinking of going with a 15450 primarily because the movement is in-house. It doesn't seem like he loves the 15450. But maybe in the end, the right move for the OP is to not buy anything, because the way both watches were presented, they would both be compromises.