ETA Vs In-house movements
Discussion
Some people on here are always banging on about the superiority of In-house movements over ETA ones, I was just wondering why people seem to assume an In-house movement to be 'better' than an ETA one?
Assuming an ETA and In-house movement are just as accurate and have the same complications, why do people automatically seem to assume the in-house one is in some way superior?
Sure a manufacturer that makes it's own movement is perhaps 'more' of a manufacturer than one that just bangs in an ETA movement. I understand that this costs the manufacturer more so the watch may be more expensive but why does that make the movement intrinsically any better?
ETA have some movements that have been around since at least the 50's but some posters seem to assume that any in house one must be better. I was wondering why?
Why do people prefer in-house movements?
Assuming an ETA and In-house movement are just as accurate and have the same complications, why do people automatically seem to assume the in-house one is in some way superior?
Sure a manufacturer that makes it's own movement is perhaps 'more' of a manufacturer than one that just bangs in an ETA movement. I understand that this costs the manufacturer more so the watch may be more expensive but why does that make the movement intrinsically any better?
ETA have some movements that have been around since at least the 50's but some posters seem to assume that any in house one must be better. I was wondering why?
Why do people prefer in-house movements?
Personally (as a Breitling and IWC owner) I doubt that there is a great difference in the accuracy of the two movements, but what I think is the main point is that an ETA movement is dirt cheap yet the above manufacturers do charge a fortune for their watches, a price which to me isn't really justified. Now in the instance of in house makers one can see a premium price purely based on volume, let alone any intrinsic differences in manufacture that may mean they are better. Now is my IWC chrono better than a chinese copy with the same movement at $300? There's the conundrum.
And just to complicate matters, what about in-house modified ETAs? Example would be the 7750 in the IWC Spitfire Chrono. Is this better than the 'standard' (though again modded/personalised) 7750 in my Fortis B-42 Pilot Professional Chrono?
I have my eye on a pre-owned IWC Spitfire but the fact that it is so similar (style, movement, functions etc) a watch to my Fortis is stopping me going for it.
I have my eye on a pre-owned IWC Spitfire but the fact that it is so similar (style, movement, functions etc) a watch to my Fortis is stopping me going for it.
I guess there's the mass-produced vs. limited production appeal - mass produced movements have to be designed within computerised assembly restraints whereas hand-made low-volume movements can be quirky and weird for the sake of it.
Also there's a bit of the 'proper watch manufacture' about being able to build a movement in-house, at least to me. If your company merely makes cases, straps and designs dials, but buys in movements from ETA, then you're not IMO building a watch, you're merely making jewellery - there's a large difference in engineering expertise required in-house to build a movement compared to just building a case (there will be some argument against this, and the lines are blurred by watchmakers who extensively modify mass-produced movements).
It's like having your own engine, I suppose. It makes more sense for a low-volume car manufacturer to buy in a Chevy LSx V8 because it's bombproof, relatively light and powerful, but people will pay a lot more for an 'engineered-from-scratch' machine compared to a parts-bin-special. Same with watches, by the looks of things.
Also, in-house movements are tricky to fake / replicate... the ETA movements are readily available either genuinely, or as chinese copies, for low prices, opening the doors up to widespread counterfeiting.
Also there's a bit of the 'proper watch manufacture' about being able to build a movement in-house, at least to me. If your company merely makes cases, straps and designs dials, but buys in movements from ETA, then you're not IMO building a watch, you're merely making jewellery - there's a large difference in engineering expertise required in-house to build a movement compared to just building a case (there will be some argument against this, and the lines are blurred by watchmakers who extensively modify mass-produced movements).
It's like having your own engine, I suppose. It makes more sense for a low-volume car manufacturer to buy in a Chevy LSx V8 because it's bombproof, relatively light and powerful, but people will pay a lot more for an 'engineered-from-scratch' machine compared to a parts-bin-special. Same with watches, by the looks of things.
Also, in-house movements are tricky to fake / replicate... the ETA movements are readily available either genuinely, or as chinese copies, for low prices, opening the doors up to widespread counterfeiting.
el stovey said:
Some people on here are always banging on about the superiority of In-house movements over ETA ones, I was just wondering why people seem to assume an In-house movement to be 'better' than an ETA one?
Assuming an ETA and In-house movement are just as accurate and have the same complications, why do people automatically seem to assume the in-house one is in some way superior?
Sure a manufacturer that makes it's own movement is perhaps 'more' of a manufacturer than one that just bangs in an ETA movement. I understand that this costs the manufacturer more so the watch may be more expensive but why does that make the movement intrinsically any better?
ETA have some movements that have been around since at least the 50's but some posters seem to assume that any in house one must be better. I was wondering why?
Why do people prefer in-house movements?
I certainly don't assume an in house movement is better than a solid ETA movement that has been manufactured for years and has all the problems engineered out of it.Assuming an ETA and In-house movement are just as accurate and have the same complications, why do people automatically seem to assume the in-house one is in some way superior?
Sure a manufacturer that makes it's own movement is perhaps 'more' of a manufacturer than one that just bangs in an ETA movement. I understand that this costs the manufacturer more so the watch may be more expensive but why does that make the movement intrinsically any better?
ETA have some movements that have been around since at least the 50's but some posters seem to assume that any in house one must be better. I was wondering why?
Why do people prefer in-house movements?
ETA make different grade movements themselves. An in house movement will probably be more highly decorated (so what? you will never see it in most instances!) an in house movement is more 'unique' and 'better'. Why do people buy handmade shoes, handmade clothes handmade furniture etc - its about exclusivity not necessarily 'better'. If we were all sensible then we would all own £5 quartz watch, but we don't.
Edited by sparkyhx on Friday 24th October 15:11
I think this is an interesting question and as I'm probably one of those banging on about in-house movements I thought I'd try to share my thoughts.
I'll start by saying this is not a simple question by any means, and there is no way that I would say that in-house is always better than a bought-in movement (whether from ETA, Sellita, Seagull, Maktime or whoever).
On the plus side the ETA movements in particular are extremely reliable and robust and have been proven in millions of watches all over the world. They are obviously extremely common (by which I mean frequently seen) and are, therefore, generally well known and understood by pretty much all watchmakers and can be easily serviced or repaired.
Clearly there are also in-house movements that are widely known, very robust and extremely reliable - Rolex comes to mind here: robustness and reliability are probably numbers 1. and 2. on the Rolex movement designers list of requirements. Certainly there are few Rolex movements/watches that have much in the way of complications beyond day, date, GMT and the occasional chrono.
However, in-house movements are usually much less common, made in far smaller numbers, not so easy to service/repair and potentially not as reliable or accurate.
Price is also a key consideration: designing and manufacturing a movement that will be reliable and accurate over years of continuous use is a complex and expensive exercise. Manufacture watches are rightly expensive. I do object strenuously to paying manufacture prices for watches with ETA movements inside. I also object to the obfuscation that usually comes with this - watch companies who assign their own calibre numbers to ETA movements and don't openly admit the source. Conversely I admire those companies who are upfront about the origins of their movements, even when they have made modifications themselves. Oris are in this latter camp.
There are many watches that use ETA (or other bought in) movements quite appropriately, and produce a fantastic watch. For example Sinn, Damasko, Oris, Stowa, Timefactors/Precista, Hamilton and many more.
But using a bought in movement means you are by definition limited - it will be a particular size and weight for instance and that will constrain what can be done.
For me what an in-house movement brings to the party is a uniqueness, an artisty, a spirit and a demonstration that actually this is the product of a watchmaker and not merely a watchcasemaker. The movement is the beating heart of a mechanical watch, and to me is as important as the form and the function. They are also usually much more beautiful than ETA movements.
Consider for instance the JLC Reverso Duo - a grail of mine - you could never make such a watch using an ETA movement, it could only be made by someone who can design and make their own movements. For me JLC are the ultimate manufacture: they make more movements than any other maker, they are more prolific in designing and introducing new movements and technologies than any other, and they have at times supplied movements to all the big four houses.
Is it a matter of versus? Not really, ETA and others fill a gap and make it possible for a huge range of affordable mechanical watches to be made and sold. But in-house movements show us the peaks for which we can strive.
So would I buy a watch with an ETA movement, absolutely: I have several. Do I prefer to buy a watch with an in-house movement, well sort of, but its rarely a simple like for like comparison, not least when considering cost.
A final comment, I have deliberately not mentioned Seiko in this discussion, to my mind they are in a special class of their own - a manufacture of both affordable and expensive watches - and they should be applauded for that, but they really have no peers.
I'll start by saying this is not a simple question by any means, and there is no way that I would say that in-house is always better than a bought-in movement (whether from ETA, Sellita, Seagull, Maktime or whoever).
On the plus side the ETA movements in particular are extremely reliable and robust and have been proven in millions of watches all over the world. They are obviously extremely common (by which I mean frequently seen) and are, therefore, generally well known and understood by pretty much all watchmakers and can be easily serviced or repaired.
Clearly there are also in-house movements that are widely known, very robust and extremely reliable - Rolex comes to mind here: robustness and reliability are probably numbers 1. and 2. on the Rolex movement designers list of requirements. Certainly there are few Rolex movements/watches that have much in the way of complications beyond day, date, GMT and the occasional chrono.
However, in-house movements are usually much less common, made in far smaller numbers, not so easy to service/repair and potentially not as reliable or accurate.
Price is also a key consideration: designing and manufacturing a movement that will be reliable and accurate over years of continuous use is a complex and expensive exercise. Manufacture watches are rightly expensive. I do object strenuously to paying manufacture prices for watches with ETA movements inside. I also object to the obfuscation that usually comes with this - watch companies who assign their own calibre numbers to ETA movements and don't openly admit the source. Conversely I admire those companies who are upfront about the origins of their movements, even when they have made modifications themselves. Oris are in this latter camp.
There are many watches that use ETA (or other bought in) movements quite appropriately, and produce a fantastic watch. For example Sinn, Damasko, Oris, Stowa, Timefactors/Precista, Hamilton and many more.
But using a bought in movement means you are by definition limited - it will be a particular size and weight for instance and that will constrain what can be done.
For me what an in-house movement brings to the party is a uniqueness, an artisty, a spirit and a demonstration that actually this is the product of a watchmaker and not merely a watchcasemaker. The movement is the beating heart of a mechanical watch, and to me is as important as the form and the function. They are also usually much more beautiful than ETA movements.
Consider for instance the JLC Reverso Duo - a grail of mine - you could never make such a watch using an ETA movement, it could only be made by someone who can design and make their own movements. For me JLC are the ultimate manufacture: they make more movements than any other maker, they are more prolific in designing and introducing new movements and technologies than any other, and they have at times supplied movements to all the big four houses.
Is it a matter of versus? Not really, ETA and others fill a gap and make it possible for a huge range of affordable mechanical watches to be made and sold. But in-house movements show us the peaks for which we can strive.
So would I buy a watch with an ETA movement, absolutely: I have several. Do I prefer to buy a watch with an in-house movement, well sort of, but its rarely a simple like for like comparison, not least when considering cost.
A final comment, I have deliberately not mentioned Seiko in this discussion, to my mind they are in a special class of their own - a manufacture of both affordable and expensive watches - and they should be applauded for that, but they really have no peers.
I think for some its like cars ...a lot of smaller (and some bigger) manufacturers will buy in engines, and modify them a little or a lot, whilst others are a 100% in-house shop.
Price seems little to do with it - there are sportscars costing hundreds of thousands with bought-in engines from (usually) cheaper cars...and others that pride themselves having their own
each appeals to different owners in different ways - some say they dont want xxx car because its only got a Chevy V8 in it...or a Rover V8 ...others aspire to some obscure sportscar thats technically not that great, but as its got its own engine and it sounds good it must be the one to have
some manufactures have heritage....some dont
some people buy for status and just want a brand...others dont care about the brand, they are more interested in the technical side
just as you can ask many Ferrari owners about the engine in their car, and if youre lucky they may even reply "V8 or V12" etc, many luxury watch owners will not have a clue (nor care) what is inside it
so it all boils down to how a brand markets itself, do they make a big thing out of their technical accomplishments, their heritage, or just advertise the latest version of a the same watch theyve been making for 40 years, change it a bit, manage supply n demand, get it seen in all the right places and keep the man in the street aspiring to own it? ..sound familiar?...do Porsche and Rolex ALWAYS go together ?
so unless your talking real high end esoteric stuff, I would suspect most mid-high end ETAs can hold their own with anything...the rest is personal preference
Price seems little to do with it - there are sportscars costing hundreds of thousands with bought-in engines from (usually) cheaper cars...and others that pride themselves having their own
each appeals to different owners in different ways - some say they dont want xxx car because its only got a Chevy V8 in it...or a Rover V8 ...others aspire to some obscure sportscar thats technically not that great, but as its got its own engine and it sounds good it must be the one to have
some manufactures have heritage....some dont
some people buy for status and just want a brand...others dont care about the brand, they are more interested in the technical side
just as you can ask many Ferrari owners about the engine in their car, and if youre lucky they may even reply "V8 or V12" etc, many luxury watch owners will not have a clue (nor care) what is inside it
so it all boils down to how a brand markets itself, do they make a big thing out of their technical accomplishments, their heritage, or just advertise the latest version of a the same watch theyve been making for 40 years, change it a bit, manage supply n demand, get it seen in all the right places and keep the man in the street aspiring to own it? ..sound familiar?...do Porsche and Rolex ALWAYS go together ?
so unless your talking real high end esoteric stuff, I would suspect most mid-high end ETAs can hold their own with anything...the rest is personal preference
tertius said:
For me what an in-house movement brings to the party is a uniqueness, an artisty, a spirit and a demonstration that actually this is the product of a watchmaker and not merely a watchcasemaker. The movement is the beating heart of a mechanical watch, and to me is as important as the form and the function.
Nice post tertius.el stovey said:
tertius said:
For me what an in-house movement brings to the party is a uniqueness, an artisty, a spirit and a demonstration that actually this is the product of a watchmaker and not merely a watchcasemaker. The movement is the beating heart of a mechanical watch, and to me is as important as the form and the function.
Nice post tertius.Certainly comes at a premium, however. 2 watches, the IWC Portuguese Auto and Chrono - fairly similar, except the $4000+ price difference, as the Automatic has an in-house movement, whereas the chrono has the IWC-modified ETA 7750. A friend who owns both, interestingly stated that his chrono keeps near perfect time, whereas his in-house auto looses 1-2 mins a week.
A good article on the matter can be found here, for your perusal.
http://www.watchtalkforums.info/forums/showthread....
Hope this helps..
Papoo said:
[Certainly comes at a premium, however. .
Not always the case though - as tertius quite rightly pointed out, there is one true manufacture who produce all of their movements in-house and yet many of them can be obtained at what can only be called bargain prices.Seiko are truly without peers, yet are often overlooked. With the Credor and Grand Seiko lines they are at the cutting edge of horology but because everybody's Dad had one years ago, they can be frowned upon. The quality of thier pieces and the fact that they are all in-house make them, arguably, the best bang for buck on the market.
Papoo said:
el stovey said:
tertius said:
For me what an in-house movement brings to the party is a uniqueness, an artisty, a spirit and a demonstration that actually this is the product of a watchmaker and not merely a watchcasemaker. The movement is the beating heart of a mechanical watch, and to me is as important as the form and the function.
Nice post tertius.Certainly comes at a premium, however. 2 watches, the IWC Portuguese Auto and Chrono - fairly similar, except the $4000+ price difference, as the Automatic has an in-house movement, whereas the chrono has the IWC-modified ETA 7750. A friend who owns both, interestingly stated that his chrono keeps near perfect time, whereas his in-house auto looses 1-2 mins a week.
A good article on the matter can be found here, for your perusal.
http://www.watchtalkforums.info/forums/showthread....
Hope this helps..
I guess you are referring to the 7-day Portuguese? This has the in-house IWC movement, and is a rather lovely watch.
To be fair I don't think two individual examples provide final proof proof of the relative accuracy of in-house vs ETA movements.
There are a huge number of variables in determining long term accuracy of a mechanical movement. With regard to cost, certainly in-house movements are generally on the pricy side, but there are some manufactures producing in-house movements at a surprisingly reasonable cost, take a look for example at Nomos. Those companies like IWC and Panerai, already successfully charging high-end prices for their ETA-based watches, are of course going to be able to charge even more when they produce a genuine manufacture movement.
The other alternative is of course used, you can get some fantastic value in the second hand market, especially (in my view) JLC, Girard-Perregaux and Zenith. If you can find one, the older Union Glashütte (sister brand of Glashütte Original) watches are well worth looking out for, they used less highly decorated GO movements. Sadly they are like hen's teeth. Sadly, the current range all use ETA movements and are, well, rather unrewarding in comparison to their earlier watches.
Finally can we please not let the PH disease spread to this forum: lose has only one "o".
tertius said:
Papoo said:
el stovey said:
tertius said:
For me what an in-house movement brings to the party is a uniqueness, an artisty, a spirit and a demonstration that actually this is the product of a watchmaker and not merely a watchcasemaker. The movement is the beating heart of a mechanical watch, and to me is as important as the form and the function.
Nice post tertius.Certainly comes at a premium, however. 2 watches, the IWC Portuguese Auto and Chrono - fairly similar, except the $4000+ price difference, as the Automatic has an in-house movement, whereas the chrono has the IWC-modified ETA 7750. A friend who owns both, interestingly stated that his chrono keeps near perfect time, whereas his in-house auto looses 1-2 mins a week.
A good article on the matter can be found here, for your perusal.
http://www.watchtalkforums.info/forums/showthread....
Hope this helps..
I guess you are referring to the 7-day Portuguese? This has the in-house IWC movement, and is a rather lovely watch.
To be fair I don't think two individual examples provide final proof proof of the relative accuracy of in-house vs ETA movements.
There are a huge number of variables in determining long term accuracy of a mechanical movement. With regard to cost, certainly in-house movements are generally on the pricy side, but there are some manufactures producing in-house movements at a surprisingly reasonable cost, take a look for example at Nomos. Those companies like IWC and Panerai, already successfully charging high-end prices for their ETA-based watches, are of course going to be able to charge even more when they produce a genuine manufacture movement.
The other alternative is of course used, you can get some fantastic value in the second hand market, especially (in my view) JLC, Girard-Perregaux and Zenith. If you can find one, the older Union Glashütte (sister brand of Glashütte Original) watches are well worth looking out for, they used less highly decorated GO movements. Sadly they are like hen's teeth. Sadly, the current range all use ETA movements and are, well, rather unrewarding in comparison to their earlier watches.
Finally can we please not let the PH disease spread to this forum: lose has only one "o".
Some real food for thought, there. I must now go and investigate the used market, with regards to JLC in particular. Stunning craft.
Gassing Station | Watches | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff