Is this cool? I think so...
Discussion
A mate of mine likes Swatch and has a collection. I have a snowpass model for skiing but don't get too excited about quartz watches in general - and that 'special movement' limited edition Swatch that I was offered (and stupidly refused) in Taormina, Sicily ages ago is now almost impossible to find and worth a fortune.
He showed me today a watch he'd ordered and said I'd probably like a few... so I had a look at the catalogue. Swatch are now selling 'automatic' watches, which piqued my interest. Looking closer, there are some interesting models and a very cool looking skeleton watch:
On further research, it's effectively an ETA 2824-2, with a few mods. Swatch have removed the datewheel and the hacking function (presumably both for cost cutting and also to reveal more of the movement from the dial - the datewheel would get in the way), and also opened up the mainspring barrel so you can see the mainspring. It's not the most beautiful case, but standard Swatch fare, and whilst the bracelet is a bit blingy - it's a Swatch, so you can interchange any number of billions of different Swatch bracelets / straps that are available.
What I think is utterly cool is the fact that it's a proper Swiss ETA (OK it's not *quite* a 2824-2, it's been slightly simplified and it runs slower), it's a great skeleton design with all the moving bits visible and fun to watch (the open mainspring being pretty novel, I don't think I've seen an open mainspring before), and it's £95.
It doesn't appear to have swapped a load of 2824 parts with plastic, so it's probably a finer movement than the similarly priced (at the lower end) Seiko 5 movement. It also makes the 'posh' brands using 2824-2 movements in £2000 watches look somewhat silly
(OK, the expensive brands use 'chronometer' grade ETA movements or build from kits, and the Swatch is neither)
I think it's cool. I've always wanted a skeleton watch so I could watch the movement, transfixed like a nutter. I couldn't use one as a main watch because they're not practical - hard to read quickly and can be more fragile depending on the amount of metal cut away. But this Swatch, IMO, rocks.
I should be receiving one tomorrow
What do the PH collective of wisdom think?
He showed me today a watch he'd ordered and said I'd probably like a few... so I had a look at the catalogue. Swatch are now selling 'automatic' watches, which piqued my interest. Looking closer, there are some interesting models and a very cool looking skeleton watch:
On further research, it's effectively an ETA 2824-2, with a few mods. Swatch have removed the datewheel and the hacking function (presumably both for cost cutting and also to reveal more of the movement from the dial - the datewheel would get in the way), and also opened up the mainspring barrel so you can see the mainspring. It's not the most beautiful case, but standard Swatch fare, and whilst the bracelet is a bit blingy - it's a Swatch, so you can interchange any number of billions of different Swatch bracelets / straps that are available.
What I think is utterly cool is the fact that it's a proper Swiss ETA (OK it's not *quite* a 2824-2, it's been slightly simplified and it runs slower), it's a great skeleton design with all the moving bits visible and fun to watch (the open mainspring being pretty novel, I don't think I've seen an open mainspring before), and it's £95.
It doesn't appear to have swapped a load of 2824 parts with plastic, so it's probably a finer movement than the similarly priced (at the lower end) Seiko 5 movement. It also makes the 'posh' brands using 2824-2 movements in £2000 watches look somewhat silly
(OK, the expensive brands use 'chronometer' grade ETA movements or build from kits, and the Swatch is neither)I think it's cool. I've always wanted a skeleton watch so I could watch the movement, transfixed like a nutter. I couldn't use one as a main watch because they're not practical - hard to read quickly and can be more fragile depending on the amount of metal cut away. But this Swatch, IMO, rocks.
I should be receiving one tomorrow
What do the PH collective of wisdom think?I think Swatch lost their way a while back, a Swatch should be plastic through and through and driven by a battery.
However, I also think I'm stuck in the 90's and should let the 'yoof' have the Swatch brand to themselves.
Hmmmm, are Swatch doing this just to keep me hooked as I try to grow up ?
Clever gits, I want one.
I was winging about this on Watchuseek yesterday being a bit too modern :
I want that one too.
However, I also think I'm stuck in the 90's and should let the 'yoof' have the Swatch brand to themselves.
Hmmmm, are Swatch doing this just to keep me hooked as I try to grow up ?
Clever gits, I want one.
I was winging about this on Watchuseek yesterday being a bit too modern :
I want that one too.
OK so some think it's cheap (really cheap, like a £30 fake) and some think it's very size-dependent. Perhaps some are sneering because it's a Swatch, and Swatch shouldn't be making watches with proper movements (indeed, one could argue that with the Swatch Automatic range, Hayek is making life very hard for the small indie watchmakers who have to buy ETA movements at his price, whereas Swatch can sell the ETA-based Automatics as loss leaders to corner the market if they wanted).
I've got it on now. First impressions - the bracelet is appallingly cheap and poorly made. OK, I've been spoilt, with Breguet, IWC, Jaeger LeCoultre and Rolex bracelets all being what I'm used to. It's shiny pressed steel, presumably the bracelet isn't even stainless but chrome plated, who knows. But it's cheap and nasty and I will be replacing it with something nicer.
The watch though... well I've got slim wrists, so the size seems absolutely fine to me. I'm not overly enamoured with the 'swatch swatch swatch' writing all round the bezel, but hey this *is* a Swatch. And I have fond memories of my first, when I was at prep school at the age of 11, 24 years ago (it was a lairy coloured plastic and rubber battery job, and lasted an astonishingly long time).
I bought this purely so I had a watch with an open movement in my collection. Something I could look at both sides and see the workings. Even if it was a basic movement, with no complications. Swatch have done a superb job here - they've ripped the covers off the mainspring barrel, so you can see the mainspring tension and watch it spiral in as you wind it up (poor man's power indicator, heh). The few jewels are clearly visible on the dial of the watch. The plates have been cut away so you can watch the balance swing back and forth from the *front* as well as the back. Sadly the escapement and anchor aren't easily visible (the anchor not at all) - but if you look *very* closely from the front, there's a curved slot in one of the plates to let you catch a glimpse of part of the escape wheel. Actually, I lie - it's nearly 10pm so the hands are getting in the way - that slot lets you see half of the escape wheel and one jewel of the anchor as it ticks away.
The rate has been slowed down on the movement, which is a double win for Swatch, as it allows them to make it more cheaply (I guess cheaper materials / wider tolerances) but it's great for a skeleton watch as you can see each tick, and watch the escapement in action.
Interestingly enough, the escape wheel is solid, rather than what I'm used to seeing (escape wheels with the centre mass cut out, with maybe 4 arms supporting the toothed ring). It is also a dull grey colour - definitely a different material to the rest of the mechanism. The other wheels are brass or gilded steel or whatever else you normally see inside an ETA 2824. It actually has its own ETA number - the ETA 2841. It's all steel or brass (gilded) - apart from that mysterious escape wheel. No plastic to be seen in any of the parts.
And you know... the movement itself looks reasonably well made. The case is the same shape as the normal Swatch... but smoothly polished steel. The case back is *entirely* acrylic - no metal ring to attach it to the case, so I assume you just use a watchmaker's knife to lever the clear caseback off the watch entirely. It gives full visibility of everything, and because everything is on display, the whole interior design is very simple and clean. I haven't tried getting the display back off yet (only just opened the box FFS and sized the bracelet!) but I'm sure the movement will be a doddle to service and adjust (the balance has a standard adjuster on it).
In fact, since all the plates are a plain, almost sandblasted matt finish (not shiny steel, just matt), it's a ripe opportunity to dismantle, and practice finishing work on it. A bit of anglage, blueing the screws, maybe geneva stripes or some other brushed-metal pattern on the plates. It'd probably look a bit OTT on a Swatch but the movement is simple, and this should be a genuinely feasible proposition for most amateur watch tinkerers...
I still think that for £95 this is cool. Some internet shops had them for £65 but were out of stock - I don't like dealing with 'overstock' or 'deep discount' internet vendors as you've got no idea why the goods are so cheap, so I got mine from Amazon who are reasonably well respected.
I suppose that there's a chance that because my favourite watches are all thousands of pounds, and that I've come to expect that sort of price, that my insistence that £95 is 'cheap' could annoy people for whom £95 is a substantial sum. I apologise for any offence - it's not intended at all. Seiko showed you could do automatic mechanical movements that work well at around the £100 mark, but their movements employ plastic parts and are better off doing sterling duty inside the watch than being displayed (I have a Monster as the Seiko representative in my collection). This Swatch has a movement that looks nice enough to be on full display - and on full display it certainly is. It's not complicated, it's simple (and simplified further by Swatch) but that's what I like about it.
The crossover from the 2824 shows in the things that matter though - the automatic rotor winds in both directions (not the case on most cheap automatic movements - esp. some of the Japanese movements used in third party watches like Werners et al) and is mounted on the same ball bearing setup that's seen in 'real' ETA 2824s. Some of the wheels look identical as well, like the characteristic wheel with circular cutouts.
If you don't like skeleton watches then fair enough. I agree that they're almost impossible to set to an accurate time unless it's 0, 15, 30 or 45 minutes past the hour, and they're also very difficult to read. This one has no markings to indicate the time at all, so an accurate reading of the time from a quick glance is not possible. But as kinetic art - mechanical aesthetics - I think it rocks. Most skeleton watches are made by high-end houses with nice movements, and cost thousands. This one's less than a ton. All I need to do is find a suitable replacement bracelet for the watch (I'd like a steel bracelet... but one of high quality that fits the standard Swatch case connection - if anyone knows of someone who makes Swatch bracelets well, then let me know).
Some pics (I'll bung the wrist shot in the wrist shot thread to maintain the history in that thread) - apologies for the quality, they're taken quickly with the camera on my iPhone which, as everyone knows, is a poor camera:
And the back (hard to take with an iPhone)
I've got it on now. First impressions - the bracelet is appallingly cheap and poorly made. OK, I've been spoilt, with Breguet, IWC, Jaeger LeCoultre and Rolex bracelets all being what I'm used to. It's shiny pressed steel, presumably the bracelet isn't even stainless but chrome plated, who knows. But it's cheap and nasty and I will be replacing it with something nicer.
The watch though... well I've got slim wrists, so the size seems absolutely fine to me. I'm not overly enamoured with the 'swatch swatch swatch' writing all round the bezel, but hey this *is* a Swatch. And I have fond memories of my first, when I was at prep school at the age of 11, 24 years ago (it was a lairy coloured plastic and rubber battery job, and lasted an astonishingly long time).
I bought this purely so I had a watch with an open movement in my collection. Something I could look at both sides and see the workings. Even if it was a basic movement, with no complications. Swatch have done a superb job here - they've ripped the covers off the mainspring barrel, so you can see the mainspring tension and watch it spiral in as you wind it up (poor man's power indicator, heh). The few jewels are clearly visible on the dial of the watch. The plates have been cut away so you can watch the balance swing back and forth from the *front* as well as the back. Sadly the escapement and anchor aren't easily visible (the anchor not at all) - but if you look *very* closely from the front, there's a curved slot in one of the plates to let you catch a glimpse of part of the escape wheel. Actually, I lie - it's nearly 10pm so the hands are getting in the way - that slot lets you see half of the escape wheel and one jewel of the anchor as it ticks away.
The rate has been slowed down on the movement, which is a double win for Swatch, as it allows them to make it more cheaply (I guess cheaper materials / wider tolerances) but it's great for a skeleton watch as you can see each tick, and watch the escapement in action.
Interestingly enough, the escape wheel is solid, rather than what I'm used to seeing (escape wheels with the centre mass cut out, with maybe 4 arms supporting the toothed ring). It is also a dull grey colour - definitely a different material to the rest of the mechanism. The other wheels are brass or gilded steel or whatever else you normally see inside an ETA 2824. It actually has its own ETA number - the ETA 2841. It's all steel or brass (gilded) - apart from that mysterious escape wheel. No plastic to be seen in any of the parts.
And you know... the movement itself looks reasonably well made. The case is the same shape as the normal Swatch... but smoothly polished steel. The case back is *entirely* acrylic - no metal ring to attach it to the case, so I assume you just use a watchmaker's knife to lever the clear caseback off the watch entirely. It gives full visibility of everything, and because everything is on display, the whole interior design is very simple and clean. I haven't tried getting the display back off yet (only just opened the box FFS and sized the bracelet!) but I'm sure the movement will be a doddle to service and adjust (the balance has a standard adjuster on it).
In fact, since all the plates are a plain, almost sandblasted matt finish (not shiny steel, just matt), it's a ripe opportunity to dismantle, and practice finishing work on it. A bit of anglage, blueing the screws, maybe geneva stripes or some other brushed-metal pattern on the plates. It'd probably look a bit OTT on a Swatch but the movement is simple, and this should be a genuinely feasible proposition for most amateur watch tinkerers...
I still think that for £95 this is cool. Some internet shops had them for £65 but were out of stock - I don't like dealing with 'overstock' or 'deep discount' internet vendors as you've got no idea why the goods are so cheap, so I got mine from Amazon who are reasonably well respected.
I suppose that there's a chance that because my favourite watches are all thousands of pounds, and that I've come to expect that sort of price, that my insistence that £95 is 'cheap' could annoy people for whom £95 is a substantial sum. I apologise for any offence - it's not intended at all. Seiko showed you could do automatic mechanical movements that work well at around the £100 mark, but their movements employ plastic parts and are better off doing sterling duty inside the watch than being displayed (I have a Monster as the Seiko representative in my collection). This Swatch has a movement that looks nice enough to be on full display - and on full display it certainly is. It's not complicated, it's simple (and simplified further by Swatch) but that's what I like about it.
The crossover from the 2824 shows in the things that matter though - the automatic rotor winds in both directions (not the case on most cheap automatic movements - esp. some of the Japanese movements used in third party watches like Werners et al) and is mounted on the same ball bearing setup that's seen in 'real' ETA 2824s. Some of the wheels look identical as well, like the characteristic wheel with circular cutouts.
If you don't like skeleton watches then fair enough. I agree that they're almost impossible to set to an accurate time unless it's 0, 15, 30 or 45 minutes past the hour, and they're also very difficult to read. This one has no markings to indicate the time at all, so an accurate reading of the time from a quick glance is not possible. But as kinetic art - mechanical aesthetics - I think it rocks. Most skeleton watches are made by high-end houses with nice movements, and cost thousands. This one's less than a ton. All I need to do is find a suitable replacement bracelet for the watch (I'd like a steel bracelet... but one of high quality that fits the standard Swatch case connection - if anyone knows of someone who makes Swatch bracelets well, then let me know).
Some pics (I'll bung the wrist shot in the wrist shot thread to maintain the history in that thread) - apologies for the quality, they're taken quickly with the camera on my iPhone which, as everyone knows, is a poor camera:
And the back (hard to take with an iPhone)
Well judging by the forum's complete lack of interest in this, I guess my tastes are either unfashionable or I'm not welcome here because of my attitude towards 'replicas'. Or I'm just being paranoid, which given my level of sleep deprivation and stress at the moment, is not entirely unlikely... 
However a few more bits of information about this new ETA 2841-1 movement.
As I said, it's largely the 2824-2. The rotor and winding mechanism module bolted on top is identical to the 2824-2, holey wheels and all.
The really interesting difference is in the escape wheel and pallet fork. There's a little cut-out on one of the plates so you can see half of the escape wheel and one pallet, you can watch it merrily ticking away, with your eyes trying to work out which way the escape wheel is actually going because it jerks like a strobe.
However it sure as hell isn't the escape wheel and pallet fork from the 2824, which is a traditional spoked brass wheel, and traditional fork with ruby pallet jewels. The entire escape wheel in the 2841-1 is solid - no spokes - and made of a dull grey matte material. So is the pallet fork. The 'pallets' are just shaped ends of the fork - there are no jewels - just a solid claw of this matte grey material.
If I had a proper macro setup and decent lighting then I'd take a photo with my DSLR to illustrate this (I own a Nikon D50 but it's more for the picture quality than the skill level of the photographer, i.e. a bit 'all the gear, no idea' - so if any *properly* skilled digital SLR experts here can tell me how to take a decent close-up shot focusing on a wheel right in the middle of a complicated structure, then I'd be *really* grateful as I'd then be able to put some decent pictures of movements up here. Most of the guides on the internet involve buying special lenses or microscope attachments).
If the 'dull grey material' was aluminium (which is what it looks like slightly) then it'd last about a day before wearing out. If the material was plastic then firstly I'd expect it to be bigger so that the fork doesn't deform under the torque, and secondly I reckon it'd last even less time than aluminium. It's not steel or brass or any of the other materials used in the movement as it looks completely different, and I don't see why Swatch would bother painting one wheel to look weird compared to the rest in what is a cheap-as-chips movement.
I reckon it's ceramic, and I don't know enough history to know whether to be surprised as hell, or simply impressed. Google research says that Patek used silicon escape wheels in 2005. I know that the current 'top end' ETA movement sized similarly to the 2824 - the 2892, which is used in lots of high-end watches, including Franck Mullers and IWC (my Aquatimer has a movement based on the 2892), uses a traditional brass escape wheel and ruby pallet jewels.
Is Swatch doing some experimentation here with their low-price brand - if the auto movements don't work well then they won't get lots of bad press, because 'it's a cheap Swatch'... or have ETA been using silicon or ceramic escape wheels for a while? I really want to put a picture up because this is really interesting.
Well it's interesting to me, as I'm fascinated by mechanical movements. If nobody replies to this then I guess nobody else is bothered. But I'd hope someone points me in the right direction when it comes to close-up photography, or I'll start a new thread about it because it affects everyone - the number of appalling photos in the 'wrist shot' thread is testament to that)...
However a few more bits of information about this new ETA 2841-1 movement.
As I said, it's largely the 2824-2. The rotor and winding mechanism module bolted on top is identical to the 2824-2, holey wheels and all.
The really interesting difference is in the escape wheel and pallet fork. There's a little cut-out on one of the plates so you can see half of the escape wheel and one pallet, you can watch it merrily ticking away, with your eyes trying to work out which way the escape wheel is actually going because it jerks like a strobe.
However it sure as hell isn't the escape wheel and pallet fork from the 2824, which is a traditional spoked brass wheel, and traditional fork with ruby pallet jewels. The entire escape wheel in the 2841-1 is solid - no spokes - and made of a dull grey matte material. So is the pallet fork. The 'pallets' are just shaped ends of the fork - there are no jewels - just a solid claw of this matte grey material.
If I had a proper macro setup and decent lighting then I'd take a photo with my DSLR to illustrate this (I own a Nikon D50 but it's more for the picture quality than the skill level of the photographer, i.e. a bit 'all the gear, no idea' - so if any *properly* skilled digital SLR experts here can tell me how to take a decent close-up shot focusing on a wheel right in the middle of a complicated structure, then I'd be *really* grateful as I'd then be able to put some decent pictures of movements up here. Most of the guides on the internet involve buying special lenses or microscope attachments).
If the 'dull grey material' was aluminium (which is what it looks like slightly) then it'd last about a day before wearing out. If the material was plastic then firstly I'd expect it to be bigger so that the fork doesn't deform under the torque, and secondly I reckon it'd last even less time than aluminium. It's not steel or brass or any of the other materials used in the movement as it looks completely different, and I don't see why Swatch would bother painting one wheel to look weird compared to the rest in what is a cheap-as-chips movement.
I reckon it's ceramic, and I don't know enough history to know whether to be surprised as hell, or simply impressed. Google research says that Patek used silicon escape wheels in 2005. I know that the current 'top end' ETA movement sized similarly to the 2824 - the 2892, which is used in lots of high-end watches, including Franck Mullers and IWC (my Aquatimer has a movement based on the 2892), uses a traditional brass escape wheel and ruby pallet jewels.
Is Swatch doing some experimentation here with their low-price brand - if the auto movements don't work well then they won't get lots of bad press, because 'it's a cheap Swatch'... or have ETA been using silicon or ceramic escape wheels for a while? I really want to put a picture up because this is really interesting.
Well it's interesting to me, as I'm fascinated by mechanical movements. If nobody replies to this then I guess nobody else is bothered. But I'd hope someone points me in the right direction when it comes to close-up photography, or I'll start a new thread about it because it affects everyone - the number of appalling photos in the 'wrist shot' thread is testament to that)...
I don't think you're the turd in the swimming pool - just that you've hit two marmite things in combination - skeletons and swatch - as I've said before, they're not my thing (yet) and I've always been a bit disinterested by swatch (if I'd had one in my youth then maybe it would be different) and I'd hazard a guess that many are the same. However, I've always liked swatch for going there own way - you have to respect them for that and I'd eventually like a display back watch to see the marvelous mechanical goings on, a skeleton is that and much more from a certain point of view.
As for macro, there're some good pointers over on the photography forum, indeed, there's a thread dedicated to macros (albeit missing one of the resident experts who was strangely banned?!).
Are you thinking of taking up two further hobbies - watch working (blueing etc) and macro-photography? If so, be good to see the results - even if it's a close up of an empty wallet...!
As for macro, there're some good pointers over on the photography forum, indeed, there's a thread dedicated to macros (albeit missing one of the resident experts who was strangely banned?!).
Are you thinking of taking up two further hobbies - watch working (blueing etc) and macro-photography? If so, be good to see the results - even if it's a close up of an empty wallet...!
cyberface said:
If the 'dull grey material' was aluminium (which is what it looks like slightly) then it'd last about a day before wearing out. If the material was plastic then firstly I'd expect it to be bigger so that the fork doesn't deform under the torque, and secondly I reckon it'd last even less time than aluminium. It's not steel or brass or any of the other materials used in the movement as it looks completely different, and I don't see why Swatch would bother painting one wheel to look weird compared to the rest in what is a cheap-as-chips movement.
I reckon it's ceramic, and I don't know enough history to know whether to be surprised as hell, or simply impressed. Google research says that Patek used silicon escape wheels in 2005. I know that the current 'top end' ETA movement sized similarly to the 2824 - the 2892, which is used in lots of high-end watches, including Franck Mullers and IWC (my Aquatimer has a movement based on the 2892), uses a traditional brass escape wheel and ruby pallet jewels.
Is Swatch doing some experimentation here with their low-price brand - if the auto movements don't work well then they won't get lots of bad press, because 'it's a cheap Swatch'... or have ETA been using silicon or ceramic escape wheels for a while? I really want to put a picture up because this is really interesting.
Well it's interesting to me, as I'm fascinated by mechanical movements. If nobody replies to this then I guess nobody else is bothered. But I'd hope someone points me in the right direction when it comes to close-up photography, or I'll start a new thread about it because it affects everyone - the number of appalling photos in the 'wrist shot' thread is testament to that)...
I'd be amazed if it were ceramic. The R&D costs of developing it would surely make it cheaper just to churn out a few thousand extra ruby pallets. Though I guess economies of scale and the low-value of a Swatch would make it a cheap/easy way to get an idea out there for testing- if it blows up in a few years, few will care, and you'll get loads of units out there for a good sample group. Unlike Omega with the Co-Axial which faces massive pressure to succeed. I reckon it's ceramic, and I don't know enough history to know whether to be surprised as hell, or simply impressed. Google research says that Patek used silicon escape wheels in 2005. I know that the current 'top end' ETA movement sized similarly to the 2824 - the 2892, which is used in lots of high-end watches, including Franck Mullers and IWC (my Aquatimer has a movement based on the 2892), uses a traditional brass escape wheel and ruby pallet jewels.
Is Swatch doing some experimentation here with their low-price brand - if the auto movements don't work well then they won't get lots of bad press, because 'it's a cheap Swatch'... or have ETA been using silicon or ceramic escape wheels for a while? I really want to put a picture up because this is really interesting.
Well it's interesting to me, as I'm fascinated by mechanical movements. If nobody replies to this then I guess nobody else is bothered. But I'd hope someone points me in the right direction when it comes to close-up photography, or I'll start a new thread about it because it affects everyone - the number of appalling photos in the 'wrist shot' thread is testament to that)...
Could this be the return of the pin pallet!? I hope not! What shape were the teeth of the escape wheel? For macro photo's, I've used a set of extension tubes to good effect. They cost me about £10, but I needed a tripod because the light level becomes so low that you need a pretty long exposure, and thus a stopped watch.
It could be some kind of teflon/synthetic-coated hardened steel?
Regarding the teeth profile. It look like this?
Edited by glazbagun on Saturday 17th October 18:21
No, the profile of the teeth are nothing like that - more like a normal escape wheel. I've tried to get some close up photos:
Then with the flash - which makes the wheel and fork look uncommonly like soft white thermoplastic, which surely wouldn't last more than half an hour?
Why use a material as unsuited to the task as plastic when you've used proper metal wheels in the rest of the movement? If you're going to use a plastic escape wheel, then there's little point in using jewels anywhere in the movement, and this one has 21.
Stranger and stranger. In normal light, the wheel looks matte grey, not like the bright white the 'flash' photo above shows...
Then with the flash - which makes the wheel and fork look uncommonly like soft white thermoplastic, which surely wouldn't last more than half an hour?
Why use a material as unsuited to the task as plastic when you've used proper metal wheels in the rest of the movement? If you're going to use a plastic escape wheel, then there's little point in using jewels anywhere in the movement, and this one has 21.
Stranger and stranger. In normal light, the wheel looks matte grey, not like the bright white the 'flash' photo above shows...
Gassing Station | Watches | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff