Should they all have in-house movements.

Bullseye1

Interesting thread on tz-uk about the quality or lack of in the movements, in this case Panerai. If these guys are going to charge a premium shouldn't they be fitting their watches with their own inhouse movement?

For those who want to read the thread here it is.
http://www.tz-uk.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=194074&st=0&sk=t&sd=a

Homer

I'll not open the back of mine so! Ignorance is bliss

peasant

While I (sort of) understand the temptation even by the big names to just put in a movement from the ETA shelf ...this is low, very low.



FFS ..it doesn't even have a +/- scale on the adjustment, never mind anything resembling finishing.
The $ 35.-- Chinese clone is a piece of art in comparison


Another reason why I love my (cheapo) Russian watches ...in-house movements in every single one of them

Bullseye1

Someone made the joke that Panerai's are now a homage of Getat.

Bullseye1

If your a watch company of this standard you really should be designing your own movements IMO. Especially with the premium they charge.

Bullseye1

What is the cut off point before they include their own in-house movement? Aren't the cheapest Pam around 3-4k?

Bullseye1

It's interesting they have JLC and Zenith movements. Thanks for the list B.

Wibbs

peasant wrote: »

Another reason why I love my (cheapo) Russian watches ...in-house movements in every single one of them

And why I love vintage as they're usually the same and even when it's a bought in movement it's usually a good one and often they tart it up on the operational level.

Personally I've no real issue with bought in movements if they add to them. IWC do AFAIR. It's when they're clearly taking the piss and the guts of your wallet just because of the name on the dial... Then again Pannys could argue they're continuing a tradition as they always had bought in movements. Rolex at first and then another who's name escapes. That said they were better quality and finish than todays.

peasant

You and I can buy THIS for 129 Euro with a better finish.

I'd say Panerai paid a max of 50 Euro for their movement ...probably even less.

CarltonBrowne

Wibbs wrote: »

Then again Pannys could argue they're continuing a tradition as they always had bought in movements. Rolex at first and then another who's name escapes.

I think that might have been Angelus. Is there anybody that Panerai haven't bought a movement off?

Monty Burnz

Bullseye1 wrote: »

Someone made the joke that Panerai's are now a homage of Getat.

Richemont Panerais are a homage anyway, as far as I'm concerned. The original Italian company was shut down after Richemont bought the name and started churning out their watches in Switzerland.

Getat has as much right to the style as Richemont do, and in a sense is closer to the spirit of the deceased Panerai company in buying in parts and assembling the watches, whereas Richemont/PAM are putting some (cool) in house movements in their pricier watches these days.

Monty Burnz

CarltonBrowne wrote: »

I think that might have been Angelus. Is there anybody that Panerai haven't bought a movement off?

And Cortebert.

gerfmurphy

panerai do have in house movements in their maufacttura range.
and I have to say I would rate the watches as of the highest calibre of mainstream mass maufacture
really like the style and finish and movement

the other thing with panerai is the wealth of straps you can get, transforming the watch.
bullseye, next coffee meeting you try my panerai

Bullseye1

Good stuff Ger.

flutered

does one buy a watch with a crap movement to get a fancy, sorry quality strap,

m4r10

bedlam wrote: »

Bit of a follow up to the original Peneristi thread re the 318.

According to a few posters in that link, they couldn't care less about the movement in their watches but still happy enough to pay the premium for them. Then can anybody blame Panerai for charging a small fortune for a watch no better than a Getat one? If I were be in charge of Panerai, I would slap a quartz movement in the watch, call it a limited edition and then charge an arm and a leg for it !

gerfmurphy

flutered wrote: »

does one buy a watch with a crap movement to get a fancy, sorry quality strap,

Sadly one does sometimes:)

Eoin

OK, here's a seriously stupid question. You've been warned.

How much more do these premium brands actually have to do with the outsourced movement?

For instance, imagine Ferrari used an engine from another manufacturer, but built a fantastic car around it, taking into account all the other really important factors like suspension, brakes, chassis and so on.

Is this what they're doing? Or is it more like putting a frock on a Skoda and calling it an Audi?

gerfmurphy

for me in house is an important factor but not essential.
my VC has a jlc movemnet, as does the AP version and the jlc version.
many of the upsacle manufacturers use "engines" from other watches.
the VC has a superb finish on the dail, not unlike the ap,but it is bigger and a different shape. the jlc version is alot different looking. All have there place in the market depending on taste.
I see the movement as one part of the watch, a very important part but not the most valuable part.
AP sell 16k roos that are a basic chrono, but the overall package is very well executed.
I see the same Roo movement in the limited editions that sell for 4X the price. the same watch essentially, but my question is---is it the same watch?
for me a panerai is a panerai, not an eta movement.

Zagato

Eoin wrote: »

OK, here's a seriously stupid question. You've been warned.

How much more do these premium brands actually have to do with the outsourced movement?

For instance, imagine Ferrari used an engine from another manufacturer, but built a fantastic car around it, taking into account all the other really important factors like suspension, brakes, chassis and so on.

Is this what they're doing? Or is it more like putting a frock on a Skoda and calling it an Audi?

I think it's a good question, but analogy is probably not a good one, as Enzo Ferrari is reported as saying:

Enzo Ferrari wrote:

When you buy a Ferrari, you pay for the engine, and i will give the rest of the car free

And also:

Enzo Ferrari wrote:

Aerodynamics are for people who can't build engines

So I'd say Enzo wouldn't be too impressed with the idea of sourcing external movements;)

peasant

A nice 100-200 Euro watch with an off the peg Miyota or Seiko movement ...no problem

A nice 500 - 1000 Euro watch with something from the ETA stable that has been nicely finished and customised ...no problem either

Something costing thousands with a bottom shelf, undecorated ETA mass product ...a pisstake

The problem with in-house movements is the tooling and necessary machinery to make all the parts. That's almost prohibitively expensive, especially so for smaller makes that don't churn out tens of thousands of watches.

So in principle I have no issue with bought in movements. But I'd like to see their finishing and fine-tuning increase from standard spec in parallel with the price of the finished watch.

Eoin

Zagato wrote: »

I think it's a good question, but analogy is probably not a good one, as Enzo Ferrari is reported as saying:

Ah come on, you know what I meant - the analogy is fine.

Wibbs

Eoin wrote: »

OK, here's a seriously stupid question. You've been warned.

For me anyway it's no such a stupid question at all.

How much more do these premium brands actually have to do with the outsourced movement?

For instance, imagine Ferrari used an engine from another manufacturer, but built a fantastic car around it, taking into account all the other really important factors like suspension, brakes, chassis and so on.

Is this what they're doing? Or is it more like putting a frock on a Skoda and calling it an Audi?

To push the analogy even more... The Mclaren F1 had a "bought in" engine from BMW. At the time they got some (daft IMHO) stick for it, however it was a bespoke engine designed for them. It defo didn't come from a 3 series. You get similar in the watch world - IWC spring to mind in the more mainstream guys - and that's cool, but IMHO too many are the same engine with at best a fancy rocker cover and some are as you describe a skoda in a body kit and a fancy badge. I'd be with peasant on this "Something costing thousands with a bottom shelf, undecorated ETA mass product ...a pisstake".

EDIT Plus it would be my, maybe daft theory, that using such generic parts under the bonnet increase the risk and ease of fakery. Try faking an in house movement. It would be a lot more difficult and far easier to spot.

Eoin

Sort of what I was getting at was not so much is the engine an off the shelf one one, but how much of the watch is the movement. Despite the Enzo quotes earlier; a car is a lot more than the engine. So McLaren could have gotten in an external engine, but have had to do a ton of work to create the rest of the car that makes it the least bit usable. Another company with less expertise could get in the exact same engine, but not produce anywhere near as good an end product.

Is it the same thing for watches?

Flashwatches

I don't think every brand should have an in-house movement. The main reason for this is servicing and repair. Of you have a watch with an ETA movement in it and it breaks down for example you have 2 choices,
1, send it back to the manufacturer and they will repair it and charge you €X amount or,
2, bring it to your local repair shop and they will repair it and charge you €Y which is probobly a lot cheaper than sending it back to the manufacturer and quicker too, plus you don't have to worry about transport.

Now if the movement in the watch is an in-house movement, the chances are it cannot be repaired locally, so it has to go back to the manufacturer and you can be guarenteed they will charge you €X times 5 and it will probobly take weeks to get it back.

Another point for the out sourced movement is that they are being made by a company that makes many millions of movements, they have years of experience and knowlage and all they do is make movements, this is very hard to beat by a watch company that is making maybe only thousands of movements, and is also making cases etc so their expertise is spread over many different things and gets watered down.

I personally think in-house movements sound great but in reallity outsourced are better for everyday use.

Just my 2 cents

Wibbs

Oh I see your point FW, but another reason I'm dubious about generic "engines" is the amount of power this may exert over the watch world. Plus the repair angle I think is overdone, or even a tad lazy. I mean many many watchmakers back in the day were dealing with quite a few different movements on a near daily basis and for the most part this didn't cause too many issues, judging by elderly relatives experiences. Nowadays IMHO and the impression I'm getting is that "repair" work is too often a case of whole module replacement. Now that's cool if it's a local watchmaker, but not cool when an authorised main dealer is selling a repair at authorised main dealer prices. Gone are the days when watchmakers would actually make up a replacement part or it seems that way.

And on the repair front what parts are likely to go wrong? Mainsprings and hairsprings would be common enough I'd imagine. Both you can even get on ebay for all sorts of movements going back nigh on a century. Broken jewels and balance staff would be a world of pain, but again you can get parts for many old movements and watchmakers used to even make/adapt such parts. One local chap did so for my dad in the 70's and I had a french guy make up a balance staff for a 1920s watch. The same guy sadly retired could do quality balance work too and his services were complete stripdowns to boot and reasonably priced with it.

Of course all of the above starts to get real complex when dealig with complications like chronos and the like. Complications that are much more commonplace today than 40 years ago say, when chronos were not so common on everyday wrists.

As for expertise and quality, outside of some technoligical innovations, many vintage mid range movements are equal to and usually higher quality and of a better finish than high end ETA stuff and the like.

It's a hard one. I see the advantages, but I also see the "pisstake" with some brands out there.

Zagato

Eoin wrote: »

Ah come on, you know what I meant - the analogy is fine.

Sorry poor wording, sure the analogy is good about the engine and the chassis. As Wibbs alludes to like in F1 where each team (constructor) has to build it's own chassis but not necessarily the engine.

peasant

Eoin wrote: »

Sort of what I was getting at was not so much is the engine an off the shelf one one, but how much of the watch is the movement. Despite the Enzo quotes earlier; a car is a lot more than the engine. So McLaren could have gotten in an external engine, but have had to do a ton of work to create the rest of the car that makes it the least bit usable. Another company with less expertise could get in the exact same engine, but not produce anywhere near as good an end product.

Is it the same thing for watches?

Well ...we could complicate the question a bit further ...it's not just movments that get outsourced.

Plenty of companies specialise in machining watchcases for example ...others specialise in straps and bracelets ...and not to forget the dial printing specialists.

There are "watchmaking" companies out there where the whole creative process consists of registering a trademark and sending off a few drawings and specs to the subcontractors.

One example I can think of right now is Junkers (Zeppelin / Maximilian Muenchen)

The "watchmaker" in this case is a company called pointTEC in Munich who (very cleverly) somehow got hold of the well known (at least in Germany) trade marks of Junkers and Zeppelin and are cashing in on the Fliegeruhr craze.

Their handy-windy chrono movements come from Maktime in Russia (in itself a remnant of the former Poljot company), their quartz are mostly Miyota and for good measure they throw in the odd ETA or Valjoux for higher priced stuff.
No idea who makes their dials, but their cases come from Garde (formerly VEB Ruhla / UMF) and that's also where the assembly and QC happens.

Only in their Maximilian Muenchen watches did they have some input in developing the Garde radio controlled quartz technology some bit further.

So are they a watchmaking company? Really?

Are their watches good?

In my opinion they churn out some quite beautiful watches that are good value for money in comparison with other watches in their market segment.
To most buyers that's all that matters at the end of the day.