WWT Shows CLICK TO: Join and Support Internet Horology Club 185™ IHC185™ Forums

• Check Out Our... •
• TWO Book Offer! •
Go
New Topic
Find-Or-Search
Notify
Tools
Reply to Post
  
regulators : American vs European approach ? "Click" to Login or Register 
posted
I live in Italy, and I'm naturally accustomed to Swiss watches (all of us in family wear Rolex, my father was a Longines/Zenith enthusiast and so on). Once I started collecting PWs I noticed that the "typical" non American PW has a simple regulator, like the one in the Moeris here below, even on rather high class movements, whereas Americans have simple regulators mainly on 7 jewels basic calibers. Could you kindly explain me if this is somehow true, and, more important, why : there is a basic difference in design approach, a different basic strategy ? Incidentally, as you see, this Moeris is not a rough thing, it has geneva cotes, anglage, 15 jewels, adjusted (it's a GSTP watch, 1939/40, cal. 19H, 19''')

 
Posts: 277 | Location: Cardano al Campo in Italy | Registered: March 29, 2008
posted
HI Mario, I will try to answer your question about the difference between americam watches regulators vs the european ones.This is my modest opinion: If you have ever to adjust a watch using an elecrtronic machine you will come to appreciate the usefulness of the micrometric regulator, especially when forced to come to a compromise due to position errors. The regulator needs to be moved a fraction of a hair and this can be very frustrating with a simple one.
I think the micrometric regulators were mandatory in RR watches because they were the logic tool to take advantage of the precision inherent to the movement and also were a garantee against the regulator becoming displaced accidentaly due to shocks that,in a crampet train cabin, must have been the rule rather than the exception.
I also think that the micr. reg. became a marketing tool to impress the customer, since movements and cases were bought separately.
It must be also said that the majority of low cost,people watches, had the simple regulator, just like the Swiss ones.
Regards Peter
 
Posts: 192 | Location: Vicenza in Italy | Registered: February 04, 2009
IHC Life Member
Site Moderator

Picture of Tom Brown
posted
Heys that is pretty good stuff, I had no idea why the American watches had the micro regulator.

Tom
 
Posts: 5107 | Location: New Mexico in the USA | Registered: January 27, 2007
posted
Another modest opinion... Smile the regulator model/type is normally fuctional to the balance wheel/echapment assy type, in other words a standard type balance wheel/haispring assy cannot take full advantage of a fine regulation while an high standard/quality assy can.
Here is a pic, unf with German explanation, which shows the evolution of the balance assy, same evolutions happened for the hairspring, the jewel ''bearings'', wheels and pinion design.

But the embellishing of a mvmt it is not necessarely a proof that the wheel's train had gone through the same careful design.

But if we consider high standard timepieces we find the same care in design either in USA and in Swiss. But high quality watches RR grade were for historical reasons more popular in USA due to customer's demand than in Europe and their diffusion much bigger.

rgds

Enzo

 
Posts: 285 | Location: Rome, Italy | Registered: May 19, 2005
posted
Reading your interesting remarks it occurred to me how much time you need to have a decent regulation with a simple regulator (and a good movement below it, of course). It's merely a cut-and-try process. A micrometric thing, even Elgin's very simple one, speeds thing up dramatically. Now, it is not possible that American industry, even before creating a marketing appeal around it, simply HAD to find a way to let watchsmiths work in a more efficient way ? Numbers were big, the process had to be simplified in order to cope with service request (and cost). Enzo stressed a good point, that is one can have a super performing balance assembly (and movement in general) and control it as well with a simple regulator as with a micrometric one. But it will take quite a longer operation. Time is money: don't you say so in US ?
Summing up: Americans, may be, resorted to micrometric tricks because they first set up an industrial way of thinking and then succeeded in manufacturing watches; Swiss first manufactured watches, then put up an industry. Could this stand ?
 
Posts: 277 | Location: Cardano al Campo in Italy | Registered: March 29, 2008
posted
I think, like all questions about the fundamental reasons that watch companies did what they did-their basic philospohy of watchmaking-this one is pretty complex. I think major American railroads required micrometric regulators as part of their watch inspection requirements. It was more costly to make them, but once the machinery was in place to mass mnufacture them it was easier to offer them in medium and high grade watches.
The swiss had a different mode of manufacture that required more hand craft to fit and make more precise regulators, and they thought them an unnecessary expense unless required for some reason. I have been watching sales of Zenith watches on eBay, and have noticed that some 15 jewel watches have the micrometric regulators, while some 17 jewel watches don't. Maybe it depended on whether or not the watches were exported to America, where this was a more important consideration. It's a complex question.
 
Posts: 827 | Location: Bloomington, Illinois in the USA | Registered: September 29, 2008
  Powered by Social Strata  
 


©2002-2023 Internet Horology Club 185™ - Lindell V. Riddle President - All Rights Reserved Worldwide

Internet Horology Club 185™ is the "Family-Friendly" place for Watch and Clock Collectors