Seagull movements.

[rfrazier]

Firstly Bob, many thanks for undertaking this major piece of dis-assembly, analysis and reassembly; and for an excellent review and report on the two movements.

I have been following the thread closely, but have refrained from comment so far as I wanted to fully digest the huge amount of information you provided for us.

From my long standing work on and with mechanical telephone systems I feel I can draw some comparisons with your findings. I guess others in different branches of 'engineering' may also have a view, though it may or may not be similar to mine; however, here goes.

The key areas that affect accuracy, repeatability, reliability and long term stability, (given suitable maintenance), of any mechanical telephone system are those where a physical interface occurs, i.e. the moving bits that touch each other; the bearings, gears, relay springs, contacts etc. Of far less importance, (other than to the eye), is the finish of those parts simply charged with holding the key areas together - but more of that later.

I think it is the same with watch movements, and whilst the areas of contact are finer and to tighter tolerances in watches than in telephone systems and the loadings and stress on them is significantly less; the principles remain the same.

From the pictures you kindly provided it would seem evident that all those physical interfaces, the pivots, jewels, gears/teeth, (those you showed at any rate), and bearings on the Seagulls were in the right place and of an equal standard and quality to those on the ETA. This would also appear to be born out by your findings on the movements accuracy.

There is nothing to suggest, either from your pictures or your report, that maintenance/servicing would be an issue as neither Seagull movement appears to have any untoward complexity - I've always been an advocate of the KISS principle where mechanics are concerned - so it would be reasonable to suspect that wear and tear would happen at a similar rate to that of the ETA. So long term stability and accuracy should also be similar to that of an ETA.

In respect of the fluff and other debris, that shows a certain failing in the assembly process/area. It was interesting to note that the second movement was better in respect to this than the first. Different assembly area/plant/process? Better QC? Who knows? But I'm sure that if Seagull were made aware of such findings, (on a global basis, not just one report), then they would quickly take steps to manage that problem out.

So what about finish? Ah, the thing that people see and draw conclusions about! When I worked on mechanical telephone systems the Clerk of Works would complain about sign-writing on relays being out of alignment. Didn't affect performance, couldn't be seen when the covers were on; and external customers would never see it anyway as they never go in there................. It's the same, I think, with watches.

And that's the major stumbling block to promoting movements such as these Seagulls. For no matter how good they are connoisseurs will look at the outward appearances of the more visible parts simply charged with holding the key areas together and make judgements based on that appearance. And, of course, close up photographs only help to exaggerate any imperfections that may exist in these lesser important areas anyway. :(

One could argue of course that it's more than that. 'Finish' can also reasonably be seen to be a reflection of the overall care a manufacturer takes in his product. But then the cost of improving the finish would only lead to improved perception and not greater accuracy or reliability. In the end it's like so many things, a compromise. One which will suit some but not others. And one that a wider public, (i.e. non-WIS), wouldn't see or care about anyway. They pick up a phone dial a number and talk to somebody.... they pick up a watch, strap it on their wrist and tell the time.

Of course, all of this could be skewed by the size of the sample. One of each type isn't necessarily a reflection of the product as a whole, Seagull or ETA. And yes, it would have been nice to have had a few more taken apart, and it would have been nice for you to have had the time, (and inclination? :wink: :lol: ), to do it. But we have to draw upon what we have.

So, would I buy a watch from Eddie with a Seagull movement in it? Dunno. But I can say it would be down to the design and individuality of the watch. From what you've shown of the movements and what they do there's nothing to put me off on that score.

Apologies for my rambling, I just felt I had to put my thoughts down as some sort of expression of my thanks for all the work you've put in on this. Thanks again Bob. :)

Thanks, Peter.

I've been thinking about what you've said, on and off. Here are my first thoughts.

I think that you are absolutely correct in that we differentiate between the utility goodness of something, and its other qualities, e.g., beauty, although sometimes one can be a sign of the other.

If one wants just utility, then quartz might be the way to go. If one wants mechanical utility, well let's put that aside for a minute. One might also want aesthetic beauty. Let's also put that aside. There is something else that one might want. It isn't purely aesthetic, but something like honesty in craft. This is difficult to characterize, but, in this case, it has something to do with an complete expression of the watchmaker's craft. This doesn't require anything to be tarted-up, but does require attention to detail.

It is this honesty in craft that the Swiss watch manufacturers are trading on. All their advertising showing people at benches in little Swiss villages is playing on this. We know the truth is that a lot of things are done by machines in industrial, mass production, settings, but some of them, to some extent, are still trying to realize some of these craft values in their production. Although they are now engaged, for the most part, in industrial watchmaking, their roots are firmly in watchmaking as a craft. Swiss watchmaking started as a craft and wound up as an automated industry. The more industrial it gets, the less of the craft values it reflects.

The Chinese watch movement makers have stripped away the craft like features of making mechanical movements. They are starting at the other end, with industrial, automated manufacturing. They are moving, perhaps slowly, to incorporate the attention to detail that reflects the craft values of watchmaking.

Now to mechanical utility. It is here where the two will first meet, and, indeed, probably have met. The Chinese movements are probably just about as good mechanically. But, they don't reflect much of the honesty of craft that we want. At the upper end, the Chinese will get better, with more attention to detail, reflecting more of the craft values. At the bottom end, the Swiss will care less and less about the craft values, and treat it as an industrial exercise. (Notice the change in shape of teeth on the wheel of the ETA 2824.) The interesting question is how much they (the Swiss) want the top tier associated with their bottom tier, as they drop more and more the craft values at the bottom.

So, the Swiss (ETA, etc.) are moving upmarket where the margins are better, and they can afford to realize more of the craft values, even if only in an industrial way. But, they are being chased by the Chinese manufacturers who are also trying to realize some of those values in their manufacturing processes.

It will all end in tears. ;)

Best wishes,
Bob