Could a watch company hold a world record and yet not claim it?...

Could a watch company hold a world record and yet not claim it?...

Joined: May 5th, 2009, 1:22 pm

February 24th, 2012, 1:32 am #1


Doesn't seem likely, does it?  We are familiar with watch companies trumpeting every tiny point of uniqueness in order to sell their products (e.g. "world's first grand sonnerie with Westminster carillon"  No, I didn't make that up)

But it may be that I have stumbled upon a watch company failing to sing, dance and wave banners about achieving a world record.

I put the question of the 'world's smallest tourbillon movement' to the Watchuseek Public Forum:

http://forums.watchuseek.com/f2/what-wo ... 57872.html

15 hours later, no response.

Here's the issue: 

Franck Muller claim the 'world's smallest tourbillon' in the sense of  'world's smallest tourbillon escapement', however the movement that contains this mechanical marvel is actually too big to fit in the case used by Sea-Gull to house their ST84 tourbillon. 

In other words, Sea-Gull have built a more compact movement to contain a tourbillon escapement larger than the one in the Muller watch.  And they've put it into production. 

Surely that is an engineering achievement worth celebrating, especially given that both the Sea-Gull and FM movements were intended for women's dress watches, and FM watch being somewhat on the large size (I have a vintage man's watch that is a similar size).  Overall size really does matter in this instance.  Therefore the 'world's smallest tourbillon movement' or 'world's smallest tourbillon watch' is a world record of genuine merit.

But surely I am mistaken.  Surely, surely Sea-Gull, while claiming 'Asia's smallest tourbillon watch' could not have somehow failed to claim the world title they deserve?  I must be missing something.

Any thoughts?
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: May 5th, 2009, 1:22 pm

February 24th, 2012, 2:01 am #2

Quote
Like
Share

Joined: May 5th, 2009, 1:22 pm

February 24th, 2012, 3:16 am #3

Doesn't seem likely, does it?  We are familiar with watch companies trumpeting every tiny point of uniqueness in order to sell their products (e.g. "world's first grand sonnerie with Westminster carillon"  No, I didn't make that up)

But it may be that I have stumbled upon a watch company failing to sing, dance and wave banners about achieving a world record.

I put the question of the 'world's smallest tourbillon movement' to the Watchuseek Public Forum:

http://forums.watchuseek.com/f2/what-wo ... 57872.html

15 hours later, no response.

Here's the issue: 

Franck Muller claim the 'world's smallest tourbillon' in the sense of  'world's smallest tourbillon escapement', however the movement that contains this mechanical marvel is actually too big to fit in the case used by Sea-Gull to house their ST84 tourbillon. 

In other words, Sea-Gull have built a more compact movement to contain a tourbillon escapement larger than the one in the Muller watch.  And they've put it into production. 

Surely that is an engineering achievement worth celebrating, especially given that both the Sea-Gull and FM movements were intended for women's dress watches, and FM watch being somewhat on the large size (I have a vintage man's watch that is a similar size).  Overall size really does matter in this instance.  Therefore the 'world's smallest tourbillon movement' or 'world's smallest tourbillon watch' is a world record of genuine merit.

But surely I am mistaken.  Surely, surely Sea-Gull, while claiming 'Asia's smallest tourbillon watch' could not have somehow failed to claim the world title they deserve?  I must be missing something.

Any thoughts?
Today, I also found this:



"The World's Smallest Tourbillon Fritz-André Robert-Charrue, Le Locle, dated 1945. Magnificent, highly important and exceptionally small 18K gold keyless chronometer with one-minute tourbillon regulator, winner of a prize from the Société Suisse de Chronométrie, and masterpiece of the 1949 Swiss Exhibition in London....

Three-piece, glazed on both sides, drum-type, brushed band, polished bezels. Matte silver with applied gold radial Roman numerals, subsidiary seconds. Blued steel "bâton" hands.  Movt diam.19.7 mm. (8 3/4'''), 3/4-plate, maillechort, going barrel with "reserve" click, steel equidistant three-arm tourbillon carriage with lateral calibrated lever escapement, monometallic balance with gold and platinum screws, self-compensating Breguet balance spring, entire train jeweled, the carriage and center jeels in gold screwed settings. Signed on the back plate.Case diam. 23.8 mm. "

http://catalog.antiquorum.com/catalog.h ... ctionid=36

 

So there is the world record for the 'world's smallest tourbillon watch', and the reason why Franck Muller is only claiming 'world's smallest tourbillon escapement'.  All that remains to be determined is the lesser question of 'world's smallest tourbillon watch currently in production'.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: June 19th, 2009, 6:51 pm

February 24th, 2012, 3:38 am #4

Doesn't seem likely, does it?  We are familiar with watch companies trumpeting every tiny point of uniqueness in order to sell their products (e.g. "world's first grand sonnerie with Westminster carillon"  No, I didn't make that up)

But it may be that I have stumbled upon a watch company failing to sing, dance and wave banners about achieving a world record.

I put the question of the 'world's smallest tourbillon movement' to the Watchuseek Public Forum:

http://forums.watchuseek.com/f2/what-wo ... 57872.html

15 hours later, no response.

Here's the issue: 

Franck Muller claim the 'world's smallest tourbillon' in the sense of  'world's smallest tourbillon escapement', however the movement that contains this mechanical marvel is actually too big to fit in the case used by Sea-Gull to house their ST84 tourbillon. 

In other words, Sea-Gull have built a more compact movement to contain a tourbillon escapement larger than the one in the Muller watch.  And they've put it into production. 

Surely that is an engineering achievement worth celebrating, especially given that both the Sea-Gull and FM movements were intended for women's dress watches, and FM watch being somewhat on the large size (I have a vintage man's watch that is a similar size).  Overall size really does matter in this instance.  Therefore the 'world's smallest tourbillon movement' or 'world's smallest tourbillon watch' is a world record of genuine merit.

But surely I am mistaken.  Surely, surely Sea-Gull, while claiming 'Asia's smallest tourbillon watch' could not have somehow failed to claim the world title they deserve?  I must be missing something.

Any thoughts?
and some are for the 80xx calibers but none for the 84.
Have you found any drawings with dimensions for it?

------------------------------------------

Quote
Like
Share

Joined: May 5th, 2009, 1:22 pm

February 24th, 2012, 4:14 am #5


Tianjin Sea-gull haven't made any recent updates on their site, so Pugwash's site (which is ll copied from the Sea-Gull site) has nothing either.

So no drawings or specs for the ST84, or the ST41 or the microrotor (designation still unknown).
Quote
Like
Share