[Daytona_John]

Originally Posted by snareman

Taken from the Federation of the Swiss Watch Industry website (http://www.fhs.ch/en/) referring to being Swiss Made:



I assume by wristlet they mean bracelet. The bracelet on Breitling's has the designation "Manufacture en Suisse" inscribed on it. So legally, they have to be made in Switzerland. No?

Ah my poor, poor niave snareman. Do companies never violate laws? Have you not heard of a little company called Enron?

[Daytona_John]

Originally Posted by snareman

The Colts are a bit on the small side by comparison. I liked them alot until I saw one in person and saw how small they were. They are still plenty big for some though. But compared to my 44mm Panerai, the 38mm Colt just seems a wee bit puny on my wrist.

Well yea...not to mention the Presidential ia a couple of mm smaller yet...

[Daytona_John]

Originally Posted by ihavedrivenanm1

Well, saying that "the Incabloc [or Etabloc or whatever] has been beefed up" should be self-explanatory – the springs that hold the hole-and-cap jewel for the balance staff is – "beefed up", strengthened, improved, better material [?].

I see...so you don't actually know what the specific improvement is. Or more importantly, if using a different material etc. actually delivers a measurable gain.

Saying that they replace the wheel and counter weight with superior material also seems pretty specific.

riiiight...which is why I didn't ask for clarification on that point. And I'll the question here too...what measurable performance gain is made by this "improvement?" It sounds good. One can speculate using a "superior material" (which isn't very specific at all...what material exactly?) MIGHT provide some measurable advantage in performance or longevity of service.

Also, not a single haute horologie House would dismiss plate and bridge finishing the way you do. They all understand that properly finished surfaces allow jewel bearings to seat more precisely, move with less friction and thus collect/contribute/distribute far less detritus to the rest of the movement thus last much longer.

Firstly, I didn't dismiss anything...I said it's "debateable". Secondly, did you catch the recent issue of WATCHTIME where the point WAS debated? The point was made that with modern manufacturing methods, and the use of hi-tech lubricants used in todays watch movements, the value of much of the finishing work is next to nil.

Anyway, I have seen both a bare ETA 7750 and a Breitling 13 disassembled and though I am by no means an expert watchmaker it was clear that Breitling had made noticeable changes to the movement beyond aesthetic decoration.

an undecorated and bare 7750 is an ugly beastie that would look considerably different than a 7750 which has had the ETA factory premium decoration work applied. That would include using varying levels of shock protection, and a few other bits and componets which would go beyond "aesthetic decoration."

Like Rolex Breitling doesn't give factory tours

Wrong again. I just turned down an offer from then to go to Swizterland and do a factory tour.

I disagree as this would cause Breitling to call attention to the fact that they, like most manufactures, use base ebauches from the likes of ETA.

Most manufacturers are a bit more up front about the source of their movements, yes.

Breitling doesn't mention ETA on it's site, who wants to send their potential customers to the ETA site to see base ebauches selling to the public for $25 or $30.

Except that most ethical manufactures that use ETA calibers (IWC, Tag, Ulyssse Nardin...the list is long) are very up front and open about their use of ETA calibers. If they try to keep that in the dark, it sort of makes you wonder about where their cases and bracelets are being made doesn't it?

Also, I would bet that Breitling sourcing their bracelets from Asia would likely violate the 1994 'Swiss/Swiss Made' parts law.

Only if they get caught...

[snareman]

Originally Posted by Daytona_John

Ah my poor, poor niave snareman. Do companies never violate laws? Have you not heard of a little company called Enron?

So what good is arguing any of these points with you, because even if Leon Breitling himself told you what improvements they made to the movement, you still wouldn't believe him. If you can't accept the basic premise of an argument (that Breitling or any other company is honest about their stuff) then the rest of the argument's points are totally moot with you. You're getting ihavedrivenanm1 to make all of these specific points and then at some point you're just going to counter with, something like "nah, I don't believe that they actually do that." Maybe Breitling really uses quartz movements in all of their watches and just tell you that they are autos. Maybe they are really cheap Chinese movements and they just hope that no one ever takes the case back off and catches them.

[ihavedrivenanm1]

Originally Posted by Daytona_John

I see...so you don't actually know what the specific improvement is. Or more importantly, if using a different material etc. actually delivers a measurable gain.

riiiight...which is why I didn't ask for clarification on that point. And I'll the question here too...what measurable performance gain is made by this "improvement?" It sounds good. One can speculate using a "superior material" (which isn't very specific at all...what material exactly?) MIGHT provide some measurable advantage in performance or longevity of service.

Firstly, I didn't dismiss anything...I said it's "debateable". Secondly, did you catch the recent issue of WATCHTIME where the point WAS debated? The point was made that with modern manufacturing methods, and the use of hi-tech lubricants used in todays watch movements, the value of much of the finishing work is next to nil.

an undecorated and bare 7750 is an ugly beastie that would look considerably different than a 7750 which has had the ETA factory premium decoration work applied. That would include using varying levels of shock protection, and a few other bits and componets which would go beyond "aesthetic decoration."

Wrong again. I just turned down an offer from then to go to Swizterland and do a factory tour.

Most manufacturers are a bit more up front about the source of their movements, yes.

Except that most ethical manufactures that use ETA calibers (IWC, Tag, Ulyssse Nardin...the list is long) are very up front and open about their use of ETA calibers. If they try to keep that in the dark, it sort of makes you wonder about where their cases and bracelets are being made doesn't it?

Only if they get caught...

Well, if the standard for this discussion is going to be that in order for the very real changes that Breitling makes to their movements to be "acceptable" that you personally must find them meaningful, or that you personally have to see value in a particular change, then there is no point in continuing.

I say that Breitling uses a better material for their Incabloc springs and you say, fine, now prove to me that it makes a measurable difference. WTF? Let me turn that around on you, why don't you prove to me that Rolexes "in house" balance and spring perform better than ETA/Breitling.

You want facts? My Breitling Crosswind Racing with a v7750/Breitling 13 keeps a consistent +1 seconds per day. My F series Explorer [with Rolexes new-and-improved 31xx balance and spring] keeps a consistent +3 seconds per day. See – by your methodology I have just proved that the ETA/Valjoux/Breitling 13 is a superior movement to the Rolex – inhouse or not.

As I said, I own about 20 Rolexes because they look great to me and are a solid watch, not because I had some religious type belief in the material they used for their shock protection springs.

If nothing else Odet's Explorer piece should prove pretty conclusively that Rolex, like every other 2nd tier manufacturer, takes its share of shortcuts and cost savings measures too.

I say this not to criticize but to make clear the point: you are clearly a Rolex fan boi and clearly see most every other 2nd tier watch as junk. Fine, but then nothing that I or anyone else says will ever convince you of anything because your beliefs are based on a type of near-religious sway.

Finally, I can't believe that even a Rolex fan boi would think about discussing dishonest business and advertising practices in regards to other brands – "Each Rolex takes a year to make", "Handcrafted", etc.

Yeah, it takes a year for the last steel ingot on the bottom of the 10 ton pile just delivered to the Rolex loading dock to finally be made into a case and shit out the other end. And about the only handicraft that is used is when the techs program in the start and stop times to the computer controlled CNC lathes.

Should we also discuss Rolexes price-fixing/restraint of trade issues - as you yourself said, just because they have yet to found guilty doesn't mean they aren't.

How about Rolex using its clout to prevent one individual somewhere in the world from selling his Rolex to another individual in the U.S. by seizing the shipment as a trademark violation – I assume you see this as simple good business practice. What about Rolex not returning parts to the owner after servicing. You paid for those parts initially, and then you pay again for the new parts yet Rolex keeps the old ones.

Rolex has setup a situation in the U.S where one basically leases a Rolex, they don't own it. Again, is this just good business practice?:mad:

I will admit that totalitarian practices such as these do go hand-in-hand with the whole fan-boi religious belief thing: Get people to believe that you are [g]od and then in the minds of the converted you can do no wrong because anything [g]od does is by definition good.

The truth is that the way in which Breitling and Rolex make their watches have far more in common than some would like to admit.

I still say that the best cure for Rolexidus is to go out and buy a JLC, and AP, a PP, or an A.L&S. Trust me, that is what did it for me. Afterwards I was able to look at Rolex from a new and fresh perspective, secure in the knowledge that my Rolexes were robust, accurate, and aesthetically pleasing watches but nowhere near the best of the watchmakers art – and that is OK.

[Daytona_John]

Originally Posted by snareman

So what good is arguing any of these points with you, because even if Leon Breitling himself told you what improvements they made to the movement, you still wouldn't believe him. If you can't accept the basic premise of an argument (that Breitling or any other company is honest about their stuff) then the rest of the argument's points are totally moot with you. You're getting ihavedrivenanm1 to make all of these specific points and then at some point you're just going to counter with, something like "nah, I don't believe that they actually do that." Maybe Breitling really uses quartz movements in all of their watches and just tell you that they are autos. Maybe they are really cheap Chinese movements and they just hope that no one ever takes the case back off and catches them.

Now you're just being rediculous because both you and ihavedrivenanm1 are making claims you can't objectively back up. You've said for years that Breitling makes "improvements" to the ETA movements they use.

I'll agree that they probobly do some alterations, although they are less than clear and up front about what alterations they make.

[Daytona_John]

Originally Posted by ihavedrivenanm1

Well, if the standard for this discussion is going to be that in order for the very real changes that Breitling makes to their movements to be "acceptable" that you personally must find them meaningful, or that you personally have to see value in a particular change, then there is no point in continuing.

Look, you're the one saying they make "improvements." All I'm saying is "fine, show me how the Breitling version of the ETA movement is improved."

I say that Breitling uses a better material for their Incabloc springs and you say, fine, now prove to me that it makes a measurable difference.

Actually, I was just wondering what material is used, and why it's actually better than the original question. It seems like a reasonable question .

Let's assume for a moment that Breitling does indeed use a different material in their Incabloc springs. All I'm looking for is an explaination of how and why it's better. If you don't know, then you don't know. But there's no reason to insult me for asking a reasonable question.

You can spend a heap of money doing something, and not really achieve any benefits. Whatever Breitling does to its movements (and they really should be more up front about this) I've always been of the opinion they changes they make are more about justifying the cost of their watches vs. actually doing any real R&D to make meaningful modifications which result in real improvements, or invest in the necessary infrastructure to make their own movements. I can run out right now and buy wheels that cost twice as much as the stock wheels on my 330i. But that doesn't necessarily mean that the wheels will perform any better than the stock selection. Unless of course the manufacturer has done some testing and can prove some measurable benefit.

WTF? Let me turn that around on you, why don't you prove to me that Rolexes "in house" balance and spring perform better than ETA/Breitling.

Uhhmmm....weren't we talking about Breitling here? It's rather common for someone backed into a corner in a debate to try and change the subject to another topic.

You want facts? My Breitling Crosswind Racing with a v7750/Breitling 13 keeps a consistent +1 seconds per day. My F series Explorer [with Rolexes new-and-improved 31xx balance and spring] keeps a consistent +3 seconds per day. See – by your methodology I have just proved that the ETA/Valjoux/Breitling 13 is a superior movement to the Rolex – inhouse or not.

You want to try and create a arguement based on a sample size of one Breitling?

I say this not to criticize but to make clear the point: you are clearly a Rolex fan boi and clearly see most every other 2nd tier watch as junk.

And you seem no less a Breitling fan boy...and don't read everything I write to boot. I have my criticisms of Breilting, just like I have of Rolex and most other brands. I started out saying that Breitling makes a great watch, and snareman has heard me say more times than I can count that I wouldn't mind buying a Navitimer. I LIKE BREITLING, and I especially like the people who work for them. It's the overly sensitive Breitling fan boys that are a pain...

Fine, but then nothing that I or anyone else says will ever convince you of anything because your beliefs are based on a type of near-religious sway.

Three words: Pot. Kettle. Black.

I still say that the best cure for Rolexidus is to go out and buy a JLC, and AP, a PP, or an A.L&S. Trust me, that is what did it for me. Afterwards I was able to look at Rolex from a new and fresh perspective, secure in the knowledge that my Rolexes were robust, accurate, and aesthetically pleasing watches but nowhere near the best of the watchmakers art – and that is OK.

In the work I do for magazines, I get the opportunity to have dozens and dozens of watches sent to me from all of the top watch manufacturers. I'm a watch guy, so there aren't too many brands that don't make something with some redeeming qualities. I"m sure I'll add a PP to the collection at some point, just like I'll pick up a Navitimer sooner or later. But I've never spent time with any watch from any manufacturer did anything more for me than any of my Rolex watches.

[ihavedrivenanm1]

Originally Posted by Daytona_John

But there's no reason to insult me for asking a reasonable question.

Insult you? Look, if you consider challenging your assertions and posing different point of views to be "insulting" then I really don't know what to say. Not to bring politics specifically into this but you sound an awful lot like Bush with regards to the new Congress, "I am willing to compromise as long as you do it my way".

There are a lot of us "watch guys" out there. A lot of us have taken factory tours, attended Basel World, and spent numerous hours learning from our preferred expert watchmakers. Just because one person's opinion diverges with yours does not constitute an argument, an insult, or a lack of knowledge.

Originally Posted by Daytona_John

You can spend a heap of money doing something, and not really achieve any benefits. Whatever Breitling does to its movements (and they really should be more up front about this) I've always been of the opinion they changes they make are more about justifying the cost of their watches vs. actually doing any real R&D to make meaningful modifications which result in real improvements, or invest in the necessary infrastructure to make their own movements.

Well, yeah. And I have never suggested otherwise.

Originally Posted by Daytona_John

Whatever Breitling does to its movements (and they really should be more up front about this) I've always been of the opinion they changes they make are more about justifying the cost of their watches vs. actually doing any real R&D to make meaningful modifications which result in real improvements, or invest in the necessary infrastructure to make their own movements.

I disagree but as you have phrased the question there can be no definitive answer here as it relies to heavily on individual value judgments.

Originally Posted by Daytona_John

I can run out right now and buy wheels that cost twice as much as the stock wheels on my 330i. But that doesn't necessarily mean that the wheels will perform any better than the stock selection. Unless of course the manufacturer has done some testing and can prove some measurable benefit.

Well – if you purchased lighter and stiffer wheels I can pretty much guarantee you better performance in the areas of speed and handling. They still might fall apart after 50,000 miles or so but the performance gains are still real.

And that was the point of pointing to the Incabloc spring material. What are the performance priorities of a spring? When Breitling says they improve this material I take it to mean that it is more ductile, more resistant to permanent deflection, etc. I more-or-less take Breitling at their word – you insist they are lying – don't know where to go with this.

Originally Posted by Daytona_John

Uhhmmm....weren't we talking about Breitling here?

Precisely my point; just about every criticism you make of Breitling could substantively be made of Rolex.

Originally Posted by Daytona_John

You want to try and create a arguement based on a sample size of one Breitling?

Again, this is just my point. By your definitions as regards Breitling, what "value" are all of Rolexes advances if you can't objectively point to each and every Rolex doing what a watch is supposed to do better than each and every Breitling – keep time?

I take that to mean that by your standards Rolexes advancements have no real value because my Breitling keeps better time than does one of my Rolexes using their newest and most advanced [non-chrono] movement.

The point, obviously, it that there are a whole host of other factors and considerations at play here and that is what I don't think you allow for with regards to Breitling and other non-Rolex manufacturers [although the movement in my JLC MGT just might be the finest 3-complication movement ever made ]

Originally Posted by Daytona_John

And you seem no less a Breitling fan boy

Not even close. I have [somewhere around here] an older ChronoShark, a Navi-Fighters [non-C.O.C.S.], and a Crosswind Racing.

As for Rolex I currently have a Sub-Date, GMT-I, GMT-II, Explorer, Explorer II, two TT DJs [one with Oyster, one with Jubilee] and about twelve SS DJs ranging from the 1601 to the 116200 with a variety of smooth and fluted bezels and Oyster and Jubilee bracelets. If I were a Breitling fan boi I think that ratio would be reversed

What I am not is a Rolex fan boi – and that is the distinction. I love their products, love them, but I hate their totalitarian business practices. I have a very realistic, even-handed approach to all of my watches and all brands. You will find that I do not own one single poster, cap, t-shirt, plaque, or ash tray with any watch brand logo [or cars, or cameras, etc. for that matter].

Originally Posted by Daytona_John

In the work I do for magazines, I get the opportunity to have dozens and dozens of watches sent to me from all of the top watch manufacturers. I'm a watch guy, so there aren't too many brands that don't make something with some redeeming qualities. I"m sure I'll add a PP to the collection at some point, just like I'll pick up a Navitimer sooner or later. But I've never spent time with any watch from any manufacturer did anything more for me than any of my Rolex watches.

All of which is fine. I have never said anything to contradict or question any of that. My point was simply that Breitling makes substantive changes to the base ETA/Valjoux 7750 ebauche. Whether you either believe that or feel that said changes have no real value to you is another matter. But the way you have rigged the question there is no way to change your mind as you have already admited that you bleive they just lie about such things.

Cheers.

[Daytona_John]

[QUOTE=ihavedrivenanm1;836215]
And that was the point of pointing to the Incabloc spring material. What are the performance priorities of a spring? When Breitling says they improve this material I take it to mean that it is more ductile, more resistant to permanent deflection, etc. I more-or-less take Breitling at their word – you insist they are lying – don't know where to go with this. [quote]

I've never said that I definitively thought that Breitling lied about anything. It's certainly convienent for you to claim that position, but I've never said that. I've said they should be more forthcoming on their technical specifications, but I've never said they lied.

Most of your responses were more deflection and arguing around and past my points. Above however is the most salient issue:

"You take it to mean." Or worded other ways: "You assume" or "You really don't know for certain."

Here's what we know: Breitling takes base ETA calibers (the v. 7750 in most cases) and does "something" to them. They're not at all clear on what it is they do, but the claim is that the movements are "improved." I take that to mean they peform better than the factory spec v. 7750. That certainly seems to be your claim. You claim the Incabloc spring is re-done by Breitling with a new material. By your own admission, you don't know what this new material is logically don't know if it really is objectively better than the default spec. But you're vehemently swearing that its somehow better. But because Breitling says its better, you believe it.

Breitling has the potential to do real improvements. Heck, rumor has it that they will soon unveil their own in-house chronograph movement. But most of what they supposedly do to their movements is shrouded in mystery, with no explaination of why they do what they do, and the advantages there in.

Not even close. I have [somewhere around here] an older ChronoShark, a Navi-Fighters [non-C.O.C.S.], and a Crosswind Racing.

It's not the watches you own or don't own which make you fall into the fan boy category. It's your blind faith in what the factory feeds you without any objective proof. I know deeply religious people with less faith in God than you have in Breitling.

[ihavedrivenanm1]

Originally Posted by ihavedrivenanm1

I more-or-less take Breitling at their word.

I think that this statement of mine makes me more of an agnostic rather than a fanatic wouldn't you say.

If someone put a gun to my head and forced me to jump on some manufacturers' bandwagon it would be JLC or AP long before Breitling.

Originally Posted by Daytona_John

I've never said that I definitively thought that Breitling lied about anything. It's certainly convienent for you to claim that position, but I've never said that. I've said they should be more forthcoming on their technical specifications, but I've never said they lied.

You have certainly suggested this, particularly in your response to the other poster whom you called naive for taking Breitling at their word – most rational people would take that to be a rather heavy suggestion from you that you believe that Breitling lies.

Hey, maybe they do – but that really doesn't affect my position which is that Breitling reworks the 7750 enough that I find significant added value. You know, at the end of it all it really doesn't matter to me whether or not you or anyone else agrees with me on this.

Originally Posted by Daytona_John

Here's what we know: Breitling takes base ETA calibers (the v. 7750 in most cases) and does "something" to them. They're not at all clear on what it is they do, but the claim is that the movements are "improved." I take that to mean they peform better than the factory spec v. 7750. That certainly seems to be your claim. You claim the Incabloc spring is re-done by Breitling with a new material. By your own admission, you don't know what this new material is logically don't know if it really is objectively better than the default spec. But you're vehemently swearing that its somehow better. But because Breitling says its better, you believe it.

Here is what I do know: I have seen a bare ETA 7750 ebauche. One used to be able to go to their site and buy them in quantities as low as [1] though the 7750 is now in such demand that I believe ETA only sells variations of the 28xx movement to the public. They are rough looking and rather unimpressive visually.

The generic 7750 also does not meet C.O.C.S. specs. Individual movements off the line might meet these specs but it would just be coincidence if more than a few per hundred did. Breitling takes these ebauches and [1] makes 'X' number of material changes, [2] they refinish the plates and bridges and decorate the movement, and [3] they ensure that each and every 7750 reborn as a Breitling 13 meets C.O.C.S. specs. These are all pretty much undeniable facts with no embellishments from me. And while we all know that C.O.C.S. is not that difficult to achieve I also know that a watch that reliably and consistently performs at -3 to +4 is better than one that ranges wildly from -5 to +10 and that such is most definitely an improvement and of added value.

So, what I now know is that the Breitling 13 is a much better finished, more attractive, and reproducibly more accurate movement than is the stock 7750. For me these very real benefits are well worth the premium Breitling currently charges for their watches regardless of how much performance each individual change makes or doesn't make.

It is in the total package that significant value is added and, in my opinion, nothing about this makes me a fan boi of this or any other brand.

Cheers.

[snareman]

I've never said that I definitively thought that Breitling lied about anything. It's certainly convienent for you to claim that position, but I've never said that.

You may never have said it, but you sure seem to belive it. If you had to pick a side of "I belive Breitling" or "I think Breitling lies about XX." From our conversations and what you've posted here, you'd seemingly be more likely to be in the latter camp. You seem to say that I too am a Breitling fan boi, but my thoughts aren't Breitling specific. If Rolex, Omega, Sinn or whomever said that they made improvements to their movements, I'd overall trust them. If a company lies about something, they are going to eventually get caught (remember Enron?). When we talked on the phone today, I suggested that if Breitling was lying about the origin of their bracelets that other competing companies would find out and advertise this fact so as to devalue Breitling in the get rid of some of the competition. Your answer to this was that all the companies lie about something so that they take a "don't tell on me and I won't tell on you" tactic. So the whole Swiss watch industry is in collusion? I just don't buy that. It makes no sense.

I take that to mean they peform better than the factory spec v. 7750. That certainly seems to be your claim. You claim the Incabloc spring is re-done by Breitling with a new material. By your own admission, you don't know what this new material is logically don't know if it really is objectively better than the default spec. But you're vehemently swearing that its somehow better. But because Breitling says its better, you believe it.

But it seems as though in all of this you again take the side of "Breitling is deceiving us" just because we don't know EXACTLY what the improvement is and what measurable improvement it has on the movement. Just because they don't come out and say what they do, you think they are hiding stuff. Sure, it would be nice if they were more open about it, but no one says they have to be.

It's not the watches you own or don't own which make you fall into the fan boy category. It's your blind faith in what the factory feeds you without any objective proof. I know deeply religious people with less faith in God than you have in Breitling.

Watches: The Pilot's Watch

Here is a link to an article that points out a few interesting things. One, that Breitling rivals Rolex for their level of secrecy with certain things. Secondly, it gives a little different take on inhouse vs. outsourced movements. As both the article and ihavedrivenanm1 points out, Breitling takes the ETA movements, which in their native state may not meet COSC standards (God knows my Seiko doesn't (thanks again for the watch btw. I still enjoy wearing it )) and modifies them so that they meet standards. So obviously Breitling makes modifications to the movements so that they all pass COSC tests, and thus there is a measurable improvement in what they do. Just because we don't know what EXACTLY that improvement is, doesn't necessarilly mean its not there.

Just because something is made inhouse, is it by definition better? Yugo's were made inhouse, but I can't say I'd want one. One of the possible advantages of being made inhouse is that something can be made cheaper. Its that whole cutting out the middle man thing. The main arguement you've always made against Breitling is that their watches are overpriced for the quality of movements they use. That they use minimaly, if at all, modified ETA movements, and that Rolex for instance, because their movements are inhouse and are apparently better, can justify the premium that they charge. As a comparison, no one would say that Lockheed Martin doesn't make the world's best fighters (the F-22) because it doesn't build every component in-house (especially the engines and avionics that are the heart of its superiority).


Now I'm not trying to change the subject here as you've alleged before, but just trying to see if your point holds up as it applies to Rolex. I certainly have nothing against Rolex, and love my Sub. So... What is it that makes the Rolex Submariner $5175 (with minimal discount available) and the Breitling Superocean $2390 (with discounts of 25-30% available) with over 6 times the depth rating (300 vs 2000 meters). Is the Rolex twice the watch? Is the Superocean not just as robust of a watch? They are both COSC Certified. Can you tell us what specific and measurable differences the Rolex has that justifies them charging such a premium? You've said that if Breitling had better movements that they could charge more. So what is so great about Rolex's inhouse movement that makes it twice as expensive?

Ok, its 4:30am - I'm off to bed.

[Daytona_John]

[QUOTE=ihavedrivenanm1;837249]I think that this statement of mine makes me more of an agnostic rather than a fanatic wouldn't you say.

You have certainly suggested this, particularly in your response to the other poster whom you called naive for taking Breitling at their word – most rational people would take that to be a rather heavy suggestion from you that you believe that Breitling lies.

There's a difference between what I personally believe, and points that I can argue and defend. The most that I've suggested is that it is possible that Breitling has lied. I can't prove so it's not an accusation that I'm going to come right out and say.

You on the other hand strongly argue that that Breitling heavily modifies and improves their movements. However, when pressed for details you can't really produce much in the way of what they actually do, or why anything they do produces any meaningful improvement over the base caliber.

Hey, maybe they do – but that really doesn't affect my position which is that Breitling reworks the 7750 enough that I find significant added value. You know, at the end of it all it really doesn't matter to me whether or not you or anyone else agrees with me on this.

Agreed. You're free to believe what you want.

The generic 7750 also does not meet C.O.C.S. specs. Individual movements off the line might meet these specs but it would just be coincidence if more than a few per hundred did.

This is a very odd point you're trying to make here. ANY modern movement has the potential to meet and hold COSC specs, but it's pure luck if they do RIGHT OFF THE LINE. Any COSC certified chronometer has to be regulated in order to perform within COSC perameters.

If you're saying that a "generic 7750" is incapable of holding COSCS tolerances, then you're incorrect. But again, the statement is muddy.

Breitling takes these ebauches and [1] makes 'X' number of material changes, [2] they refinish the plates and bridges and decorate the movement, and [3] they ensure that each and every 7750 reborn as a Breitling 13 meets C.O.C.S. specs. These are all pretty much undeniable facts with no embellishments from me. And while we all know that C.O.C.S. is not that difficult to achieve I also know that a watch that reliably and consistently performs at -3 to +4 is better than one that ranges wildly from -5 to +10 and that such is most definitely an improvement and of added value.

And if you could demonstrate what Breitling specifically does that adds value, and why said changes make the movement run more accurately, run longer, etc., etc. then I might be inclined to agree with you.

[Daytona_John]

Originally Posted by snareman

You may never have said it, but you sure seem to belive it. If you had to pick a side of "I belive Breitling" or "I think Breitling lies about XX." From our conversations and what you've posted here, you'd seemingly be more likely to be in the latter camp.

See my response to your fellow Breitling fan boy and comrade in arms. What I believe and what I can prove are two different things. I said as much over the phone.

You seem to say that I too am a Breitling fan boi, but my thoughts aren't Breitling specific. If Rolex, Omega, Sinn or whomever said that they made improvements to their movements, I'd overall trust them.

Being generally naive doesn't mean you're not a fan boy.

If a company lies about something, they are going to eventually get caught (remember Enron?).

No. Not necessarily. Many people lie and never get caught. The same goes for companies. You've offered one example of a company that was caught in a lie. That doesn't mean that every one will.

When we talked on the phone today, I suggested that if Breitling was lying about the origin of their bracelets that other competing companies would find out and advertise this fact so as to devalue Breitling in the get rid of some of the competition. Your answer to this was that all the companies lie about something so that they take a "don't tell on me and I won't tell on you" tactic. So the whole Swiss watch industry is in collusion? I just don't buy that. It makes no sense.

That's a very poor explaination of something that makes a whole lot more sense than your notion that because one company was caught in a lie that all will be.

But it seems as though in all of this you again take the side of "Breitling is deceiving us" just because we don't know EXACTLY what the improvement is and what measurable improvement it has on the movement. Just because they don't come out and say what they do, you think they are hiding stuff. Sure, it would be nice if they were more open about it, but no one says they have to be.

No...not at all. Like every time we've discussed Breitling and their movements in the past, the same thing happens. I'm critical of Breitling because they use ETA movements. You go into Breitling fan boy mode and start with the "Oh but Breitling heavily modifies their movements, yada, yada"
"Really, what modifications do they make?" Then you, like your comrade in arms in this thread talk in circles, until you acknoledge the fact that you don't really know what Breitling does, because Breitling isn't real forthcoming with this information. Nor do you know if anything they do makes a hill of beans difference in the performance of the movement. I then point out that all the other major manufacturers who use ETA movements are much more open about the fact that they do so, and if they improve the movements, they MARKET they fact that they do so - entire white papers dedicated to what they do, how they do it, and why. IWC. UN. Omega - all fall in this camp. One wonders why Breitling is so different in this regard?

Watches: The Pilot's Watch

Here is a link to an article that points out a few interesting things. One, that Breitling rivals Rolex for their level of secrecy with certain things. Secondly, it gives a little different take on inhouse vs. outsourced movements. As both the article and ihavedrivenanm1 points out, Breitling takes the ETA movements, which in their native state may not meet COSC standards (God knows my Seiko doesn't (thanks again for the watch btw. I still enjoy wearing it )) and modifies them so that they meet standards. So obviously Breitling makes modifications to the movements so that they all pass COSC tests, and thus there is a measurable improvement in what they do. Just because we don't know what EXACTLY that improvement is, doesn't necessarilly mean its not there.

A)I'm still not clear why you or your comrade feel the need to justfy Breitling, relative to Rolex. Do either of you get the fact that it doesn't matter if Rolex buys their movements from China? Even if that were true, it doesn't change the fact that Breitling uses outsourced ETA movements, or what they do or don't do to the movements.

B)Seiko makes Seiko movements. They don't use ETA movements.

C)Regulating is not modifying. Do you understand the difference? Thanks to modern manufacturing methods, about any movement has the potential to meet COSC specifications - they really aren't that hard to meet nowadays. Whatever modifications Breitling makes or does not make has little to do with making their movements pass COSC.

Just because something is made inhouse, is it by definition better?

Of course not. I can make a strong arguement that a 2892-A2 is 'bout as good as a Rolex 3135. Your point?

One of the possible advantages of being made inhouse is that something can be made cheaper. Its that whole cutting out the middle man thing.

No, where watch movements are concerned it's almost always cheaper to outsource, due to the cost of R&D, tooling, etc.

The main arguement you've always made against Breitling is that their watches are overpriced for the quality of movements they use.

That's sort of true...it's a relative thing. For the price of a Breitling, I can buy a Rolex that doesn't use an outsourced movement, or for less than a Breitling, I can buy an Omega that has an outsourced movement that is very clearly and truely modified and enhanced.

That they use minimaly, if at all, modified ETA movements, and that Rolex for instance, because their movements are inhouse and are apparently better, can justify the premium that they charge.

"Better" is a slippery slope - however, I find them to be of more personal value, yes.

As a comparison, no one would say that Lockheed Martin doesn't make the world's best fighters (the F-22) because it doesn't build every component in-house (especially the engines and avionics that are the heart of its superiority).

Now I'm not trying to change the subject here as you've alleged before, but just trying to see if your point holds up as it applies to Rolex. I certainly have nothing against Rolex, and love my Sub. So... What is it that makes the Rolex Submariner $5175 (with minimal discount available) and the Breitling Superocean $2390 (with discounts of 25-30% available) with over 6 times the depth rating (300 vs 2000 meters). Is the Rolex twice the watch? Is the Superocean not just as robust of a watch? They are both COSC Certified. Can you tell us what specific and measurable differences the Rolex has that justifies them charging such a premium? You've said that if Breitling had better movements that they could charge more. So what is so great about Rolex's inhouse movement that makes it twice as expensive?

A) You've chosen to use one of Breitling's cheapest watches for comparison, in order to make whatever point it is your making more dramatic. A more accurate comparison might the Super Ocean Steelfish XL

B)As you have pointed out MANY times, the law of diminishing returns readily applies to watches. You have to spend exponentially more money to get a linear improvement in many cases.

C)I can point to certain advantages that the Submariner has over the SOP sure. But that's not really the point here. Because it doesn't matter if I can't even spell Rolex. It still doesn't change the fact that you claim that Breitling modifies their movements, yet can't begin to back up the claim. You and your buddy can try all the logical misdirection you'd like, but at the end of the day, I'm still not seeing any substantiation to your claim.

I'm off to work...

[snareman]

This is a very odd point you're trying to make here. ANY modern movement has the potential to meet and hold COSC specs, but it's pure luck if they do RIGHT OFF THE LINE. Any COSC certified chronometer has to be regulated in order to perform within COSC perameters.

If you're saying that a "generic 7750" is incapable of holding COSCS tolerances, then you're incorrect. But again, the statement is muddy.

I think his statements were actually pretty clear. A base unmodified ETA movement may run within COSC stardards, however it obviously can't be guaranteed. Like you said - its pure luck if they do right off the line. He never said that a generic movement is incapable of holding COSC tolerances, he is saying, as are you, that it can't be guaranteed. So to guarantee it, the base movements are modified by Breitling. I don't know what is unclear about that. Obviously Breitling has to do something to the movements to guarantee that 100% of them meet COSC standards.

And if you could demonstrate what Breitling specifically does that adds value, and why said changes make the movement run more accurately, run longer, etc., etc. then I might be inclined to agree with you.

While the above doesn't mention specifically what they do, it does argue the point that they obviously do something to make all of their watches run more accurately. There is a measurable improvement for you - not running in COSC standards to 100% running within.


More later after I get back from work...

[Daytona_John]

Originally Posted by snareman

I think his statements were actually pretty clear. A base unmodified ETA movement may run within COSC stardards, however it obviously can't be guaranteed. Like you said - its pure luck if they do right off the line. He never said that a generic movement is incapable of holding COSC tolerances, he is saying, as are you, that it can't be guaranteed. So to guarantee it, the base movements are modified by Breitling. I don't know what is unclear about that. Obviously Breitling has to do something to the movements to guarantee that 100% of them meet COSC standards.

The point herein is that most any modern movement can hold COSC tolerances without any modification needed. A factory stock 7750 is perfectly capable of chronometer certification - it simply requires regulation. Surely you comprehend the difference between materially modifying a movement, and simply regulating it - a process that any watchmaker can do in about 5 minutes.

While the above doesn't mention specifically what they do, it does argue the point that they obviously do something to make all of their watches run more accurately. There is a measurable improvement for you - not running in COSC standards to 100% running within.

As proven above, this point is far from the silver bullet you're groping for, which will definitively prove that Breitling modifies the ETA calibers they use. Just because Breitling movements run within COSC chronometer specs, it does not necessarily follow that Breitling modifies their movements in any way. You can order a chronometer grade 7750, completely stock and straight from the ETA factory.

Ready to give up yet?

[ihavedrivenanm1]

Originally Posted by Daytona_John

There's a difference between

You keep missing the forest for the trees, intentionally I suspect. I also suspect this is why you have only selectively addressed the points I made in my previous post.

Facts - Breitling takes a base 7750 and:

[1] They add, subtract, and make 'X' number and types of material changes.

I use 'X' to signify an unknown quantity/quality factor here for the purposes of this discussion. I make no claim as to any percentage of improvement that these particular changes themselves make.

[2] They then refinish and decorate the movement. This is a very specific and easily observable fact.

If given the choice, and for no other reason, I personally would always choose a movement with finely finished plate and bridge surfaces to one that wasn't.

Likewise, I find that a tastefully decorated movement is an added bonus, even without an exhibition back. Yes, with decoration we are talking aesthetics here and not mechanical performance but I think it fair to say that for most watch people aesthetics play an enormous role.

[3] Finally they ensure that all Breitling 13 movements meet C.O.C.S. specs.

As I clearly said before, a few base 7750's pulled of the line might by pure coincidence meet C.O.C.S. specs but they would be few and far between.

That Breitling ensures that each and everyone of their 7750's meet C.O.C.S. is another undeniable fact and, as I also said before and quite clearly, a movement that consistently performs to C.O.C.S. specs [as easy as that might be to accomplish] is still of significant added value to a movement that doesn't meet spec.

This too is a simple, observable, and reproducible fact.

I submit that of those three facts, two of them alone [C.O.C.S. and movement finish and decoration] are enough to significantly distinguish the Breitling 13 from the base 7750.

More to the point, mechanical accuracy and aesthetics [both inside and out] are two of the primary reasons that people are interested in and collect mechanical watches in the first place.

Unless one is dim, one cannot dispute that Breitling does at least those three things to add value to the base 7750 ebauche regardless of one’s personal belief in how much relative value is added.

Now, you might not feel that these changes add much value for you personally, and you might want to know more detail about some of these changes for your own edification, but you cannot dispute that these changes are made, therefore its is a simple, verifiable, and reproducible fact that Breitling improves and enhances the base ETA/Valjoux 7750.

And, speaking for myself and myself alone, that is all I have been trying to say. Your seemingly intentional stubbornness to not recognize these quite simple and easily observable facts really make me question your...well lets just say that I find Breitling's current price/performance ratio to be about right. I suppose that you still disagree.

Sorry if you have interpreted my posts as questioning your status as self-appointed watch guru or you see me as having invaded some game of king-of-the-mountain. That was not my intention.

Nor am I a Breitling fan boi. I know and understand precisely where Breitling stands in the horological hierarchy - they are what they are - and I have no desire or reason to try and elevate them above that position. I would certainly put Rolex ahead if only because of their long history in advancing the state-of-the-art in wristwatches. And with their co-axial movement Omega has likely moved ahead now too [got a few of those as well].

My point has never been that Breitling is better than any other watch. I never made nor suggested such a thing. I also never suggested or claimed that Breitling did anything "better" than anyone else - that's what fan bois do.

I simply stated what is an observable and measurable fact, that Bretiling improves, enhances, and adds value to the base 7750.

But in my opinion, for anyone to claim that they know a great deal about watches and then not be able to recognize [or is it to simply admit] that Breitling adds measurable and observable value to the base ETA 7750 eauche is just plain daft.

Cheers.

Edited to add:

I think I will stop here. Not because I feel that I have won or lost anything [there was never anything to be won or lost to begin with] but because it seems that you are really pushing a personal agenda here.

As I said, I have no great interest in what anyone else thinks about any watch brand, I just was trying to have a discussion.

The snide smiles at the end of your last post seem to suggest that you are now arguing for the sake of it, that you are trying to taunt snareman, I could be wrong though.

Cheers.

[snareman]

Ready to give up yet?

Aren't you? BUt I know thats a dumb question.

['Cane]

Originally Posted by snareman

Aren't you? BUt I know thats a dumb question.

I am. You guys ruined a good thread.

[Daytona_John]

Originally Posted by ihavedrivenanm1

You keep missing the forest for the trees, intentionally I suspect. I also suspect this is why you have only selectively addressed the points I made in my previous post.

And you keep arguing around my very salient points and attempt to use misdirection in order to keep the focus off the areas you seem ill-equipped to defend.

Facts - Breitling takes a base 7750 and:

[1] They add, subtract, and make 'X' number and types of material changes.

I use 'X' to signify an unknown quantity/quality factor here for the purposes of this discussion. I make no claim as to any percentage of improvement that these particular changes themselves make.

So it's "fact" that they do..something to their movements...you just don't know exactly what. But whatever it is, it's a fact! Undeniable! Irrefutable and without question!!!

[2] They then refinish and decorate the movement. This is a very specific and easily observable fact.

There is no doubt that the Breitling calibers are finished and decorated...I never argued that point. There's some question in my own mind of whether or not they do it, since ETA calibers can be ordered very well decorated straight from the factory. But again, I can't prove that they do or do not do this particular work to the movement. So fine, they decorate it. But finishing and decorating isn't modifying. You've yet to prove they do any true modifications.

[3] Finally they ensure that all Breitling 13 movements meet C.O.C.S. specs.

Ahhh...here's another area you seem to be changing slightly in order to make the position more defensible. I never disagreed with the above notion. But you originally claimed that Breitling modifies their movements to meet COSC specifications. Now you're saying they "ensure." That's a pretty safe word choice. Maybe the guys at Breitling just check the order box on the ETA forms and select the COSC certification option? That would qualify as Breitling "ensuring" their movements are COSC certified...

As I clearly said before, a few base 7750's pulled of the line might by pure coincidence meet C.O.C.S. specs but they would be few and far between.

That Breitling ensures that each and everyone of their 7750's meet C.O.C.S. is another undeniable fact and, as I also said before and quite clearly, a movement that consistently performs to C.O.C.S. specs [as easy as that might be to accomplish] is still of significant added value to a movement that doesn't meet spec.

This too is a simple, observable, and reproducible fact.

Again, I never said Breitling calibers aren't COSC certified. What you've failed to prove here is that Breitling does anything on their own to get their movements COSC certified.

I submit that of those three facts, two of them alone [C.O.C.S. and movement finish and decoration] are enough to significantly distinguish the Breitling 13 from the base 7750.

Again, a 7750 can be ordered from the factory well decorated, and COSC certified. You've not done a lot here to forward your arguement.

Unless one is dim, one cannot dispute that Breitling does at least those three things to add value to the base 7750 ebauche regardless of one’s personal belief in how much relative value is added.

Ahhh...so I'm the one who's "dim" here? More insults? Either directly, or indirectly, Breitling does docorate their 7750's, and they are COSC certified. Why are you making this point?? These points were never in contention.

The issue here is whether Breitling modifies and materially improves their movements. Making the movement pretty, and tuning the movement are not modifications. Geeze....

Now, you might not feel that these changes add much value for you personally, and you might want to know more detail about some of these changes for your own edification, but you cannot dispute that these changes are made, therefore its is a simple, verifiable, and reproducible fact that Breitling improves and enhances the base ETA/Valjoux 7750.

Let's table the issue of whether or not Breitling decorates the movements themselves, or even if they regulate the movements themselves. Will you at least acknowledge that any manufacturer can order a well decorated, COSC certified movement from ETA? If a well decorated, COSC certified ETA movement is all Breitling has going for them, then yea...I can get that cheaper elsewhere.

And, speaking for myself and myself alone, that is all I have been trying to say.

No...instead of admiting that I've made some excellent points, you just keep modifying your arguement...and arguement which started out saying that Breitling makes significant modifications and enhancements to their movements.

Sorry if you have interpreted my posts as questioning your status as self-appointed watch guru or you see me as having invaded some game of king-of-the-mountain. That was not my intention.

I'm not self-appointed. I'm recognized by my published work in 5 seperate watch industry trade publications, as well as several publications outside the watch industry.

But in my opinion, for anyone to claim that they know a great deal about watches and then not be able to recognize [or is it to simply admit] that Breitling adds measurable and observable value to the base ETA 7750 eauche is just plain daft.

Yep, I'm sure anyone and everyone who disagrees with you is "daft" in your eyes.

If you keep changing what it is your arguing about, I'm sure you'll find a position you can adequately defend...

Edited to add:

I think I will stop here. Not because I feel that I have won or lost anything [there was never anything to be won or lost to begin with] but because it seems that you are really pushing a personal agenda here.

No...no personal agenda...beyond the personal amusement of watching you dig deeper into a hole...

As I said, I have no great interest in what anyone else thinks about any watch brand, I just was trying to have a discussion.

Nope...you were just trying to make yourself look and sound superior, and throw around a few insults in the process...

The snide smiles at the end of your last post seem to suggest that you are now arguing for the sake of it, that you are trying to taunt snareman, I could be wrong though.

Cheers.

Actually it's snareman who's trying to taunt me. Why else would he throw in with the likes of you?

[Daytona_John]

Originally Posted by snareman

Aren't you? BUt I know thats a dumb question.

Now, now...that's not fair. I asked first.