I get all the excitement about the new technology Breguet introduced, but can we talk about the outcome?
How accurate it really is? Is there going to be observatory tests? Is this a big step towards a 0.1 seconds daily loss that will be normalized in the near future?
Real durability and reliability?
What specific weakness this new technology entails?
I feel the experimentale 1 key outcomes require a separate post by its own — we’re done explaining it, now what does this mean to the watch industry?
Great article, and clears up some stuff. Still seems like magic to me (with apologies to Arthur C. Clarke)! Also liked your related discussion with Tony on his podcast.
Well worth a revisit now that you’ve heard directly from the horse’s mouth. I dream of a large scale model of this thing with proportional magnets so I can feel like I really understand it. Thanks to you and Mr. Flum for working so hard at explaining it to us!
Absolute clarity. Definitive accuracy. Fascinating to read. All at the same time. In one article. Hell, in every article. This is so rare these days that, well, I'll quote Lotus, from this same comment section: talk about "exotic animals"! Jack, you are one of a kind, in the best possible way. Don't ever stop doing this!
You are way too kind Rip, all I did really was bug Breguet 😃 it was a very interesting story to run down, I will say. Of course the big question is what's next.
Very interesting observation--'cause it does seem that you're right that the Experimentale has garnered lots more attention than the RD#5 did. Personally, I admire both of them a great deal; and since both are vastly beyond my resources, I don't have any skin in the game as to whether either one ends up stillborn or as a "live birth", to continue your analogy.
But if in fact the Experimentale is generating more commentary, I think it's explainable and, dare I say it, to be expected, for a couple of reasons. First, the RD#5, for all its indisputable brilliance, remains an assembly of gears and springs, all based on physical contact. The Experimentale brings magnetism into play at a fundamental level and even though, as Jack's article makes clear, there is still physical contact in the escapement mechanism, the use of magnetism as a motivating force in that context is something new and borderline revolutionary (a word I use reluctantly, because it's such a cliche). And second, the mechanism is not at all easy to understand, so another part of the reason for the greater discussion, seems to me anyway, is people simply trying to figure out how the damn thing works.
but that’s exactly it rip! both are equally expensive, but only one is desirable.
a flyback chronograph with a tourbillon, in the exact shape and size as the ravishing jumbo, with pushers like an iphone. are you kidding me, who doesn’t want to wear that?!
a magnetic something-or-other doohickey, “allegedly” it’s one second more precise than a mass-produced oyster perpetual. who cares? no one really. except jack, only jack cares or understands, the rest of us pretend to care or understand to appear smart, shame on us!
me, i’m a slave to my desire, so thankfully i’m immune to pretendititis.
I think there are two different things under discussion here: desirability as a watch to buy and use, and interest-generating as a new idea to sink our commenter/watch writer teeth into.
Regarding desirability, you are very likely right: I agree with you that the RD#5 offers some desirable benefits, whereas the accuracy gain of the Experimentale, while certainly laudable, isn't all that big a deal. (Hell, if I want the ultimate in spring-driven accuracy, well, I'll head to my GS AD and pay way less than the Experimentale will cost me.)
But in terms of being something new and unique, maybe even breakthrough (another cliche) to think about, something to discuss in comment sections apart from its tangible benefits, well, that's another story, and there the Experimentale (at least as I see it) is way, way more intriguing than the RD#5. And I say that without in any way disparaging the extraordinary accomplishment of AP in putting the RD#5 together.
Well, we all have our personal tastes and favorites – I loved writing about the technical advances in RD5 but (and this may be surprising) I actually found it less appealing personally than the Expérimentale 1, just personal tastes. As a watch writer I had a blast covering them both. With high tech chronograph solutions like the RD5 and the Agengraphe, I always wonder how much of the new tech is really solutions in search of a problem – I had a Datograph on long term loan from Lange for months at one point and I have never taken more pleasure in a chronograph's tactile operation – but "solution in search of a problem" is something you could plausibly say about the Expérimentale 1's magnetic escapement as well. The heart has its reasons whereof reason knows nothing 😃
Well, not to go all terminally cynical, but given the easy and cheap availability of more or less perfect battery-operated timekeeping devices for the wrist, not to mention smartphones, I think it could be said that pretty much all efforts at technical advancement under the umbrella of mechanical watches are "solutions in search of a problem." Kinda like if IBM were to launch the Selectric today and market it as a breakthrough in typewriter technology. At one time, it was exactly that, but now? Uh, no. Yes, it's still a breakthrough typewriter technology, but typewriters themselves are relics of another age.
But yes, absolutely, the heart has its reasons, and that's why closet romantics like me keep wearing and reading about mechanical watches. Yes, of course there are those who see mechanical watches mainly as tradeable investments and don't much care about the nuances of movement design or finish as long as enough people approve of them. But I suspect there are more of us romantics still out here than one might think.
An insightful and valuable addition to all of the writings helping us understand this novel and fascinating watch. Thanks!
I get all the excitement about the new technology Breguet introduced, but can we talk about the outcome?
How accurate it really is? Is there going to be observatory tests? Is this a big step towards a 0.1 seconds daily loss that will be normalized in the near future?
Real durability and reliability?
What specific weakness this new technology entails?
I feel the experimentale 1 key outcomes require a separate post by its own — we’re done explaining it, now what does this mean to the watch industry?
Great article, and clears up some stuff. Still seems like magic to me (with apologies to Arthur C. Clarke)! Also liked your related discussion with Tony on his podcast.
Good point on patent versus reality. Exactly the same with the Journe Centigraphe......
Oh, yeah, that's a great example. Yeah, I love reading patents but for sure, they're not always the whole story.
Well worth a revisit now that you’ve heard directly from the horse’s mouth. I dream of a large scale model of this thing with proportional magnets so I can feel like I really understand it. Thanks to you and Mr. Flum for working so hard at explaining it to us!
Absolute clarity. Definitive accuracy. Fascinating to read. All at the same time. In one article. Hell, in every article. This is so rare these days that, well, I'll quote Lotus, from this same comment section: talk about "exotic animals"! Jack, you are one of a kind, in the best possible way. Don't ever stop doing this!
You are way too kind Rip, all I did really was bug Breguet 😃 it was a very interesting story to run down, I will say. Of course the big question is what's next.
i think it says a lot about the state of watch enthusiasm that the stillborn experimentale generated more discourse than the groundbreaking rd#5.
watches are no longer consumer goods, but exotic animals. “enough about the bengal tiger, let’s hear about the amur leopard”.
Very interesting observation--'cause it does seem that you're right that the Experimentale has garnered lots more attention than the RD#5 did. Personally, I admire both of them a great deal; and since both are vastly beyond my resources, I don't have any skin in the game as to whether either one ends up stillborn or as a "live birth", to continue your analogy.
But if in fact the Experimentale is generating more commentary, I think it's explainable and, dare I say it, to be expected, for a couple of reasons. First, the RD#5, for all its indisputable brilliance, remains an assembly of gears and springs, all based on physical contact. The Experimentale brings magnetism into play at a fundamental level and even though, as Jack's article makes clear, there is still physical contact in the escapement mechanism, the use of magnetism as a motivating force in that context is something new and borderline revolutionary (a word I use reluctantly, because it's such a cliche). And second, the mechanism is not at all easy to understand, so another part of the reason for the greater discussion, seems to me anyway, is people simply trying to figure out how the damn thing works.
but that’s exactly it rip! both are equally expensive, but only one is desirable.
a flyback chronograph with a tourbillon, in the exact shape and size as the ravishing jumbo, with pushers like an iphone. are you kidding me, who doesn’t want to wear that?!
a magnetic something-or-other doohickey, “allegedly” it’s one second more precise than a mass-produced oyster perpetual. who cares? no one really. except jack, only jack cares or understands, the rest of us pretend to care or understand to appear smart, shame on us!
me, i’m a slave to my desire, so thankfully i’m immune to pretendititis.
I think there are two different things under discussion here: desirability as a watch to buy and use, and interest-generating as a new idea to sink our commenter/watch writer teeth into.
Regarding desirability, you are very likely right: I agree with you that the RD#5 offers some desirable benefits, whereas the accuracy gain of the Experimentale, while certainly laudable, isn't all that big a deal. (Hell, if I want the ultimate in spring-driven accuracy, well, I'll head to my GS AD and pay way less than the Experimentale will cost me.)
But in terms of being something new and unique, maybe even breakthrough (another cliche) to think about, something to discuss in comment sections apart from its tangible benefits, well, that's another story, and there the Experimentale (at least as I see it) is way, way more intriguing than the RD#5. And I say that without in any way disparaging the extraordinary accomplishment of AP in putting the RD#5 together.
Well, we all have our personal tastes and favorites – I loved writing about the technical advances in RD5 but (and this may be surprising) I actually found it less appealing personally than the Expérimentale 1, just personal tastes. As a watch writer I had a blast covering them both. With high tech chronograph solutions like the RD5 and the Agengraphe, I always wonder how much of the new tech is really solutions in search of a problem – I had a Datograph on long term loan from Lange for months at one point and I have never taken more pleasure in a chronograph's tactile operation – but "solution in search of a problem" is something you could plausibly say about the Expérimentale 1's magnetic escapement as well. The heart has its reasons whereof reason knows nothing 😃
Well, not to go all terminally cynical, but given the easy and cheap availability of more or less perfect battery-operated timekeeping devices for the wrist, not to mention smartphones, I think it could be said that pretty much all efforts at technical advancement under the umbrella of mechanical watches are "solutions in search of a problem." Kinda like if IBM were to launch the Selectric today and market it as a breakthrough in typewriter technology. At one time, it was exactly that, but now? Uh, no. Yes, it's still a breakthrough typewriter technology, but typewriters themselves are relics of another age.
But yes, absolutely, the heart has its reasons, and that's why closet romantics like me keep wearing and reading about mechanical watches. Yes, of course there are those who see mechanical watches mainly as tradeable investments and don't much care about the nuances of movement design or finish as long as enough people approve of them. But I suspect there are more of us romantics still out here than one might think.
Excellent and most enlightening, bravo 👏
Fantastic, Jack. I appreciated digging into your original article, and doubly appreciate this followup piece.
Lovely write-up. Thanks for the additional details!