 |
PM |  | |
Quote | | |
Reply | | |
Full Topic | |
| Joined: | Thu Apr 16th, 2009 |
| Location: | Arctic, Norway |
| Posts: | 5821 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
From what I read somewhere, a new caliber or new movement needs at LEAST 10 years before it can prove itself. Hard to think how a system piece containing so many small moving parts, researched by engineers, designed by entire departments and produced with so much attention to detail has to have a 10 year record. But I guess that's how the true and pure industry works. Strangely, this is also what they say about a new ballistic size, i.e. 41mm AE or .40 Caliber.
Nasa saved them self 10 years of waiting when they did the flight qualification's tests in 1965 on different brands chronometers before choosing the Speedmaster from Omega...
Of course it has to imply that parts exposed to tearing due to repetitive actions, would be strong/thick enough to withstand a decade without the need to be changed or weak enough to impeach any digging.
This is why the "Delryn(kind of plastic) brake was introduced in 74 to prevent the wear of the central second pinions, since the original metal part was digging into them...
I'm just quoting infos about the movement 861 from Speedmaster I've been reading since I'm not a watchmaker myself.