Discussing the Nardin Freak on this board crosses several boundaries but I believe the NAWCC has to better connect with fans of modern high end and not quite so high end wrist watches. I’ll try to keep my response within the interest area of the topic and the thread
I have been intrigued with the Freak in several of its variants, especially the exotic materials versions.. They have broken a lot of ground in the area of super materials and fabrication processes . Patek Philippe copying this kind of effort is a very high complement. I think it’s great that this is viable market niche but its not for me for several reasons
The first is cost. For what one of these costs I can buy several old watches I would rather own. My preference for the older watches is because they were made when people placed serious reliance on their performance. If you were running railroad, navigating a ship or running time sensitive business, you relied on your watch.
For what Freak level watch costs, I could buy several competition watches that in their day were the most accurate timepieces in existence.
The other reason for my preference is historic significance
Many very high grade old watches carry inscriptions that tie them to people who were very significant and left records of what they did.
I have learned a lot about people I have found very interesting after I obtained their watch. They are not the major celebrities but one was the man who arranged to bring the Statue of Liberty to the US. Another was the developer of the cable used for the trans-Atlantic telegraph, another gave insight into the personal life of a significant leader of the US women’s suffrage movement. Another watch led to learning about the way Insurance underwriters rewarded Captains who prevented major losses. This is the subject of an article to be in the November Watch and Clock Billetin.
I spend a lot of very enjoyable time at this and to hold or wear something that these people carried is source of deep enjoyment.
A problem for me if I obtained a fabulous super mint watch there is no real follow up. I may wear but it woudl be rarely. Preserving it requires that I lock it away. I don’t get a lot of enjoyment in that. I do enjoy tracking down significant people who owned and carefully used fine watches
I can get over dozen of these for what a watch like a Freak costs. I respect people who enjoy these but I’ll get about 90% of the enjoyment I’d get owning one by admiring it on some else’s wrist or in a shop display or an on line animation. I think it’s a marvelous thing and with unlimited funds I might be tempted.
That’s my view, but, as I began, all us watch enthusiasts need to play nicely together so I would enjoy learning what attracts you to this watch but this might be better placed in the wrist watch foru
Today’s super wristwatches are accessories, if they are worn at all. Its sad since I believe todays high end watches are at least as fine as the old ones and I like supporting this kind of work.
I do not own a Freak, but I am pretty sure that those who do consider them daily wear watches, not something locked in a safe. This will not likely get a discussion here because the owners do not participate on our Message Board.
I think this is a matter of community. We do not seem to make this board a very welcoming place for the wealthy. I am sure we have some wealthy participants here, but I think less than the proportional numbers in society,
I also think that the wealthy of today who collect watches or admire them look at wristwatches rather than pocket watches so any who are here may be reading the wristwatch forum. Our WatchDig web site is intended to attract those with a primary interest in wristwatches such as the Freak.
The most intergrated case is the Potter designed Charmilles in which the case is also the top plate. This was made by Potter as a "dollar watch". This is less true of the Waterbury Rotary watches but to quite as integrated. One thing abotu dolalr watches they are rarely if ever recased and if so not into standard cases.
It's not so much integrated but Vacheron made some watches in aluminum cases.
Also there are some Ekegren watches with lever or button setting from the back. I imagine that there is quite a biut of case integration on these but I have yet to handle one.
Kullberg made some watches that also required opening the back to set them but I am not so clear as to how they worked but they mst have some mechanism in the case.
One other example is the Movado Ermeto watches. These have a case that slides opens from two sides which slide apart to expose the face. This action also woinds the watch via a ratchet. Some of these are chronometer grade.
There are a few similar watches that wind by opening the back but some one else will have to come up with the makers.
好家伙，全英文，有些费劲。
分开我都认识，连起来一个单词都不认识:L
混江龙 发表于 2012-11-4 01:32 static/image/common/back.gif
好家伙，全英文，有些费劲。
我准备把他们全翻译了
本帖最后由 nomorewatch 于 2013-9-11 21:02 编辑
完成
本帖最后由 nomorewatch 于 2012-11-4 12:00 编辑
Fuck the world, screw the shit
本帖最后由 nomorewatch 于 2013-9-11 21:05 编辑
完成
需要中文，太需要了。:lol
haru 发表于 2012-11-4 17:04 static/image/common/back.gif
需要中文，太需要了。
我现在都把没有来得及翻译的材料都放到这里
本帖最后由 nomorewatch 于 2013-9-11 21:07 编辑
完成
Why the obsession with escapement lubrication? So long as the train needs to be cleaned and lubricated, cleaning and lubricating the escapement is only a detail. Good timekeeping begins at the mainspring (I can't remember who said that, but it's as true as it ever was).
A marine chronometer's spring detent escapement was lubricant free but Gould recommends servicing every three years - a practice that was followed in the Royal Navy and I suspect the US Navy too.
本帖最后由 nomorewatch 于 2013-9-11 21:07 编辑
完成
这么多翻译起来还是有点工作量的啊
haru 发表于 2012-11-5 16:48 static/image/common/back.gif
这么多翻译起来还是有点工作量的啊
不然的话，怎么造福兄弟们？
辛苦了！
xhandy 发表于 2012-11-7 00:17 static/image/common/back.gif
辛苦了！
只是为了日后可以更好地进行交流:handshake
I have a high regard for American watches evidenced by the many that I own. The simple fact is that no American maker with the possible exception of the Edward Howard made a first class lever, one with a detachable safety finger. This is not essential to time keeping performance and for their purposes, the American industry did marvelously well. The Edward Howard also introduced the ancestor of the gyromax balance. Hamilton's uniformity and fit and if finish were wonderful and their super elinvar was as good as it gets .
As I wrote before, I doubt the lever on the Edward Howard was US made but its balance was invented here n the US and probably made here. My problem is that too many people like it too much so it costs a lot more than watches i would enjoy as much or more.
That all said no US maker ever won a Swiss or English time trial. Waltham did win at Philadelphia and Sydney but never won a formal "concours"
Great things happened in the US but for my money the best watches were made in England, France, Switzerland and Germany. To state the US watches did not meet those standards is not to say they are bad.
It's an opinion. It's also how I spend my money. I think a clean Waltham 72 American grade or an Elgin 21 j Convertable or an Edward Howard is a very fine item I would like to own. My problem is that for that money I could get two or three Louis Audemars or a an even less known maker watch that is better with no questions about whether it has been switched or re-cased or otherwise done over.
I like a watch I can something with after I get it. For a very fine watch by a maker I don't know I can look into their history. i usually find they competed in time trials.
Sometimes I get one with an interesting owner or set o owners, After you get that mint in the box one of three mistakes made by the factory what do you do with it?
I have had many a watch take me on an interesting journey. A very few of these were US made but the really interesting dead people I have met through their watches liked the same high grade foreigb watches I seek.
I am delighted that others buy other things.