# Claro-Semag CL-888 versus Sea-Gull ST16 tear down



## lysanderxiii

I was asked Zoodles95 to tear down and compare these two movements during a routine service so we can see just what are the differences between these two movements:

(Note: the top,or right-hand image will always be the CL-888 and the bottom, or left-hand image will be the ST16.)

Here are the two movements in there respective cases, the CL-888 in a large black Swiss Legend; the ST16 in a smaller Seagull.



















The first thing done was check the timing of the two:

CL-888:
Beat error - 0.9 ms
Rate - +6.00 (dial up), +21.5 (crown down)

ST16:
Beat error - 1.5 ms
Rate - -7.2 (dial up), -11 (crown down)

Both of these rates are acceptable, and should average within my preferred band of +/- 10 s/d.

Now we start withe the actual disassembly of the movements. For those who wish to see the actual steps taken I refer you to the WUS thread titled "Inside an ST16 (lot's of images)", where did a step-by-step on the disassembly of this movement.

I thought there would be _some_ differences between the two, but, as you will see in the following pictures, there isn't.

Mainplates









Date wheels









Main Bridge









Auto Bridge









Rotors


















Bridge for the 2nd Wheel









2nd Wheel


















4th Wheel


















3rd Wheel


















Balance


















Pallet Bridge








Pallets



























Escape Wheel




































Barrel 


















Auto-winding Reduction gear









"Magic Fingers" for auto-winding









Click/Click spring combination and hack lever









C-spring 









Here is the only difference I found:









The CL-888 had two second hand pinion tension springs.

My comments in a moment, for right now, I'll let your modems cool back down.


----------



## Craig M

lysanderxiii said:


> (Note: the top,or right-hand image will always be the CL-888 and the bottom, or left-hand image will be the ST16.)


Finally a tear down...thanks for taking the time lysander

I haven't even looked yet, but the fact you HAD to put that...says a lot. :-d

Maybe its time to update the Chinese watch Wiki??

-

*post reading the thread - It doesn't take a watchmaker to see they are the same.


----------



## particleman

I hope you didn't accidentally mix the IMPORTANT Swiss parts with the Chinese parts ;-)

Excellent Job as always :-!


----------



## gigfy

drum roll please .......... why the jewel count difference?

I am very anxious to hear what lysanderxiii has to say about this comparison!!

This thread has been posted in the reference section. :-!

Cheers,
gigfy


----------



## Craig M

gigfy said:


> drum roll please .......... why the jewel count difference?
> 
> I am very anxious to hear what lysanderxiii has to say about this comparison!!
> 
> This thread has been posted in the reference section. :-!
> 
> Cheers,
> gigfy


I think we should state out front that regardless of lysander's pending thoughts...we all agree that due to whatever process done it Switzerland...the CL-888 is "Swiss Made"...BY LAW....beyond that its totally an ST16 :-d

I am also curious about the noted jewel counts


----------



## lysanderxiii

Now, for my comments. These two movements are the exact same design, all the parts are identical and probably interchange (I had to be very careful not to mix-up the parts.)

One difference between these two movements was the finish. I have always associated heavy, shiny chrome or nickel plating with cheapness, as is it is often used in an attempt to cover small machining imperfections. The Seagull is heavily plated as opposed the the light satin finish of the CL-888. This, with the deep cut Geneva stripes, detracts from the rather utilitarian design of the movement. But, that is just my opinion. There are ST16 movements out there with the lighter satin finish and I prefer them, but that has a lot to do with how I feel a Geneva finish should be done, and how Seagull does it on this and more noteably the ST19.

The other visible difference was the addition of a second tension spring for the second hand pinion. This could have been an error during assembly, or it could be an attempt to ensure that the chances of second hand stutter are minimalized, right now, I don't know if it was intentional or not, but, if I see another one with two springs....

The hair, or balance, spring on the CL-888 was better formed and the timing shows this. The rate of all watches in a timing machine varies slightly and the quoted rates are averages over a short period of time, but the CL-888 varies less, about the same as the average Standard grade ETA.

Now, I know what some out there are saying, "So where do they get off saying that is a SWISS movement?"

Well, the rules allow of up to 50% of the _*value*_ of the entire movement (not including labor) to be of non-Swiss origin and a movement to still be considered "Swiss." The hairspring was almost certainly Swiss, as Chinese one usually don't look that well formed, the mainspring probably (although the two were identical, as far as I could see), possibly the rotor and maybe the plating as well. These parts could very well account for over 50% of the value of the movement, as brand new Chinese movement can be had *retail* for 10 bucks, imagine what they cost if you order 100,000 direct from the factory, unassembled.

(By the way, for those who feel this is a rather loose definition of "Swiss Made", you should read what is required for the "Made in USA" label, while not as ridgedly defined as the FHS definition, it is a better definition.)

Other observations: The CL-888 was clean and tidy on the inside and properly oiled, the ST16 was relatively clean but the oiling was spotty, some pivot had a hint of oil, others did not have any.

From what I have seen the Claro-Semag "Triple-Eight" is an improved ST16, in that it has a better hairspring and is more consistant in its rate and lubricated for five to ten years of wear before it needs looking after. These aren't big, or really even noticeable to the average guy wearing watches in these price ranges (who don't plan on ever servicing them), but they are improvements. Whether, or not, you feel they are worth the extra cost of "SWISS MADE" is entirely a personal question.

In any case, the design is an excellent design, capable of hard use and good timekeeping.


----------



## lysanderxiii

particleman said:


> I hope you didn't accidentally mix the IMPORTANT Swiss parts with the Chinese parts ;-)
> 
> Excellent Job as always :-!


I didn't mix _any _parts, important or otherwise. :-!


----------



## lysanderxiii

gigfy said:


> drum roll please .......... why the jewel count difference?
> 
> I am very anxious to hear what lysanderxiii has to say about this comparison!!
> 
> This thread has been posted in the reference section. :-!
> 
> Cheers,
> gigfy


The jewel count was the same, I think all the jewels are pictured. [EDIT: the CL-888 has 21 jewels, the ST16 has 20. The extra jewel is on the bottom pivot for the barrel arbor, the same useless (IMO) location as ETA uses. And, all of them are pictured]

The jewels might be of Swiss origin, that would also add to the Swiss value content.

But, how can you tell the difference between a Swiss ruby and a Chinese one? Is there even a noticeable difference?


----------



## gigfy

Thanks lysanderxiii for the very informative write up.



lysanderxiii said:


> ... the CL-888 has 21 jewels ...


Very interesting! :think: Why all of the fuss and put 18 jewels all over the rotor and literature. And the EL-18 (even further refinished CL-888) states that they have 18 jewels. Don't you think they would have caught that mistake?

Not that it makes any difference with the added jewels. That is not my point. The fact that they put that on the movement & literature and it is not correct, says a lot, in my book. :-x

Cheers,
gigfy


----------



## Craig M

I find this whole subject to be really interesting



gigfy said:


> Thanks lysanderxiii for the very informative write up.
> 
> Very interesting! :think: Why all of the fuss and put 18 jewels all over the rotor and literature. And the EL-18 (even further refinished CL-888) states that they have 18 jewels. Don't you think they would have caught that mistake?
> 
> Not that it makes any difference with the added jewels. That is not my point. The fact that they put that on the movement & literature and it is not correct, says a lot, in my book. :-x
> 
> Cheers,
> gigfy


----------



## gigfy

BTW, I am REALLY enjoying wearing my Zodiac Oceanaire w/ CL-888 while reading this thread and watching it unfold! 

Cheers,
gigfy


----------



## lysanderxiii

Jewel count:

Mainplate jewels: one in the center, one next to the oil stain on the CL-888 at 9 (for barrel arbor), two on in a line angled at 2 (3rd and 4th wheels), one at 3 (escape wheel), one just above the balance jewels and the two for the lower balance pivot. Eight (8) total, the ST does not have the one at 9, giving it seven (7).









Main bridge jewels: three (3) in the upper right, both.









Auto bridge jewels: one (1) at the top









2nd wheel Bridge jewels: two (2).









Balance and balance cock jewels: one impulse jewel, two for the balance pivot (underneath), for a total of three (3).









Pallet Bridge jewels: one (1).









Pallet jewels: two (2)









Magic Finger jewels: one (1)









Adding the numbers in parenthesis, we get 21 jewels for the CL-888 and 20 jewels for the ST16.


----------



## lysanderxiii

gigfy said:


> Thanks lysanderxiii for the very informative write up.
> 
> Very interesting! :think: Why all of the fuss and put 18 jewels all over the rotor and literature. And the EL-18 (even further refinished CL-888) states that they have 18 jewels. Don't you think they would have caught that mistake?
> 
> Not that it makes any difference with the added jewels. That is not my point. The fact that they put that on the movement & literature and it is not correct, says a lot, in my book. :-x
> 
> Cheers,
> gigfy


There are laws against adding jewels that aren't there, but there aren't any about not counting those that are.

Why wouldn't you want to count jewels? Maybe because they want to be different. Maybe they are trying to convince you that this really is a different movement from all those 21 jewel Chinese and Japanese movements out there. Maybe they are trying to convince themselves the movement is different.

It's not like most people will crack one open and count red specks... Well, at least not those that aren't WISes


----------



## Craig M

gigfy said:


> BTW, I am REALLY enjoying wearing my Zodiac Oceanaire w/ CL-888 while reading this thread and watching it unfold!
> 
> Cheers,
> gigfy


:-! As you should...I got nuthin but love for the movement whatever its named


----------



## Somewhere else

Many thanks for an outstanding post. It was really an eye opener. I don't know Claro very well. It's still rarely turns up here in Japan, so I have not had a chance to disassemble one yet. Is the Claro 88 and the Claro 888 the same movement?

Also, I heard it said that Zeno bought 5,000 Claro 88 movements and less than a year later tried to sell them all off because the quality just wasn't good enough. As you know, Zeno, which not a bad watch, is not in the front ranks of the Swiss watch industry either.

So, two questions: Are their quality concerns with the Claro 88 and is the Claro 88 the same as the Claro 888?


----------



## Chascomm

Thank you for that excellent review of these movements. :-!

The photographic evidence is unequivocal:

1. both the ST16 and CL888 ebauches are identical, so neither is a 'clone' of the other (newcomers here are encouraged to check out Lysanderxiii's other teardowns to see how cloning invariably results in machining differences)

2. the ebauche has been finished differently from each other including a probably Swiss hairspring, so the CL888 has been genuinely 'finished' by Claro to legally warrant the 'Swiss' label.


Add to that the following facts:

1. the ST16 appeared publicly years earlier than the CL888
2. the ST16 is a well-developed range of movements from Sea-Gull with an officially documented history, whereas the CL888 is a single model from Claro-Semag with only dubious anecdotal history.
3. claims of an earlier CL888 dating back to the 1960s have no evidence to support them and some evidence (the Seiko patents) to disprove them.

And you would have to conclude that Claro-Semag have been buying ebauches from Sea-Gull.


----------



## Zoodles95

Thank you so much for agreeing to take on this project and for your excellent job 
putting this together. There is evidence here to support both sides of the argument:

-There is some upgraded parts and finishing which can justify the CL-888 being "Swiss" as per their rules.

-There can be no dispute now that the CL-888 is a modified ST16 with a Swiss hairspring, Swiss assembly and lubrication and their own finishing.

Claro should come out and admit that their movement is an improved ST16. These movements are good workhorses which are good timekeepers.

Again you did an amazing job and have done a service to all of us who want to know the real truth about these things. Thank you to Gigfy and others who helped me get the Swiss Legend watch so that I could source a watch with a CL-888 movement to get this comparo done. Took a few months to get the needed watches etc but frankly this was well worth it.









http://www.network54.com/Forum/650156/


----------



## Chascomm

Craig M said:


> Maybe its time to update the Chinese watch Wiki??


Done


----------



## domanovich

gigfy said:


> BTW, I am REALLY enjoying wearing my Zodiac Oceanaire w/ CL-888 while reading this thread and watching it unfold!
> 
> Cheers,
> gigfy


+1 me too


----------



## GuySie

And now the interesting thing is, who'se going to confront C-S with this information and ask them to come up with the whole truth ;-)


----------



## ivan1998

+1 info


----------



## Chev James

Great post! I just had a question about the CL-888 used in the Zodiac Oceanaire and other models; it's advertised as having an 18-jewel movement. Was the movement modified by Zodiac to go down from 21 to 18 jewels? Thanks!



lysanderxiii said:


> The jewel count was the same, I think all the jewels are pictured. [EDIT: the CL-888 has 21 jewels, the ST16 has 20. The extra jewel is on the bottom pivot for the barrel arbor, the same useless (IMO) location as ETA uses. And, all of them are pictured]
> 
> The jewels might be of Swiss origin, that would also add to the Swiss value content.
> 
> But, how can you tell the difference between a Swiss ruby and a Chinese one? Is there even a noticeable difference?


----------



## Chev James

lysanderxiii said:


> I didn't mix _any _parts, important or otherwise. :-!


If I had been doing the tear-downs, I would have ended up with enough leftover parts to have made a third watch! :-d


----------



## gigfy

Chev James said:


> Was the movement modified by Zodiac to go down from 21 to 18 jewels?


The CL-888 has 21 jewels as counted by lysanderxiii. Not 18 as advertised.
http://www.ocean7watchco.com/webfiles/CL-888.pdf

And not 18 as stamped on the rotor. 








The real question is why tell everyone that it has 18 jewels when it clearly does not? :think:

Cheers,
gigfy


----------



## Martin_B

gigfy said:


> The CL-888 has 21 jewels as counted by lysanderxiii. Not 18 as advertised.
> http://www.ocean7watchco.com/webfiles/CL-888.pdf
> 
> And not 18 as stamped on the rotor.
> View attachment 222515
> 
> 
> The real question is why tell everyone that it has 18 jewels when it clearly does not? :think:
> 
> Cheers,
> gigfy


I guess it has something to do with the association people have with 21 jewel movements -> Asian.

There is even a webshop, 21jewels.com that mainly sells japanese watches. Also at some forums, simple Chinese or Japanese movements are referred to as a 'generic 21 jewel movement'. Usually they mean in that case the Miyota clones that feature in many mushrooms.

So I guess Claro does not want to be associated with that, being a fine Swiss brand ;-)


----------



## John MS

Chev James said:


> Great post! I just had a question about the CL-888 used in the Zodiac Oceanaire and other models; it's advertised as having an 18-jewel movement. Was the movement modified by Zodiac to go down from 21 to 18 jewels? Thanks!


They are the same movement. Giving a movement an unusual (if untrue) jewel count would be one way of distinguishing the otherwise indistinguishable.

Seems to me that on the Afforable Watches forum there was a battle royal between several WUSer's and someone whoI believe was associated with Zodiac. The gist of the argument was how swiss the Claro Semag really was. Wonder if he will be responding to this thread..._:think:_


----------



## GuySie

John MS said:


> Seems to me that on the Afforable Watches forum there was a battle royal between several WUSer's and someone whoI believe was associated with Zodiac. The gist of the argument was how swiss the Claro Semag really was. Wonder if he will be responding to this thread..._:think:_


Actually, iirc the outcome of that thread is not dissimilar from what has been stated here: by law, the claro is swiss made. Lysander has identified parts which are higher quality than the ST16 plus an added jewel that would easily bump it over the 50% cost of the chinese ebauche.

I'm more interested in seeing C-S's response to their original statements that the ST16 was a copy of _their_ movement...


----------



## AlbertaTime

Claro 888: Chinese by birth, raised in China...went to a Swiss finishing school and got citizenship.


----------



## nsmike

AT you sure know how to put a spin on things.:-!


----------



## jason_recliner

Outstanding posts Lysander! :thanks


----------



## SiebSp

Nice to get some clarity (pun intended ;-)) about the Claro 888.
Good to know that it is a good movement.

I'll enjoy wearing my Kienzle FL22602 Borduhr even more now.


----------



## Guillermo_P

AlbertaTime said:


> Claro 888: Chinese by birth, raised in China...went to a Swiss finishing school and got citizenship.


:-! Very well written!

Lysanderxiii, excellent post as always! Very detailed... this kind of information is indeed remarkable. Thanks for sharing and putting this all together so well.

Cheers,

Guillermo


----------



## Wangstang

gigfy said:


> The CL-888 has 21 jewels as counted by lysanderxiii. Not 18 as advertised.
> http://www.ocean7watchco.com/webfiles/CL-888.pdf
> 
> And not 18 as stamped on the rotor.
> View attachment 222515
> 
> 
> The real question is why tell everyone that it has 18 jewels when it clearly does not? :think:
> 
> Cheers,
> gigfy


Technically it does have 18 jewels as it takes 18 to get to 21....

Wes


----------



## gigfy

Wangstang said:


> Technically it does have 18 jewels as it takes 18 to get to 21....
> 
> Wes


:-d :-d


----------



## andrema

Very interesting! Thanks for posting!


----------



## 09.ducati

Want to say thanks for this thread. I just found it and I have been wondering about the cl888 movt since discovering it in my gv2 stadium watch. I was expecting an eta movt and wasn't sure what to think about this movt. The second hand does studder slightly, although it has become less perceptible with use, I bought the watch in Nov 09.


----------



## bxa67

I think they might have noted an 18 Jewels instead of the 21 it really has is for Tax purposes, this is what heard from another watch CO that noted lower than the 21 jewels it its movement, any one else have similar thoughts?
Best Rgds
Bill in IL


----------



## lysanderxiii

bxa67 said:


> I think they might have noted an 18 Jewels instead of the 21 it really has is for Tax purposes, this is what heard from another watch CO that noted lower than the 21 jewels it its movement, any one else have similar thoughts?
> Best Rgds
> Bill in IL


The jewel tariff was an effort to protect the US watch industry from cheap imports, namely from Switzerland. The number of jewels has a direct relationship to the longevity and durability of a mechanical movement [1], and back when the US had a watch industry they wanted the imports to either 1) cost more for the same jewel count, or 2) have inferior movements for the same price.

Now, since a no jewel quartz is just an accurate as the best quartz [2] and miles ahead of any mechanical, coupled with the fact that there is no longer much US watch industry, and the major US watch companies [3] import(ed) their watches from over seas, I seriously doubt the jewel tariff still exists.

Notes:
1) in simplistic terms, a complete run-down of the benefits of high jewel counts and where it becomes of little use, is beyond the scope of the post.
2) As far as the average person cares, these days, a cheap quartz will drift off about 1 minute in about 9 months to a year, and for most people, that's fine. 
3) Pulsar, Bulova and Timex were the largest US based watch companies, in the post quartz era, all three imported some movements and would have had good rerason to desire the abolishment of the jewel tariff. Pulsar was bought by Seiko in 1978, Bulova was bought by Citizen in 2008


----------



## chrisbo28

Probably the First reseller which "has balls enough" to tell the truth about the CL-888 :-d:

Kienzle 1822 Fliegeruhr FL22602 Borduhr für €.425 zu verkaufen von einem Trusted Seller auf Chrono24

Basic movement Seagull TY-28...


----------



## gigfy

chrisbo28 said:


> Probably the First reseller which "has balls enough" to tell the truth about the CL-888 :-d:
> 
> Kienzle 1822 Fliegeruhr FL22602 Borduhr für €.425 zu verkaufen von einem Trusted Seller auf Chrono24
> 
> Basic movement Seagull TY-28...


Awesome! Thanks for posting. :-!









cheers,
gigfy


----------



## chrisbo28

For all of those who wanna have a Watch with Carlo's "creation" can find one at the bay: Swiss Legend Reserve Automatic Mens Watch + Winder bei eBay.de: Wristwatches (endet 08.02.11 17:22:20 MEZ)

...for the price of a nice Alpha. :-d


----------



## AID

I don't know exactly why 21 jeweled movement was officially passed for 18 jeweled one, but I can tell you for sure it's not because 21 jewels associated with cheaper Japanese movements in peoples mind. One of the worlds most reliable and most respected Swiss movements - ETA 2892 - has 21 jewels and any WIS would probably know it. IMO, from what I've seen on pictures, this movement is lower quality than even basic 2892 caliber, but of course I would have to put my hands on it to tell for sure. 
Either way I want to thank the author for excellent article, great photography and all the knowledge about these movements I gained. Thanks a lot.


----------



## chrisbo28

*Wrong title? Comparision among ST17 (!) and a CL-888*

Hey guys, the title seems to be wrong. You probably compared the CL-888 with the ST17. :-(

http://bdwf.net/forum/showthread.php?t=60935


----------



## gigfy

*Re: Wrong title? Comparision among ST17 (!) and a CL-888*



chrisbo28 said:


> Hey guys, the title seems to be wrong. You probably compared the CL-888 with the ST17. :-(
> 
> Identity of Haurex Armata Movement - BDWF Forum Index Page


The Haurex in the BDWF post has a ST17. The ST16 & 17 are visually similar and both have many variants (some overlapping). But as a general rule ST16's hack and ST17's do not hack.

The one above has the hacking bits shown.

Cheers,
gigfy


----------



## lysanderxiii

AID said:


> I don't know exactly why 21 jeweled movement was officially passed for 18 jeweled one, but I can tell you for sure it's not because 21 jewels associated with cheaper Japanese movements in peoples mind. One of the worlds most reliable and most respected Swiss movements - ETA 2892 - has 21 jewels and any WIS would probably know it. IMO, from what I've seen on pictures, this movement is lower quality than even basic 2892 caliber, but of course I would have to put my hands on it to tell for sure.
> Either way I want to thank the author for excellent article, great photography and all the knowledge about these movements I gained. Thanks a lot.


They want to distance themselves from the ST16. The ST 16 is well known as a 21 jewel movement, if the triple-eight was advertised as a 21 jewel movement the truth would be obvious to even the least informed.

Increasing the jewel count would have been one way to change the number, but it also requires some redesign to figure out where to put the extras.

Decreasing the count is easier, it require no work or changing the movement, you aren't really lying, as one wag put it if there are 21 jewels there are also 18 jewels, and it probably doesn't break any laws, as I doubt there are any tariffs on jewels these days.

Further, if you don't count the jewels in the auto-winding mechanism, any only count those jewels that contribute to timekeeping, there are 18 jewels.


----------



## Chascomm

*Re: Wrong title? Comparision among ST17 (!) and a CL-888*



chrisbo28 said:


> Hey guys, the title seems to be wrong. You probably compared the CL-888 with the ST17. :-(
> 
> Identity of Haurex Armata Movement - BDWF Forum Index Page


While the ST17 seems to have been derived from the ST16, there is no mistaking one for the other, particularly when they are disassembled. The ST17 has had the entire train shuffled around slightly such that the 4th wheel is located exactly 90deg from the stem (i.e. at the 6 o'clock position when the crown is at 3 o'clock) thus allowing a directly-driven subsidiary second hand at the most aesthetically-pleasing location. Many however have been fitted with indirectly-driven centre seconds just like the ST16.


----------



## adswuk

I found this post excelent and I thank the OP , clearly this is a chinese movement and my laugh of the day goes to 

Born in China, Raised in China, went to Swiss finishing school and got citizenship ... Great way of putting it and so so true .. but.

I for one have seen some really really bad swiss movements from as little as 25 years ago that are not even close to the quality of an ST16 , with this in mind its clear that things have improved from all corners of the planet and after all if you tear open most products these days many would be stunned at where stuff is made .. For example I drive a Toyota that is 100% made in Thailand to get round the import duties, so is it a Japanese car ?

The fact is quality control of production and supply chain is more important than where its done, and in this regard it is my belief that when you are raised poor and you work for small money your concern for quality must fall short of the typical swiss riased and employed person so even with the parts made in china if QC and assembly is Swiss my money will go there . Lets not discuss the parts quailty that is a whole new area 

Fossil make money, alot of money... they do this by fine tuning their product range and their margins, they waste ZIP , if Timex had been as good at it as fossil are Timex would still be a USA based company .. after all it had 80% of the US market at one point and like Nokia watched it disapear in front of their eyes by being arrogant.

Quality is based around final inspection and as I have said when the Chinaman that earns 20 USD a week inpspects a finished movement can he care as much as the Swiss guy that earns 400 USD a week ? Can he really know what quality is ? after all he lives in low grade house with not too much money to spare and most likley not much else , but more than this does he really care or for that matter does his boss that has no reputation to maintain ? Do the Chinese that dont use ther name just look for profit ? . Do they just sell numbers .. I think we all know the answer to that .

The 888 is Swiss by law, Chinese by origin, but inspected by Swiss people so when you the consumer buy one will someone tell me how it doesnt get the best of both worlds for Swiss qulaity and Chinese price that after all we all like .

If you want Swiss design you need to buy the ETA or a Rolex but if you want pure Swiss Patek it has to be .. Zodiac is a Hybred that uses a law to use "swiss made " on the Dial for all we know the case might be swiss and not the movment but either way it left Switzerland before I got it, and it was inspected by Swiss workers that have a reputation for caring about quality .. That is fine by me , after all its only cost a few hundred dollars not tens of Thousands so lets keep it real and enjoy, and as interesting as this is QC in Switzerland does have some value in the sales process of a watch .. to me anyway .


----------



## LCheapo

A few comments: 'chinaman' seems offensive, whereas 'englishman' or 'irishman' would not. Maybe it's the generalizing 'the' in front?
Quality control: needs to be integrated with production; just checking the final product (without disassembly) can not find hidden flaws that can later stop the watch. 
If it doesn't seem obvious to you, look at Lysanderxiii's recent tear down and discovery of poor machining in a Liaoning 7750 as an example.
QC versus pay: Not sure about the correlation you postulate. Some people have a good work ethic independent of pay. Also, cost of living has to be taken into account. Many of my colleagues who have worked in both the US and India claim that despite lower pay they enjoy a higher standard of living when in India. I don't know how far $400 would go in Switzerland compared to $20 in China.


----------



## adswuk

Well actually I speak from personal experience working with and currently being partners with both production facilities in Asia and in Europe .

Reality is that work ethic is integrated in to a society, and is actually part of a culture and as much as you can eliminate this area that affects production you cannot remove it . The more parts you add to the production process and assembly of any given unit the more room for error you create . The more need for adjustment and the more room for poor adjustment you create . The lower the working ethic the more final inspection you create and this in my experience is directly related to the amount of money the society you produce in demands for its labour . It is not linear but it has a direct effect on the quality of the work carried out .

There is no doubt that Japan produce very good quality they learned and continue to learn to improve , Singapore in the list as well and quality produced in Singapore is generally very high . What do both of these countries have in common ? The are both western costing economies . China quality from all walks of life in any production circles is generally accepted not as good as any other part of the world it is not an insulting biased statement it is a fact . 

This is in my opinion driven by culture structure and working ethics which do tend to go hand in hand with remuneration 

In reality if an individual was inspecting a point of a movement he may well for the sake of being pushed for higher production levels either fail to reject or pass incorrectly when he is of a lower pay scale, than someone that is in the first place more conscientious and in second place more company driven due to the standing of their job and in particular the pride they have in doing it . 

There is no doubt that if you pay a good wage in the western world you can demand a higher working ethic, in Asian culture ( in Asia ) if you pay more it is much harder to expect better work the only advantage you have is that it becomes easier to replace that person if they do not work to your standard . 

Western employers know that with production staff in developing Asia if you give them an inch they will take a mile in Europe this does not apply anywhere near as much , in Asia we are all to aware that when you turn your back they will try to step of the gas hence far more supervision is required in Asia than in the west . 

This is my main point and this is why I say quality is always the first part to suffer in developing Asia , in Europe parts that get rejected on our production facility are always parts that have been passed from our shipping operation in Asia and not matter how hard we have tried this very rarely gets better .

All watch movements have many parts that can be faulty and in my opinion the chance of getting a bad movement is much higher if final inspection and assembly of those parts is carried out in developing Asia . The reasons for that are as above, and after all what we care about is what we buy not how it was made badly or why.

Considering this it stands to reason that if you buy a movement that is assembled and inspected in Switzerland even if the parts are made in China the chance of you getting a bad one is considerably less , any defective parts will have been eliminated before you get the watch and the standard of workmanship/inspection would have been higher so the watch you buy should be better . After all Swiss made did get it reputation for a reason, and I dont think I have ever heard anyone say Swiss junk sadly we all know we have heard a similar junk description applied to somewhere else.


----------



## seagullfan

LCheapo said:


> A few comments: 'chinaman' seems offensive, whereas 'englishman' or 'irishman' would not. Maybe it's the generalizing 'the' in front?


The error here is comparing "Chinaman" to "Englishman" or, to describe someone like myself, an "Irishman".

The equivalent would be "Irelandman" - which sounds rather jarring don't you think? The correct equivalent of Irishman would be a Chineseman - no one would bat an eyelid then :-!

Plus the historical connotations of the use of the word... just like you don't see many newspapers writing about "Orientals" anymore.

Just an OT side note ;-)


----------



## Chascomm

adswuk said:


> Well actually I speak from personal experience working with and currently being partners with both production facilities in Asia and in Europe .


What kind of production have you been involved? The reason I ask is that this work ethic that you speak of may vary widely between different industries and different parts of China. For example, in China mechanical watch movements are all made by old companies dating back to the command economy days. These companies have a long and proven track record. By contrast, quartz watches, and mechanicals built using bought-in movements are generally made by newer companies going back only as far as the opening up of the economy in the 1980s. Many of them are based in places like Shenzhen, and their business practices influenced by the traditions of Hong Kong businesses. Do you remember what Hong Kong watches were like in the old days?

All I'm saying is that it is difficult to make sweeping generalizations about work ethics.


> After all Swiss made did get it reputation for a reason, and I dont think I have ever heard anyone say Swiss junk ...


Then you haven't listened to me. ;-) With basic function quartz movements and the simpler quartz chronographs, the Swiss product seems to be inferior to Japanese in the opinion of several watchmakers that I have spoke to. Swiss watch batteries are crap in my experience and the experiences of others I know. Avoid Renata!

My particular interest is vintage watches, and in that regard, I can say unreservedly that back in the 1950s to 1970s, the average quality of Swiss made watches certainly seems to have been inferior to those of Japan, China and the USSR in the same period. This is because the majority of Swiss watches and uncased movements produced up until about 1981/82 were of the lowest grade, much of the rest were in the mid-grade and the top-end comprised a tiny minority; whereas in Japan, China and the USSR the watches were almost all in the mid-grade. In retrospect, the 'Quartz Revolution' was the best thing that happened to Switzerland because it wiped out the 1-jewel watch and enabled them to reposition the mechanical watch as a luxury item, with the halo effect benefiting even the reputation of their quartz watch production.

The reason for the reputation of Switzerland is a combination of work ethic, experience, money and _marketing_. Being 'Swiss' does not make a Swiss Legend better than a Beijing or a Sea-Gull.


----------



## lysanderxiii

I don't know that many around here have _said_ "Swiss junk", but I have run across plenty of _examples_ of "Swiss Junk" watches.....

And, in my opinion, final inspection is the worst place to try and ensure quality. A good manuafcturer should place quality at the front of the line in the actual manufacturing phase. It's cheaper (less waste and requires less manpower in the final inspection phase). From the examples I have seen, Hangzhou seems to be the best at this among the Chinese movement makers....


----------



## adswuk

I take any point on about manufacturing and in particular quality control , but it seems to me that many many people fail to understand the basic fact of ALL manufacturing and its methods .....Economics.

Pure and simple econmics is the driving force of how far any manufacturer will go to make things better, a product has a market place it is determined by who it appeals to. what price they will pay for it, and what it will be used for. These are the design criteria of virtually everything . Taking this as read then add that some products will end up in the hands of people that dont know what it is, or really care, It would be bought to just do a job. Others will be enthusiastic about it and cherish it either because they have a feel for it, or they know what it is, or they set out to buy it . In any event all products have a certain market place and the manufactuer knows that .

Swiss made must be compared with like for like in the year 2011, not what it was before, as if you do that then you must look at what Chinese was like before and the fact is the industry along with many things has moved on . so both Swiss and Chinese have got better I dont think anyone would dispute that .

However the point is that quality control is one of economics and this is decided by the cost of the final product and what it can demand , very few people will pay 10000 USD for a Chinese watch so the limits that can be spent on QC either of the finished product or the parts its made of are with the finite restriction of its value and what someone will pay . Rolex start at 5000 USD these days so what they can spend ( not what they actually spend ) is considerably larger than a 100 USD watch, so it goes without saying that it can not be anywhere near the same quality or consitancy of quality at 100 USD as if it were 5000 USD. No matter what anyone makes on the product a scam like that would blow a company apart and it would not last long. Take this principle of lower end products with just a few hundred dollars difference and the fact remains the same.

The Chinese watches are cheap they start at 20 USD they may be good value and I have a few, but when comparing Swiss with Chinese would I have bought the Zodiac Z8000 with the CL888 for 350 USD if it had made in China on it . NO I WOULD NOT... but would I have bought it for a 150 USD with made in China..YES I WOULD.

Thats 200 USD difference, and it shows in the product, and its function. I have the ST16 in two other watches, I have serviced them and they work well but are they as good a the CL 888 ..NOT THEY ARE NOT .We can go on forever as to why but my opinion still stands the QC from the start to the end and in between is better in Switzerland for one simple reason it can demand a higher price tag so they can spend more on acheaving it, either by way of rejection of sub standard parts or final product inspection with more time spent on quality assembly . The workers understand this as do the company that make it. In China brand awareness is low and their production numbers are high and their quality is created on a budget, ( they dont honour warrenties well either so they have no motivation or need to protect a reputation ). In Switzerland their brand awareness is high their quailty IS their industry and their workers know it. This filters down to the end product .

Reputation is everything these days, the Chinese have a reputation of cheap products the Swiss one of quality .. It occurs that way for a reason.


PS
I would add I am neither interested or care about Quartz it is a 50c module and no matter where its made it has no place in my world . The marvel of a small set of gears that keep time is the alure of a watch to me and its mechnical watches I refer to here.


----------



## Pawl_Buster

I have to assume that you haven't read any of the 'tear down' ... in particular, the one done on the CL888 :roll:

All quartz watches have 50 cent modules...oh my; someone had better tell the HEQ manufacturers!
Statements like that don't do much but discredit anything you've said previously :-s


----------



## lysanderxiii

As to quartz....

the quality of the quartz crystal itself, and the quality of the manner it is cut relative to the "grain" of the sourse crystal has a lot to do with the quality of the movement and how well it keeps time. Cheap crystals are not cut nearly as well, and the timing shows this, even in non-HEQ quartz movements.


----------



## adswuk

I am involved in the electronics industry at a very high level and all I can say is most people have no idea how much stuff really costs . Its how we like it

I know for a fact that the production cost of an high profile smart/device that retails for in excess of 300 USD is less than 30 USD per unit . I wont name it so dont ask but retail at ten times cost is normal.

Sure everything has a value and there are good and bad but a quartz xtal in a cylindrical form is less than 2 c for each unit . The chip that drives the motors and the functions is less than 20c in most cases the board is not much more and a machine makes it . End cost less than a dollar. This will get you better than 15 secs a month .. Go high end to get better and maybe the cost increases but not by much .. Quartz watches are truly profitable for those that make them of that I can assure you .

Numbers are the game for electronics , how many you buy, and as I have said the cost of a quartz module is so small it has no value to me no matter who makes it , its is a chip and some small motors it has no skill in its accuracy and is of no horological interest . 

A point of interest for all, I was once involved in sourcing alternatives of the swatch watch range ( not copies but the same concept ) I sourced from China and for 10000 units the cost of a perfect watch with three hands and date, blister packed and shipped to the UK to be sold at point of sale locations was landed at the docks ex taxes...... 15 US Cents .. The whole finished product with watch strap battery and blister pack and ready to sell ..was 15c !!! Quality was OK and that is what we could buy it for.!!! These also kept 15 secs a month hardy skill in making these dont you agree.

Its a free world and I am free to my opinion that in my case is based on knowledge . All quartz modules are cheap to make no matter what they do , skill is not required to make them accurate and neither is it expensive to do so . Mechanical watches take skill and it is in reality and art form, to get any kind of decent accuracy. It takes know how and quality and that is the difference .


----------



## lysanderxiii

I will agree that a quartz movement can be made very inexpensively, and some literally for pennies, but all quartz movements are not equal and some do cost more.

There is skill in cutting and selecting a quartz crystal... here (https://www.watchuseek.com/f9/thermocompensation-methods-movements-2087.html) is everything you wanted to know about how crystal selection and cutting affects the stability of a quartz.

(Of course if you are just a +/- 30 seconds type guy, any quartz will do. But, that does not mean they are all equal.)


----------



## chrisbo28

I would wonder myself if my swiss made Ronda 5030.D quartz chrono was made of a 50 cents crystal.;-)


----------



## Pawl_Buster

adswuk said:


> I am involved in the electronics industry at a very high level and all I can say is most people have no idea how much stuff really costs .


You are probably too high in the electronics industry to understand that you blanket statements don't hold water. I was much lower in the electronics industry and know that thee can be wide difference in the price of crystals depending on the accuracy you want. They can range from a few cents to dollars(in quantity).



> ...
> Its a free world and I am free to my opinion that in my case is based on knowledge . All quartz modules are cheap to make no matter what they do , skill is not required to make them accurate and neither is it expensive to do so . Mechanical watches take skill and it is in reality and art form, to get any kind of decent accuracy. It takes know how and quality and that is the difference .


I fear your much vaunted knowledge is not as accurate or as vast as you would have us believe.
How do you explain the skill required of a robot to machine parts and assemble a mechanical watch like a Seiko or even a Rolex? The skill is not in horology at all but in robotics...the exact same applies to quartz watches.


----------



## adswuk

In electronics volume is king and where you are in the food chain determines what you pay and how many you can buy .

A 12 Inch LCD Panel in 1994 was over 500 USD to buy today it is less than 50, in 1994 it was STN today its TFT .

The world of electronics is where perception of value drives its market , demand dictates its price and volume determines its cost.

The skill I refer to is tolerance, in a Quartz watch if the bearing is loose it will not matter it will still jump one second , if the balance wheel is bent or the hair spring is bent or a bearing is loose what will occur with a mechanical watch ? It takes far more skill to design and build a good mechanical watch over any quartz no matter if it is made by a machine or not . Rolex V Seiko.. 3135 v 7s26 .. There is no comparison, one does pass all chronometer tests, and one cant pass any. If this isn't the pure definition of how skill is required for a mechanical watch either by design or manufacture to make it accurate ... what is .

If some likes the concept of Quartz and they like the watch .. it a free world and I for one love that fact .. but I just cant see anything other than a small electronic circuit that neither my kids or my grandchildren will ever be able to enjoy . It will by definition be long gone in 50 years either the tracks of the board will corrode ( copper always does in the end no matter how you protect it ) or the small surface mount capacitors will fail or the battery that is no longer made will be the cause of its demise . In any event it will be gone.

Even the Chinese watches we talk about will still be around if you put it in drawer and you leave it there for 50 years, so long as it was sealed well and made well with lubrication it can be brought back to life , can anyone see a quartz watch in the same drawer ending up the same way ?

How many original walkmens are there now? ..They made 20 million !! and just 15 years later how many still work or even exist ?

Where are the original LED watches , and look how many of those were made... millions.. where are they now ?

On the other side go to any vintage watch site and see how many 20/30/40 or more old mechanical watches are for sale . My dad is 83 and he wears an original Omega constellations watch it was given to him when he was 21 for his graduation , thats 62 years of service .

How many LED graduation gifts are still even working , sad but true

This is my point electronic watches are a consumable product .. made to become obsolete and to be replaced and I for one just dont like that


----------



## Pawl_Buster

adswuk said:


> ...
> 
> The skill I refer to is tolerance, in a Quartz watch if the bearing is loose it will not matter it will still jump one second , if the balance wheel is bent or the hair spring is bent or a bearing is loose what will occur with a mechanical watch ? It takes far more skill to design and build a good mechanical watch over any quartz no matter if it is made by a machine or not . Rolex V Seiko.. 3135 v 7s26 .. There is no comparison, one does pass all chronometer tests, and one cant pass any. If this isn't the pure definition of how skill is required for a mechanical watch either by design or manufacture to make it accurate ... what is .
> 
> ...


As I said, you seem to be way too high up on the ladder to see the realities.
I'm sure there are probably software, firmware and hardware engineers amongst us that would find your view of that it takes far more skill to design a mechanical watch over an electronic one. I suspect you are probably in accounting or supply chain and haven't a full grasp of the real engineering that goes into the conceptualization, design and manufacturing of watch movements at all.

It is no longer just some master craftsmen working at wooden benches with an assortment of hand tools, mini lathes and testers. Producing watches today requires large investments in resources for design, marketing and manufacturing. Both mechanical and quartz watches are produced in predominantly automated factories. This is how the 50 cent quartz module and the $1 mechanical modules are made. Even the $50 modules for both types are made this way with final assembly being done by master assemblers in some cases.

The Rolex 5513 you mentioned is mostly assembled by machine and fine tuned by technicians to meet it's COSC designation. The Seiko 7s26 is probably never handled by human hands until the new owner opens the box but the Seiko Grand Seiko is assembled by hand with all of the parts being hand picked for perfection and will meet the Japanese accuracy standards which are more stringent than COSC.
Compare apples to apples if you want to make a point.

No matter what spin you put on it; all watches are nothing more than consumer products and as such will eventually be disposed of. Check eBay and you will find there are just as many old broken mechanical watches up for auction as old broken quartz ones...some repairable, most not.

As for what the future holds; I suspect that even mechanical watches will suffer the same fate as quartz watches with no parts and nobody with the skills to fix them...that's if anybody even wears watches by then.


----------



## adswuk

"I suspect you are probably in accounting or supply chain and haven't a full grasp of the real engineering that goes into the conceptualization, design and manufacturing of watch movements at all."


Actually I am a electronic design engineer with design claims of specialist aviation and automation, as well as consumer electronics for some of the largest companies in the world. I have active interests in several electronic companies, and on many occasions have been involved in the design of machines that make parts of the modules and components we have spoken about. Watches are my passion and with my knowledge of material technology and manufacturing processes, I am pretty sure making a watch and the process involved is not only within my grasp but within my knowledge .

These forums are of interest to me as marketing is one aspect of anything we are all subject to, and frankly it interest me to a great extent how many people buy the marketing hype that is fed to each and every one of us daily . Lets be fair it is stunning how much hype people buy and these forums do have a habit of selling the myth.

The original post is about the CL888 and its similarities to the ST16 , I will put this back on track and point out it is the same movement as the OP helpfully highlighted ,but likewise I will emphasize when it leaves Switzerland the QC with the knowledge I have of factories worldwide is just better, and I stand by that statement. 

If others choose to think different.... Once again its a free world, and we are only here once lets not lose too much sleep over who is right .


----------



## Pawl_Buster

adswuk said:


> "I suspect you are probably in accounting or supply chain and haven't a full grasp of the real engineering that goes into the conceptualization, design and manufacturing of watch movements at all."
> 
> Actually I am a electronic design engineer with design claims of specialist aviation and automation, as well as consumer electronics for some of the largest companies in the world. I have active interests in several electronic companies, and on many occasions have been involved in the design of machines that make parts of the modules and components we have spoken about. Watches are my passion and with my knowledge of material technology and manufacturing processes, I am pretty sure making a watch and the process involved is not only within my grasp but within my knowledge .
> 
> These forums are of interest to me as marketing is one aspect of anything we are all subject to, and frankly it interest me to a great extent how many people buy the marketing hype that is fed to each and every one of us daily . Lets be fair it is stunning how much hype people buy and these forums do have a habit of selling the myth.
> 
> The original post is about the CL888 and its similarities to the ST16 , I will put this back on track and point out it is the same movement as the OP helpfully highlighted ,but likewise I will emphasize when it leaves Switzerland the QC with the knowledge I have of factories worldwide is just better, and I stand by that statement.
> 
> If others choose to think different.... Once again its a free world, and we are only here once lets not lose too much sleep over who is right .


Swiss fanboys all sound the same...in the end, all the huffing and puffing and chest pounding doesn't add up to a hill of beans since you're the ones who have bought into the hype :-d

Sleep tight; I know I will


----------



## chrisbo28

Swissophiles condem the movement for the same reason as chinese watch fans love it.  Swiss Legend is the cheapest way to aquire one of those. :-! Unfortunately the Zodiac Oceanaire is rare as a pearl in the south sea. :-(


----------



## adswuk

chrisbo28 said:


> Swissophiles condem the movement for the same reason as chinese watch fans love it.  Swiss Legend is the cheapest way to aquire one of those. :-! Unfortunately the Zodiac Oceanaire is rare as a pearl in the south sea. :-(


What does that make the Z8001 with divers club cast on the back with not a single Oceanair in sight , I must confess to having never seen another one .

Just one more point I have several divers with a 2824 or SW200 movements and there is no way the CL888 is even close to the consistent accuracy of those, its positionally accuracy is just very poor , so how does appreciating a better product make me a SWISS fan-boy ?


----------



## lysanderxiii

The several CL888s that I have worked on and the ETA 2824-2s (Standard grade) were generally comparable. From what I have seen, and worked on, the CL888 is as good as the +/- 12 sec/day and the positional variation was easily within the maximum 30 sec/day of a Standard grade ETA.

I think many people tend to forget that ETA 2824-2s are available in grades from the bottom grade Standard to Chronometer. The CL888 is a single grade movement, comparable to the ETA Standard grade.


----------



## chrisbo28

Choose a standard grade Eta 2824-2, regulate it in chronometer specs, put a stamp on it and double the prize. :-x


----------



## adswuk

lysanderxiii said:


> The several CL888s that I have worked on and the ETA 2824-2s (Standard grade) were generally comparable. From what I have seen, and worked on, the CL888 is as good as the +/- 12 sec/day and the positional variation was easily within the maximum 30 sec/day of a Standard grade ETA.
> 
> I think many people tend to forget that ETA 2824-2s are available in grades from the bottom grade Standard to Chronometer. The CL888 is a single grade movement, comparable to the ETA Standard grade.


I think the issue is not one of quality more one of design and that in the case of the 2824 it is why it is a better time keeper , dont forget the beat rate the most 2824s is 28800 not 21600 , but even so low grade 2824s will still keep more consistent time over a St16 and a CL888 of that I am sure, as I have both and have done the tests.


----------



## lysanderxiii

adswuk said:


> I think the issue is not one of quality more one of design and that in the case of the 2824 it is why it is a better time keeper , dont forget the beat rate the most 2824s is 28800 not 21600 , but even so low grade 2824s will still keep more consistent time over a St16 and a CL888 of that I am sure, as I have both and have done the tests.


Hmmm . . . . By that reasoning, my marine chronometer, operating at a ridiculously low 7200 bph must really be a bad time keeper... :roll:

The design of a ST16, Miyota 8215 and a 2824-2 is basically the same, a going barrel turning the 2nd wheel running the minute hand and the 3rd wheel, which turns the 4th wheel which turns the escape wheel which is stopped and started by a lever escapement regulated by an oscillating balance. The location of these gears on the mainplate makes no difference in the accuracy.

There are plenty of examples of 21,600 bph and 18,000 bph movements that out perform 28,800 bph movements, by specification. A Hamilton 22, for example works at 18,000 bph and was specified and tested to average 2 sec/day...

If an ETA 2824-2 performs better than an ST16, I would say the ETA has the advantage because it has a better balance spring (Nivarox vs Elivar) and mainspring, pure and simple. Give an ST16 a Nivarox balance and main spring and they perform better.

Wait a minute, the CL888 has a better balance and main spring....


----------



## LCheapo

My ST16 is +2 seconds for the last two weeks (total, not per day). Largest day to day variation was 3 seconds. Yep, I know, statistics of one, but it's the one that matters for me.


----------



## adswuk

lysanderxiii said:


> Hmmm . . . . By that reasoning, my marine chronometer, operating at a ridiculously low 7200 bph must really be a bad time keeper... :roll:
> 
> The design of a ST16, Miyota 8215 and a 2824-2 is basically the same, a going barrel turning the 2nd wheel running the minute hand and the 3rd wheel, which turns the 4th wheel which turns the escape wheel which is stopped and started by a lever escapement regulated by an oscillating balance. The location of these gears on the mainplate makes no difference in the accuracy.
> 
> There are plenty of examples of 21,600 bph and 18,000 bph movements that out perform 28,800 bph movements, by specification. A Hamilton 22, for example works at 18,000 bph and was specified and tested to average 2 sec/day...
> 
> If an ETA 2824-2 performs better than an ST16, I would say the ETA has the advantage because it has a better balance spring (Nivarox vs Elivar) and mainspring, pure and simple. Give an ST16 a Nivarox balance and main spring and they perform better.
> 
> Wait a minute, the CL888 has a better balance and main spring....


The CL888 has better parts !! I am really not sold on that argument but if you say so . With regards to the rest where do you draw the line, part of design is what it is made up of after all most watches work the same and the argument of better parts goes back to a better design .

With regard to my post my point is consistent time keeping , in the real world that is determined by wear and durability, which in turn is determined by design and quality of materials used, which brings us back to a full circle of what makes it better . Dont ever forget that gearing and stresses are a fine art and the size of the gears determines the stress of them on any respective part that it works with . You simply cannot say they are the same, they are clearly not.. no parts are interchangeable so they are different in all areas of stress and efficiency. In one word design .

Beat rate is just one part of why the 2824 is a better movement, but the design must be another part of it along with quality parts . Total sum better design, I ask you this why isn't the ST16 a 28800 beat rate movement. Maybe ( and I dont know ) it would not last as long if it were .

We know that when you use a watch as it goes along its life it will wear out, I have an Ebel with twin barrel GP movement, fresh from service it will keep + 1 second a day on or off the wrist but when it needs a a service ( which it does like clockwork after 4 years ) it will gain time for about 2 days of using it then settle down as you wear it. Then one day it just goes crazy and gain 5 mins a day ..Then it needs a service .. Why is this .. It is because it is a very very delicate movement and the tolerances are very very tight, and when the oils get thick it gains time but when it is fresh it is superb .. This is all design and after 15 years it is still a 1 sec a day watch .

Design is the sum of parts and the way they work, that in turn is how long it continues to work and how well . This alone is why the ST16 ( in my opinion ) is not as good as the 2824 and this is why when lubricated and assembled well it is better than if it were not . The cl888 is better than the St16 ( not by much ) as it will be finished in Switzerland so something is better than nothing, and the 2824 is better than either of them, and no matter how you swing it the reason is the design and the quality of the parts, then add some poor assembly and the race is won hands down for the 2824.

One more point, there is no way you can keep a ST16 /CL888 going without parts for 15 years ( the pawl & or jewel lever assembly will wear out ) but the 2824 can go for years without parts and just lubrication . This must be design and can be nothing else and in my mind it makes it a better design


----------



## Pawl_Buster

I see lots of babble but nothing to back it up except the usual unsubstantiated fanboy drivel :roll:

Until or if you ever read any of the excellent teardown articles done by real watchmakers on these watches and can show good reason why they are all mistaken...your credibility amounts to around zero :-(

Your arguments all sound like they came right out of the Swiss karaoke marketing machine :-d


----------



## lysanderxiii

Tell you what, after you have torn one down taken a few pictures, examined the parts, done a few tests on the parts, come back and report your findings with some evidence.

Right now, all I hear (read) is some guy writing his biases (one might say prejudices) with no verifiable basis.....

How do I know you are full of... well let's just say, you are mis-informed...


adswuk said:


> ...there is no way you can keep a ST16 /CL888 going without parts for 15 years ( the pawl & or jewel lever assembly will wear out ) but the 2824 can go for years without parts and just lubrication . ...


First, I can't really state how old the oldest ST16 I have seen is, but, I have come across a number of older (1970s, I would guess, 35 to maybe 40 years old) Chinese movements, none of these showed abnormal wear, ie, they were not worn any worse than comtemporary Swiss movements. I cannot see any basis for the suggestion that an ST16 cannot go 15 years with just cleaning and oiling.

Second, Of the ST16s (and the few CL888s), I have seen, they do not show any abnormal wear indicating they are made from inferior quality materials. (this also goes for the DGs).

And last, the 'indestructable' ETAs . . . . the two parts most troublesome in an Eterna auto-winding system (the one used by the ETA 2824-2) are the two reverser wheels. These are known to be a pain when the oil gums up and then hand winding overloads the auto-wind reduction gearing*. That is why every one else that used the Eterna auto-winding design looked at different ways to do the reversers. Rolex used Teflon coated ones, a number of Chinese designs and the Russians use a jewel element sprage-type clutch (I forget which Swiss company patented this design, but it was also used by Elgin in the 760). ETA themselves moved away from it (sort of anyway) in the 2892 series.

As to the ST16's pawl and jewel, I have seen a number of Seikos from the sixties and seventies with this design. I haven't seen abnormally high wear in this area. I don't see why the Chinese should be any different. Unless the friction pixies frown upon the Chinese watch industry.

To tell the truth, I have seen more ETA/Eterna type autowinding mechanisms damages to the point of needing parts that the Seiko "magic finger" type. And, neither Swiss or Chinese have been in great need of replacement parts, due to wear.
____________________________________
* Bent axles of the last reduction gear, the highest loaded when spun backwards


----------



## adswuk

Pawl_Buster said:


> I see lots of babble but nothing to back it up except the usual unsubstantiated fanboy drivel :roll:
> 
> Until or if you ever read any of the excellent teardown articles done by real watchmakers on these watches and can show good reason why they are all mistaken...your credibility amounts to around zero :-(
> 
> Your arguments all sound like they came right out of the Swiss karaoke marketing machine :-d


See previous post I am a design engineer with material technology as just ONE of my degrees in engineering ... you carry on with your belief and I will carry on with mine . Fact is..NONE SO BLIND AS THOSE THAT WONT SEE

Anyone with half a brain can see with their own eyes what will wear out on the ST16, but hey that takes half a brain

I dont need to prove anything on here, its about opinions and I made mine known ....END OF STORY


----------



## LCheapo

Man, CAPITAL LETTERS; according to the interweb rules & regulations, that's it, adswuk wins, no use arguing about it!

Seriously, how did a well-researched informational positive thread about how two movements, one swiss, one chinese, are so similar they're really the same, turn so ugly?


----------



## adswuk

lysanderxiii said:


> Tell you what, after you have torn one down taken a few pictures, examined the parts, done a few tests on the parts, come back and report your findings with some evidence.
> 
> Right now, all I hear (read) is some guy writing his biases (one might say prejudices) with no verifiable basis.....
> 
> How do I know you are full of... well let's just say, you are mis-informed...
> 
> First, I can't really state how old the oldest ST16 I have seen is, but, I have come across a number of older (1970s, I would guess, 35 to maybe 40 years old) Chinese movements, none of these showed abnormal wear, ie, they were not worn any worse than comtemporary Swiss movements. I cannot see any basis for the suggestion that an ST16 cannot go 15 years with just cleaning and oiling.
> 
> Second, Of the ST16s (and the few CL888s), I have seen, they do not show any abnormal wear indicating they are made from inferior quality materials. (this also goes for the DGs).
> 
> And last, the 'indestructable' ETAs . . . . the two parts most troublesome in an Eterna auto-winding system (the one used by the ETA 2824-2) are the two reverser wheels. These are known to be a pain when the oil gums up and then hand winding overloads the auto-wind reduction gearing*. That is why every one else that used the Eterna auto-winding design looked at different ways to do the reversers. Rolex used Teflon coated ones, a number of Chinese designs and the Russians use a jewel element sprage-type clutch (I forget which Swiss company patented this design, but it was also used by Elgin in the 760). ETA themselves moved away from it (sort of anyway) in the 2892 series.
> 
> As to the ST16's pawl and jewel, I have seen a number of Seikos from the sixties and seventies with this design. I haven't seen abnormally high wear in this area. I don't see why the Chinese should be any different. Unless the friction pixies frown upon the Chinese watch industry.
> 
> To tell the truth, I have seen more ETA/Eterna type autowinding mechanisms damages to the point of needing parts that the Seiko "magic finger" type. And, neither Swiss or Chinese have been in great need of replacement parts, due to wear.
> ____________________________________
> * Bent axles of the last reduction gear, the highest loaded when spun backwards


First let me thank you for your clearly informed opinion being a civilised individal I value your comments

However you must take in to context location, and I have for some years lived in extreemly hot climates and as such I too have seen both side of the coin .

The points you raise of the ETA movements are of course valid but are almost exclusively limited to watches that have not been serviced or have not been serviced corectly, as if they had been the wear would not have been anywhere as much if at all .

With regards to the 7s26 in Asia the biggest problem is one of the pawl assembly either failing or wearing out and needing replacment , my very good friend that own a service centre for Seiko has confirmed this as being one issue with the 7s26 that crops up daily .

Bear in mind in Asia the 7s26 is sold in huge numbers, and as such this must be considered . Also bear in mind that people do tend to be somewhat more active here and that will have an effect too but either way it does wear out .

The whole original argument is being forgotton, and I have made my opinion known I will leave it at that , this is the Chinese forum and I will respect the fans of Chinese movements

However no matter what any of us say, time will tell who is right


----------



## Pawl_Buster

adswuk said:


> See previous post I am a design engineer with material technology as just ONE of my degrees in engineering ... you carry on with your belief and I will carry on with mine . Fact is..NONE SO BLIND AS THOSE THAT WONT SEE
> 
> Anyone with half a brain can see with their own eyes what will wear out on the ST16, but hey that takes half a brain
> 
> I dont need to prove anything on here, its about opinions and I made mine known ....END OF STORY


I haven't actually posted any beliefs in this thread but I have called for you to back up your 'opinions' with some kind of evidence to support them. Claiming to be some kind of superior professional with multiple degrees; typing with a lot of upper case characters and and stating that you don't have to prove anything after continuing to 'defend' your completely indefensible opinion, reeks of insecurity...sad really :-(

Now be a good little troll and go hide back under your bridge :-d


----------



## skywatch

adswuk said:


> However no matter what any of us say, time will tell who is right


As a quiet onlooker, reading this thread since it started, I would like to thank this recent feisty dialog for educating me. I know there is a lot of passion about this topic, and I'm agnostic (own and love watches from Switzerland, Japan and China.) Alongside the contributors' strong opinions and intellectual defenses, you have all helped me learn a bit more, which is why I am here reading. Thanks!


----------



## lysanderxiii

adswuk said:


> With regards to the 7s26 in Asia the biggest problem is one of the pawl assembly either failing or wearing out and needing replacment , my very good friend that own a service centre for Seiko has confirmed this as being one issue with the 7s26 that crops up daily .
> 
> Bear in mind in Asia the 7s26 is sold in huge numbers, and as such this must be considered . Also bear in mind that people do tend to be somewhat more active here and that will have an effect too but either way it does wear out .


Sounds to me that these watches were not serviced properly and/or at the proper frequency. (Which is typical of Seikos, people believe them to not require servicing.)

Funny how you say:


adswuk said:


> The points you raise of the ETA movements are of course valid but are almost exclusively limited to watches that have not been serviced or have not been serviced corectly, as if they had been the wear would not have been anywhere as much if at all...


Then turn around and condemn the Seiko design as weak, because the owners abuse them...


----------



## chrisbo28

@Lysanderxiii

Something came up my mind when I thought about the comparission. The main reason for the diffrent jewel count is that you haven't chosen the based Ebauches movement, the TY2806 with 21 jewels like in my Alpha Milsub.


----------



## adswuk

Pawl_Buster said:


> I haven't actually posted any beliefs in this thread but I have called for you to back up your 'opinions' with some kind of evidence to support them. Claiming to be some kind of superior professional with multiple degrees; typing with a lot of upper case characters and and stating that you don't have to prove anything after continuing to 'defend' your completely indefensible opinion, reeks of insecurity...sad really :-(
> 
> Now be a good little troll and go hide back under your bridge :-d


Do your own research ... none so blind as those that dont look

www.thepurists.com 

" It is not at all uncommon to find some wear around the lever arms and intermediate wheel coupling in older versions of the Magic Lever system. This example showed some wear [15] underneath the pawl wheel. This amount of wear is fairly significant for a watch that is less than two years old. On the whole, the automatic system is a triumph of simplicity that comes with some apparent sacrifices to longevity as well as efficiency."

Get a life I dont need to prove anything


----------



## lysanderxiii

Quote the whole thing if you are going to quote... the sentence immediately preceeding



> ...and I've yet to hear of a Seiko automatic that does not wind sufficiently in use.


So, apparently, even with wear, they still work.

And, the wear he points to in 15 is not on the pawl, but on the intermediate wheel bearing, The ST, DG, NN and CL888 don't even have this gear, the pawl is run directly off the rotor.

Hmmm, I wonder what this indicates.....









All designs make trade-offs, Seiko made "...the automatic system ... a triumph of simplicity that comes with some apparent sacrifices to longevity as well as efficiency...", while ETA made an automatic system that traded some reliability for efficiency with a bit of complexity (read cost) thrown in. The fact is, neither system fails often....


----------



## adswuk

lysanderxiii said:


> Sounds to me that these watches were not serviced properly and/or at the proper frequency. (Which is typical of Seikos, people believe them to not require servicing.)
> 
> Funny how you say:
> 
> Then turn around and condemn the Seiko design as weak, because the owners abuse them...


Service of any machine is essential we all know that, if parts move they need lubrication and a watch is no exception for sure in particular if it is made of metal.

I accept in Asia service is a word that for a cheap seiko does not exist, they wait until it fails the point you make is valid .

But this post is about the ST16 and CL888 its winding system is not a seiko system. The same would mean.. the same parts from the same company with exactly the same design.. and the ST16 is not a Seiko it is not the same . Close for sure but not the same .

The materials that the pawl and the rotor are made of may or may not be inferior to Seiko . The bearing that the Rotor relies on has some play ( I know this from personal use of one of mine that clearly has extra play after use) and that will wear the Jewel bearing that drives the pawl assembly, that in turn will lead the fingers to be misalinged and that will wear the pawl gear and or the fingers .Think about it logically and you can see where the wear will take place service or not . My original point of parts is based on these facts. I might add on the ST16 your would need a new bridge as the bearing is not replaceable . In ten years how common would that part be for each varient ?

The seiko 7s26 is a great workhorse and for how much it costs who the hell can complain , but the ST 16 is even more basic than the 7s26, (some may say better) but with a rotor bearing on the St16 that has play from new most times ( Some more than others ...quality issues evident ) and one that likely gets worse with time, it will wear out faster serviced or not . The rotor spins and has the pawl jewel underneath, with play on the rotor bearing this will cause a problem with consistant alignment and lead to wear on the whole pawl assembly.. this cannot be disputed. Missalignment will cause wear on the pawl assembly. This is not a service issue it is a design and quality issue from new. It may also be why seiko on the 7s26 they do not have the pawl bearing Jewel in a deasign so as to be affected from wear on the rotor bearing .

As I have said time will tell


----------



## lysanderxiii

adswuk said:


> But[,] this post is about the ST16 and CL888 its winding system is not a eiko system. The same would mean.. the same parts from the same company with exactly the same design.. and the ST16 is not a Seiko it is not the same . Close for sure but not the same-.



*The automatic winding system used by most Chinese stuff is exactly the same design as the Seiko 6106 and 4205*. Maybe you should research a bit more before you post...*

*(And, "same design" does not mean made by the same company&#8230; :roll: )*




adswuk said:


> The materials that the pawl and the rotor are made of may or may not be inferior to Seiko-. _*The bearing that the [r]otor relies on has some play (-I know this from personal use of one of mine that clearly has extra play after use) and that will wear the [j]ewel bearing that drives the pawl assembly, that in turn will lead the fingers to be [misaligned] and that will wear the pawl gear and or the fingers-.Think about it logically and you can see where the wear will take place service or not-. My original point of parts is based on these facts.*_ I might add on the ST16[,] [you] would need a new bridge as the bearing is not replaceable-. In ten years how common would that part be for each [variant]-?


*The Moon might be made from green cheese, too. "May, or may not&#8230;"? All this is pointless supposition on your part, and, some of it just plain wrong (the highlighted part).*

*I have stated that from my observation (and, it is more than a sample of one) the ST16 and DG/NN28 winding system does not show more wear than similar Seiko (6106 and 4205 series) designs. So, I can confidently assume that the materials are comparable. Also, having seen a good number of the 6106 (and 4205) series, all of this "possible" stuff just does not occur, at least, not to the point where the mechanism is incapable of powering the watch.*

*Unfortunately, this is something I cannot say about the ETA/Eterna design. I have seen two or three of these that have too much drag in the gears, due to wear. Statistically, two or three does not give a high confidence level, but it is quite a bit higher than the ZERO Seikos (and Chinese, BTW) that no longer wind due to wear.*

*The bearing does wobble, it is a weak point in the design using such small diameter ball bearings, and it can lead to rotor rub on the movement, I have seen that often on Seikos, but like I said earlier, it doesn't stop it from working. (Also, wobbly rotors are not exactly unheard of on ETAs&#8230*

*HOWEVER**, this does not lead to extra wear on the pawl. The pawl is confined by the auto-wind bridge on top and the main bridge on the bottom; this is what keeps the pawl fingers in the same plane as the winding gear and all of these parts aligned properly. A wobbly rotor bearing is more of an annoyance than a performance degrader. Maybe if the eccentric pin worn completely through&#8230;*

*Next, you mention pawl/gear teeth wear, yes, any time two surfaces rub against one another, there will be wear. HOWEVER, (again) this is true of any movement; in your ETA 2892A2 the pivots rub the inside of the jewels, do they wear? Of course they do, abrasion is non-nationalistic.** But, smart people ask the important question - How long will this design work before normal wear degrades performance? Again, I refer you to my observations on this. The answer is: a long, long time, apparently.*

*Parts - Yes, parts can be a problem, if certain things go out on certain model of Seikos, you cannot get those parts without cannibalizing other movements, older Swiss, German and French stuff suffer from this problem, as well. This is true of all movements to a certain extent. HOWEVER, (again, again) you fail to take into account the important question - How often will we need these parts?*

*Again referring to my observations, not often enough to become paralyzed with fear over it&#8230;*




adswuk said:


> The eiko 726 is a great workhorse and for how much it costs who the hell can complain-, but the ST 16 is even more basic than the 726, (some may say better) but with a rotor bearing on the St16 that has play from new most times (-Some more than others ...quality issues evident-) and one that likely gets worse with time, it will wear out faster serviced or not . The rotor spins and has the pawl jewel underneath, with play on the rotor bearing this will cause a problem with [consistant] alignment and lead to wear on the whole pawl assembly.. this cannot be disputed. [Misalignment] will cause wear on the pawl assembly. This is not a service issue it is a design and quality issue from new. It may also be why eiko on the 726 they do not have the pawl bearing [j]ewel in a [design] so as to be affected from wear on the rotor bearing .



*See above comments, as this paragraph just restates much of what was put forth in the second one, except for this: Seiko did not use a jewel on the 7S26 because the jewel is there to reduce drag, with the extra gearing, drag is not a problem as opposed to the direct drive used by the 6106 and 4205 series movements. *

*_______________________*
*The 6106 series consists of the following calibers:*
*6106*
*6109*
*6117*
*6118*
*6133*
*6138*
*6139*
*6306*
*6308*
*6309*
*6319*
*And, the Benrus marked:*
*HG1 B3*
*HG1 B6*

*The 4205 series consists of the following calibers:*
*4205*
*4206*
*4207*

*** Unlike some posters*


----------



## adswuk

lysanderxiii said:


> *The automatic winding system used by most Chinese stuff is exactly the same design as the Seiko 6106 and 4205*. Maybe you should research a bit more before you post...*
> 
> *(And, "same design" does not mean made by the same company&#8230; :roll: )*
> 
> *The Moon might be made from green cheese, too. "May, or may not&#8230;"? All this is pointless supposition on your part, and, some of it just plain wrong (the highlighted part).*
> 
> *I have stated that from my observation (and, it is more than a sample of one) the ST16 and DG/NN28 winding system does not show more wear than similar Seiko (6106 and 4205 series) designs. So, I can confidently assume that the materials are comparable. Also, having seen a good number of the 6106 (and 4205) series, all of this "possible" stuff just does not occur, at least, not to the point where the mechanism is incapable of powering the watch.*
> 
> *Unfortunately, this is something I cannot say about the ETA/Eterna design. I have seen two or three of these that have too much drag in the gears, due to wear. Statistically, two or three does not give a high confidence level, but it is quite a bit higher than the ZERO Seikos (and Chinese, BTW) that no longer wind due to wear.*
> 
> *The bearing does wobble, it is a weak point in the design using such small diameter ball bearings, and it can lead to rotor rub on the movement, I have seen that often on Seikos, but like I said earlier, it doesn't stop it from working. (Also, wobbly rotors are not exactly unheard of on ETAs&#8230*
> 
> *HOWEVER**, this does not lead to extra wear on the pawl. The pawl is confined by the auto-wind bridge on top and the main bridge on the bottom; this is what keeps the pawl fingers in the same plane as the winding gear and all of these parts aligned properly. A wobbly rotor bearing is more of an annoyance than a performance degrader. Maybe if the eccentric pin worn completely through&#8230;*
> 
> *Next, you mention pawl/gear teeth wear, yes, any time two surfaces rub against one another, there will be wear. HOWEVER, (again) this is true of any movement; in your ETA 2892A2 the pivots rub the inside of the jewels, do they wear? Of course they do, abrasion is non-nationalistic.** But, smart people ask the important question - How long will this design work before normal wear degrades performance? Again, I refer you to my observations on this. The answer is: a long, long time, apparently.*
> 
> *Parts - Yes, parts can be a problem, if certain things go out on certain model of Seikos, you cannot get those parts without cannibalizing other movements, older Swiss, German and French stuff suffer from this problem, as well. This is true of all movements to a certain extent. HOWEVER, (again, again) you fail to take into account the important question - How often will we need these parts?*
> 
> *Again referring to my observations, not often enough to become paralyzed with fear over it&#8230;*
> 
> *See above comments, as this paragraph just restates much of what was put forth in the second one, except for this: Seiko did not use a jewel on the 7S26 because the jewel is there to reduce drag, with the extra gearing, drag is not a problem as opposed to the direct drive used by the 6106 and 4205 series movements. *
> 
> *_______________________*
> *The 6106 series consists of the following calibers:*
> *6106*
> *6109*
> *6117*
> *6118*
> *6133*
> *6138*
> *6139*
> *6306*
> *6308*
> *6309*
> *6319*
> *And, the Benrus marked:*
> *HG1 B3*
> *HG1 B6*
> 
> *The 4205 series consists of the following calibers:*
> *4205*
> *4206*
> *4207*
> 
> *** Unlike some posters*


Why dont you prove me wrong instead of trying to justify why . I disagree the pawl DOES wobble ..it has to, a small amount but it does.. and in terms of wear it WILL result in wear and that once again brings me back to the point of parts .

With regards to wear on any watch its always there but with the pawl it is unavoidable with any kind of lubrication, as there is friction of two surfaces that are by design going to wear with a bearing it is dependent on servicing and quality of both the bearing and the shaft and the film of oil separating them .

I pointed out where it will wear and why but you still can only quote comparison not reasons why it wont, and as for working how many cars kick out smoke but they still work , it does however mean they are "worn out " and will fail.

A Chinese bearing V a Japanese bearing .. Now let me see !!! .. No contest

if you want it in black and white I have no doubt the quality of the Chinese ST16 is far inferior to any Seiko made to date in materials and quality .The Chinese do not have the quality of the Japanese a fact universally accepted, and I very much doubt they ever will. Japanese make good products Chinese make cheap ones. This is not achieved by quality parts and manufacture but by cost cutting and we all know that is heavily carried out in cheap products

as for the moon comment .... well there is only one thing left to say

Pathetic


----------



## Pawl_Buster

Sadly; it you who is pathetic :roll:

Your ethnic biases are blatant and your agenda is obvious :roll:


----------



## Chascomm

I think this thread has run its course. Looks of good information so far, but I can see it sliding downhill from here.

Thread closed.


----------



## chrisbo28

Good evening Pawl. When doesn't Lysander recognize that there is no use in feeding trolls with arguments?:roll:


----------

