# FC-710 vs ETA2824 / SW200-1. Discussing an in-house movement.



## danfermat

When I first saw a FC-710 movement, through a Classics Manufacture's caseback, I thought 'wow, this looks mysterious':
Two concentric plates cover most of the movement, but, still, it's possible to observe the balance wheel in action (at 6).

I am not an expert, but it looks very different from the workhorses of the industry, the ETA 2824 (and variants) and Sellita SW200-1 (and variants).

To my understanding, the Sellita was born as a copy of the ETA because of politics (monopolistic practices, etc.) We know the story; in sum they wanted to offer the exact same quality without depending on the Swatch Group...

On the other hand, the FC-710 was born as a true manufacture caliber and *indending to be different from these 'generic movements', and as such it should be differently constructed, right?*
I know it is still a simple three hand plus date, and at an 'entry price' (from manufactured movements), but it has to be different (let aside 'better'), right?

Then, what's exactly behind those mysterious plates in my FC-710 and how is it different/better regarding the generic movements?

All the technical information I was able to find is here: 700 series manufacture | Frederique Constant

There it states that the in-house movement has the same number of jewels, power reserve and frequency (28.800vph, canonical for the Swiss).
The only obvious differences seem to be the size (the FC is larger, don't know if that's better, I guess not because all other specs are the same) and the analog display of the date.

Is it possible to get a technical drawing of an FC-710?
That would be great.


----------



## KazeKei

The same thing that I have been wondering. How different is the FC entry In house movement compared to a stock ETA?

They look similar in many areas and the winding feels the same. 

So is the whole inhouse movement just a gimmick?

Sent using Tapatalk


----------



## danfermat

KazeKei said:


> They look similar in many areas and the winding feels the same.
> 
> So is the whole inhouse movement just a gimmick?


This is precisely what I'm wondering.

Being this an official forum sponsored by the brand, is someone capable to answer in FC behalf?


----------



## rehault69

Waiting me too for an answer !


----------



## KazeKei

Hope to hear some more opinions!


----------



## michael8238

I have to be honest, I usually always prefer in house over ETA, but this particular in house doesn't seem to offer any real advantage over the ETA equivalent, other than just being in house. Even the resale value is pretty much just as bad as other FC models.


----------



## lkorso

Well, it depends how you see it. At first, what other in house movements on that price range offer more?

Then, the in house construction might not be an attempt to offer something ''better'' than ETA. It could also be a proof that the company has advanced watch making skills and at the same time an available option for the future, when likely the sourcing of ETA movements will become more difficult.


----------



## fortysix

I don't think, that the fc movement has anything in common with eta or sellita movements! maybe they started out with the idea to make something similar 

you have to start somewhere  imho there is not much, that you can do or reinvent, if u produce a 3 hand automatic with date function

but for example, the fc movement self winding mechanism is spring loaded, so, if the power reserve is full, the rotor doesn't spin around, like crazy, you maybe know, how noisy a 2824 or 7750 can be....

for me, the fact, that it has an in house movement, was the main reason, that I bought my alpina startimer!

you can find an eta or sellita 2824 in any watch from a price range of 400 to over 2000 usd! you know, it's like a honda and a ferrari would have the same engine 

if you are interested in the mechanical aspects of a watch, you definetely have to appreciate an in house movement!


----------



## KazeKei

fortysix said:


> I don't think, that the fc movement has anything in common with eta or sellita movements! maybe they started out with the idea to make something similar
> 
> you have to start somewhere  imho there is not much, that you can do or reinvent, if u produce a 3 hand automatic with date function
> 
> but for example, the fc movement self winding mechanism is spring loaded, so, if the power reserve is full, the rotor doesn't spin around, like crazy, you maybe know, how noisy a 2824 or 7750 can be....
> 
> for me, the fact, that it has an in house movement, was the main reason, that I bought my alpina startimer!
> 
> you can find an eta or sellita 2824 in any watch from a price range of 400 to over 2000 usd! you know, it's like a honda and a ferrari would have the same engine
> 
> if you are interested in the mechanical aspects of a watch, you definetely have to appreciate an in house movement!


I know where you coming form but you know... a lot of the seiko's movement e.g.4R35 movement is also inhouse?


----------



## fortysix

KazeKei said:


> I know where you coming form but you know... a lot of the seiko's movement e.g.4R35 movement is also inhouse?


we're talking about swiss movements here


----------



## gatormac

But frankly, there's not any advantage over any other in house movement over an ETA movement. ETA movements have been refined over the years to where they are top movements that can be regulated to be as accurate as anything out there. You call them "generic" as if they are low end movements. They are not. They are outstanding Swiss movements. That doesn't mean I don't like in house movements, for the sake of something different, and it shows that a company at least has the capability of time keeping mechanics. But the truth of the matter is that there's no real technical advantage over the in house movements in expensive watches, or even if there is, it is extremely minute, and certainly does not equal the price difference from ETA movements. So FC is no different. The fact that they make their own movements shows that they are trying to be a real watch making company. It offers customers something different for a pretty reasonable price. But asking it to show a real advantage over ETA movements is asking them to do something that the best watch making companies in the world really can't do.

Oh- and there are ETA movements in watches much, much higher in price than 2K. IWC, Breitling, etc. use ETA movements that they "rework" which is just a gimmick for them to be able to say they do more than just pop ETA movements in there. Even Rolex in the past used the VJ7750 movement which has long been the ETA7750 movement. The truth is that they can put in a stock ETA movement that has been regulated to well within COSC standards, as accurate as anything on the market, and they know it. The Omega 2500 is just an ETA movement with their coaxial escapement added, which is cool in theory but really adds nothing objectively better in time keeping. More and more companies are going away from ETA because of their restrictions and also because of the relatively resent obsession with "in house" movements. It really is just pure marketing. That's not to say I don't enjoy it as a watch enthusiast, but I keep a level head about it.


----------



## gatormac

danfermat said:


> (28.800vph, canonical for the Swiss)


Not sure exactly what you mean by that, but you do realize that many Patek movements are less than 28K bph, as is the Omega Coaxial movement?


----------

