In house vs ETA

[chriseskew24]

There seems to be alot of hype about inhouse movements. But is it exactly that Hype????

I mean there are ETA movements that are just as acurate just as derabel and watches with ETA are generaly alot cheaper. What is the hype all about. Honestly are there real diffrences or is it just the cool factor? Pardon my ignorance

[Andad]

ETA movements are in-house movements just not for Rolex watches.

[karmatp]

IMHO, mostly just marketing. By no means is a Rolex in-house movement more accurate than your standard ETA. They can all be regulated to COSC specs., it's all about keeping all the money in-house.

[chriseskew24]

Originally Posted by karmatp

IMHO, mostly just marketing. By no means is a Rolex in-house movement more accurate than your standard ETA. They can all be regulated to COSC specs., it's all about keeping all the money in-house.

Make's sence but then why did Rolex put ETA in the tudor line? They could have kept all the money in House? Or is that just part of justifing the big price diffrence. Esentaly the couldent give the same exact watch for thousands less.

[mborkow]

Originally Posted by karmatp

IMHO, mostly just marketing.

I could not disagree more. The fact that Rolex makes all their own movements shows how accomplished they are. It shows what they are made of and how serious they take their engineering efforts.

Watch companies that don't make their own movements are like car companies that don't race...it's hard to take them seriously; they are all show and no go.

[rajurama]

Well no doubt ETA movements are very good and they are modified and fitted in so many brands like Panerai , rado , channel and various fashion lables... ETA manufactures mass scale movements also at a very low cost... Indeed in terms of quality and use of materials movments of Rolex and various other in-house movements are superior. Its a very deep subject like we cant compare a patek grand complication movement to a rolex 3135... For example even new developments in Urwek watches movements are really innovative.

[newmedia]

Originally Posted by chriseskew24

Make's sence but then why did Rolex put ETA in the tudor line? They could have kept all the money in House? Or is that just part of justifing the big price diffrence. Esentaly the couldent give the same exact watch for thousands less.

marketing of Rolex , Rolex does not want to cheapen its brand by putting its engine on lesser costly Tudor brand.

The movement of ETA sells much cheaper in wholesale market even for the higher grade ETA models compare to Rolex inhouse movement.

Just one way to built value of Tudor brand selling it next to Rolex for these consumers who are looking for Rolex quality and prestige.

[karmatp]

Originally Posted by mborkow

I could not disagree more. The fact that Rolex makes all their own movements shows how accomplished they are. It shows what they are made of and how serious they take their engineering efforts.

Watch companies that don't make their own movements are like car companies that don't race...it's hard to take them seriously; they are all show and no go.

Everything you just typed has marketing all over it.

[Tools]

This argument is always a thriller..

The fact is, many only equate the fact that an ETA and a Rolex can meet COSC as some sort of "equalizer".

... It just ain't so..

Rolex uses full balance bridges throughout the line... ETA almost none..

Rolex uses a larger balance wheel for more stability.. ETA none

Rolex uses a Breguet coil over hairspring for better isochronism.. ETA, flat springs

Rolex uses a free sprung balance... ETA only uses this in the Co-Axial Omega line.

Rolex uses 31 functional jewels and another 9 for date etc, ETA doesn't come close.

ETA movements are good movements and used in a lot of nice and high end watches... But, we do need some perspective.....

[Idle Swede]

Simply put, you get what you pay for.


Hey Larry,

How are we doing on OUR vacation?

[chriseskew24]

Originally Posted by Tools

This argument is always a thriller..

The fact is, many only equate the fact that an ETA and a Rolex can meet COSC as some sort of "equalizer".

... It just ain't so..

Rolex uses full balance bridges throughout the line... ETA almost none..

Rolex uses a larger balance wheel for more stability.. ETA none

Rolex uses a Breguet coil over hairspring for better isochronism.. ETA, flat springs

Rolex uses a free sprung balance... ETA only uses this in the Co-Axial Omega line.

Rolex uses 31 functional jewels and another 9 for date etc, ETA doesn't come close.

ETA movements are good movements and used in a lot of nice and high end watches... But, we do need some perspective.....

Thak you Larry for bringing a technical aspect to the mix. I can apreciate that.

[C. Davidson]

The following link talks about the rising popularity of in-house movements (2000):

TimeZone: TZ Classics: 1271: Carlos' Journal on Ebauche Tradition

[karmatp]

Originally Posted by Tools

This argument is always a thriller..

The fact is, many only equate the fact that an ETA and a Rolex can meet COSC as some sort of "equalizer".

... It just ain't so..

Rolex uses full balance bridges throughout the line... ETA almost none..

Rolex uses a larger balance wheel for more stability.. ETA none

Rolex uses a Breguet coil over hairspring for better isochronism.. ETA, flat springs

Rolex uses a free sprung balance... ETA only uses this in the Co-Axial Omega line.

Rolex uses 31 functional jewels and another 9 for date etc, ETA doesn't come close.

ETA movements are good movements and used in a lot of nice and high end watches... But, we do need some perspective.....

Very nice Larry. I don't think anyone would ever think that a ETA is technically in line with Rolex, but the end result, which is timekeeping is not compromised surprisingly.

To become a official manufacture, you must produce a in-house movement, lots of brands just want that title and status.

[padi56]

Originally Posted by chriseskew24

There seems to be alot of hype about inhouse movements. But is it exactly that Hype????

I mean there are ETA movements that are just as acurate just as derabel and watches with ETA are generaly alot cheaper. What is the hype all about. Honestly are there real diffrences or is it just the cool factor? Pardon my ignorance

A lot of people think the ETA is a inferior movement which it is not,and there 5 grades to many of the ETA line up and all 100% in-house built.The top grade chronometer grade movement IMO can match any of the mass produced high end Swiss brands in terms of accuracy and longevity.And in proportion to the amount of Rolex movements tested at the Swiss COSC the ETA 2892/3 and Valjoux 7750 have the highest first time pass rate.And lets not forget there was a little bit of ETA in all Rolex watches for decades with the escapement hairsprings.Take the Ulysse Nardin marine chronometers they have always been highly regarded, but it is a little known fact that for years, they were fitted with a hi-beat version of (36000 BPH) version of the ETA 2824-2, UN calibre NB11QU.


Sometime I hear comments like "such an expensive watch and only an ETA movement inside ". Words like these give the impression that an ETA movement is of lower quality.It should be the other way around, people should say "Well, it has a excellent ETA movement inside this watch, but the price of this watch is astonishingly high".And they still make and sell around five million plus movements a year.Lets not forget that ETA is the largest manufacture in Switzerland, because they make everything, in-house only.I have a special regard for the Unitas 6497/8 this movement has not basically changed now for over 50 years,and is capable of COSC standards,and very forgiving in its servicing or lack of.A truly great workhouse movement that has powered many high end watches.

This is short list of outstanding movements that should all easily achieve a daily consistency of five seconds or better on the wrist.ETA 2892-A2, ETA 2824/2T, ETA 7750,Unitas6497/8,Omega 2500, JLC 889/2 , JLC 960, all of the current Rolex calibers, Longines 990 (Lemania 8815), PP 215, PP 240, Zenith 400,Zenith 670, GP 3100 plus there are many more.

[chriseskew24]

Thanks Padi56 a new light on it.

[Goodwatch]

In my view the manufacture is part of a complete watch packet. Rolex started out as a company that didn't make watches, they just assembled them from various outsourced parts. Slowly but gradually they started to produce everything themselves or, in case of the bracelet manufacturer, bought the supplying company.

The Zenith El Primero movement used in the Daytona was cast out several years ago and replaced by an in-house movement, thus closing the circle.

I think it's too easy to dismiss the likes of ETA or any of the other remaining 'ebauche' manufacturers to produce movements that cannot hold a candle to what e.g. Rolex make. They are equally mass produced, only the attention to detail and materials used in Rolex movements is of a different order.

The ETA movements used in some of the higher end brands are almost skeletons, sometimes 80% of the movement is replaced by own or heavily reworked parts.

The perception by many is that it is the pinnacle of watch-making if a company is able to produce everything in-house. Just the logistics of it all are immense. It is much, much easier to order 20,000 movements with certain specifications from ETA (and leave everything to them, including quality control) than to design and produce the movement yourself.

And there's some logic in it as well: leave the specialism to a specialist! There's no PC manufacturer that makes its own hard discs. Why? Too complicated to do it alongside all the rest. But this was a wrong example as PC manufacturers (the brand one's) don't make but only design.

But on this subject, at least to me, ignorance is bliss and knowledge is poison. Up to the purchase of a Cartier Santos Dumont Carré in 1980 I was happily truckin' along, unaware of what was inside my watch(es). Until that dark day that I opened Pandora's box and found out that a movement is more than a collection of wheels, cogs and springs.... Woe me....

[vukotab]

My experience with ETA movements is fantastic!
Dad`s Breitling Superocean (ETA 2824-2) runs within COSC standards, it runs approx +2,3 seconds per day, which is amazing. Much, much better than once mine EXP II.
And I had few 7750 powered watches, all very reliable and accurate.
My beloved Tudor Prince Date(2824-2, but without COSC certificate) is constantly losing 5 seconds per day, which is also good result.
I don`t think that ETA`s are inferior movements compared to Rolex` in house.
I mean, IWC, Breitling, Omega...are using them. Even Rolex, with Tudor brand...

[daveathall]

At one stage I had 3 different watches with the ETA 2824/2 beating inside them, Breitling, Stowa and Sinn, a 4th watch also had an ETA movement (Tutima). All highly respected watch manufacturers, I took it as a sign of quality and reliability that these movements were in these watches, all were stunning time keepers all worked and kept on working flawlessly.

[haakon59]

The reason you hear about in-house movements amongst collectors is not because they are technologically superior, but because they are exclusive to that particular brand and therefore more collectible and worth more trading on the secondary market because there are fewer of them. Collectors put a premium on exclusivity, which has nothing to do with keeping accurate time.

There are many fine movements being manufactured today by companies like: Rolex, ETA, Jaeger LeCoultre, Vacheron Constantin, Zenith, Girard Perregaux, Chopard, etc. They are all COSC capable and reliable. ETA is now owned by Swatch, which makes brands like Omega, etc.

[RW16610]

Originally Posted by padi56

A lot of people think the ETA is a inferior movement which it is not,and there 5 grades to many of the ETA line up and all 100% in-house built.The top grade chronometer grade movement IMO can match any of the mass produced high end Swiss brands in terms of accuracy and longevity.And in proportion to the amount of Rolex movements tested at the Swiss COSC the ETA 2892/3 and Valjoux 7750 have the highest first time pass rate.And lets not forget there was a little bit of ETA in all Rolex watches for decades with the escapement hairsprings.Take the Ulysse Nardin marine chronometers they have always been highly regarded, but it is a little known fact that for years, they were fitted with a hi-beat version of (36000 BPH) version of the ETA 2824-2, UN calibre NB11QU.


Sometime I hear comments like "such an expensive watch and only an ETA movement inside ". Words like these give the impression that an ETA movement is of lower quality.It should be the other way around, people should say "Well, it has a excellent ETA movement inside this watch, but the price of this watch is astonishingly high".And they still make and sell around five million plus movements a year.Lets not forget that ETA is the largest manufacture in Switzerland, because they make everything, in-house only.I have a special regard for the Unitas 6497/8 this movement has not basically changed now for over 50 years,and is capable of COSC standards,and very forgiving in its servicing or lack of.A truly great workhouse movement that has powered many high end watches.

This is short list of outstanding movements that should all easily achieve a daily consistency of five seconds or better on the wrist.ETA 2892-A2, ETA 2824/2T, ETA 7750,Unitas6497/8,Omega 2500, JLC 889/2 , JLC 960, all of the current Rolex calibers, Longines 990 (Lemania 8815), PP 215, PP 240, Zenith 400,Zenith 670, GP 3100 plus there are many more.

Very well put, Padi 1000% agree with your above post

[shandy]

I love my ETA movements all are a match any day for accuracy and reliability to anything out there.

I particularly love my thermocompensated quartz movement that is in my Constellation, with no special treatment mine is accurate to 5 seconds a year, I might have it adjusted come service time to see if I can improve on that

[SDDS]

thanx for this great info

[TheVTCGuy]

This is getting in to a heated discussion! Let me say, I have nothing against ETA movements and obviously, they are incredible pieces of workmenship. And, I won't disagree that marketing has something to do with it, Rolex saying their movements are "In House" obviously has marketing appeal, BUT... Larry pointed out some technical advantages a Rolex in house has, and honestly, one of the reasons I chose my Daytona to be an 116520 instead of a 16520 was because of the new In House movement. I actually like the dial layout of the Zenith better; specifically, the sweep-seconds hand at the 9:00 instead of the 6:00 (Do they call that the "Hunter" style Larry? ) What I liked about the In-House was that Rolex has complete authority to make whatever changes to the movement they desire. They have complete control over technical improvements, testing different components, oils, designs, everything; not so if they are buying an ETA movement. To me, that meant that the product can be tweeked to a finer level of quaility, so I believe I'm getting just a slightly better movement with an In House.

Just my

[alcook]

Originally Posted by mborkow

Watch companies that don't make their own movements are like car companies that don't race...it's hard to take them seriously; they are all show and no go.

There's a lot to be said about this argument. Marketing it may be, but it shows confidence in the brand and the ability and wish to pursue excellence in their field.

Not all car manufacturers need to race, but those selling their brand on performance have to, or they do risk not being taken seriously as mborkow states. It may make great financial sense, but manufacturers sharing engines, chassis and drive trains etc across marques do dilute the brand to those seeking to 'buy into' or relate to a specific heritage (be it racing or hand built luxury)

I see Rolex wishing to push their brand to new levels. Making their own movements will allow them the freedom and ability to improve the benchmark they've worked hard to achieve and thus maintain their status level within the industry.

[kzm40]

Its a standard buisness expansion model.. Either expand horizontally, or vertically, horizontally would involve Rolex buying other watch manufacturers, vertically could be either forwards.. buying up the retailers, or backwards, buying everyone in your supply chain, and bringing eveything in-house. ( this also removes any outside dependancies )
I guess this is what Rolex decided to do a long time ago, and the Zenith Daytona was the last bought it (allbeit heavily modified movement)..

[greekbum]

I was wearing my gold president today and was buying a cigar at the liquor store to smoke on the beach and an old man noticed my watch.He said is that a Real Rolex I said yes He said I bought this watch at wallmart 3 years ago for $10.99 and it keeps perfect time does yours keep perfect time.I said give or take a few seconds a week yes.He said I knew them Rolex's were not that good cause I dont see many people wearing them anymore.I laughed so hard and he didnt flinch.As for the ETA in house thing my theory its a matter of preference as you can see from the old man even a $10.00 watch can tell time so......................But for me I cant see spending more than $500-$900 on a ETA based watch for some reason I feel I am getting shafted????I could never justify buying a Panerai cause of this.You can build an almost identical watch head using Grade A parts and Swiss ETA 6497 Movement for under $400.00 maybe thats why the homage Marina Militaire market is growing I dont know.

[chriseskew24]

Wow this is getting some good discusion..

[DaveInLA]

For me, it's the "coolness" factor. A decent ETA movement can be regulated to be just as good as a Rolex movement (oftentimes more accurate). But because Rolex makes their own movements, I see Rolex as watchmakers. I see companies that just use generic ETA movements as case and bracelet makers.