You Have Made A Tourbillion Mistake
March 23rd, 2007
Sport watches do not need to prove themselves–as is the case–with the watchmaking feat of the Bell & Ross Tourbillon. As I mentioned on the comments of Wristwatchreview.com, this is the “Jump the Shark” move of the sport watch industry. Your customer-base buys black, PVD, big, square watches! Why would you put a high complication in that piece? Do you put a Hermes saddle on a Donkey, of course not, and you don’t need a tourbillion for a sport model watch–it serves no function. CTWG
Entry Filed under: Just In, Watches, Mechanical, News
10 Comments Add your own
1. Mont Blanc Pens » B&hellip | April 11th, 2007 at 1:27 pm
[…] Watch bloggers have been all abuzz about the Bell & Ross BR01 Instrument Tourbillon. Bell & Ross, a company which is famed for big square watches that take their inspiration from a plane’s clock has joined the rest of the watchmaking world in creating a watch with multiple complications including a tourbillon. The new watch includes a tourbillon, precision indicator, regulator and a power reserve indicator. It has carbon fiber bridges and a black carbon finish. The Trust Index (which had earlier bloggers thinking it might be a thrust indicator) shows the accuracy of the movement in accordance with the tension on the barrels. The watch as white photo-luminescent coating on the hands, numbers and index in contrast with the black dial. The regulator features an hour counter and a large minute hand. A removable caseback reveals the movement through a sapphire crystal. The watch is sold with two straps in rubber and black alligator. Not everyone is a fan of this watch, Chad the Watch Guy likens a tourbillon in a Bell & Ross to putting an Hermes saddle on a donkey. […]
2. Dmitry Paradis | April 11th, 2007 at 3:01 pm
Sports watches may not need to prove themselves, but B&R is offering variety of its popular line. I, for one, like this. You have to consider the fact that the Instrument is their flagship model and has totally reinvented the brand. It’s only natural to have a chronograph, tourbillon, diamond pavé versions, even if it is for novelty sake. Minute repeater may be pushing it though.
My critique is with this funny “Trust” indicator. I’m sorry, but if you call a watch “Instrument”, you can’t have a dial with such a tangeable soft term as “trust”. Precision - maybe, but again, expect to define it (like +/- seconds variance per 100hr or something). It’s been speculated on other blogs that it’s an indicator of mainspring torque (isn’t that the power indicator itself?), do you have any insight on this “Trust” business?
Cheers
3. Ronald Kornish | April 16th, 2007 at 9:33 am
With your logic, what is the difference between a tourbillion in a so-called sport watch like the Instrument watch and a Rolex sport watch in platinum with a pave dial? The latter is completely superfluous, while the former actually has a purpose. Why do you limit the Instrument as a sport watch? The real question is, how would you use an Hermes saddle?
4. Alex Doak | April 17th, 2007 at 10:24 am
you dont’ need a tourbillon for ANY wristwatch, period…. but i don’t hear you complaining about Breguet or G-P tourbillon watches?!
i handled the B&R watch at Basel last week, and it’s AWESOME. Period.
:-p
A
5. Chad | April 20th, 2007 at 11:20 pm
Ronald,
I love Rolex, still I would not pick a timepiece with lots of gingerbread on it for myself, just not my style. Is there a market for the Bell & Ross toubillion, I hope so for their sake, my point is this, when the watch was introduced it had all the makings of the next Breitling/Pilot favorite. I guess pilots could fly upside down and really test that toubillion, maybe that is the real purpose of the mechanism? Keep fighting gravity! CTWG
6. OLIVIER | December 15th, 2007 at 3:41 am
MESSAGE TO CTWG:
STICK WITH YOUR ROLEX BECAUSE ONLY THE FORWARD THINKING WILL GRASP THE BELL ROSS TIMEPIECES. DEFINTELY DESIGNED FOR THOSE WITH A GREATER VISION THAN THE MUNDANE…ESCPECIALLY THE B&R TOURBILLON
7. Chad | December 15th, 2007 at 11:09 am
Wow,
It never fails someone is just mad at the world and their surroundings. Sport watch tourbillions are not forward thinking, they are just not practical for wear, think about it. Calm yourself and think again grasshopper. CTWG
8. OLIVIER | December 15th, 2007 at 5:36 pm
YES WOW,
Thank you for clarifying my point that its is PRECISELY what you have stated which makes the BR Tourbillon unique.
The word “practical” is a subjective term. So please take a moment of your time to re-think that perhaps It is the collaboration of innovative design, precision and prestige which makes this watch worth it. I highly doubt that one would acquire this piece simply becuase they think that: “hey that’s a practical watch”…
Food for thought???
9. OLIVIER | December 15th, 2007 at 5:40 pm
Oh sorry forgot to mention, where HERMES originated and is used, they do not have donkeys in their stables…
10. Chad | December 16th, 2007 at 1:24 pm
Practical is the definition of a sport watch, it can be worn outside of the suit and tie element that most high end watches find themselves. A tourbillion is not going to hold up to a bad drop, let alone sporting activities. The design was original and then they carved out the pilot instrument and slapped one of the most non-functional balances ever made. Tourbillion is fun, but not functional, theory in motion. It works, just not well, the anti-gravity aspect is smoke, mirror, smoke…….
Leave a Comment
Some HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>
Trackback this post | Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed