Contrarian's view: GMTs-no way, but retrogrades, yes

I know, everyone here likes GMTs. I have no problem with 24 hour dials (even if they clutter a watch dial), but I consider GMTs as close to useless. That is, unless you're Rave and buzz around the continents weekly.

There's nothing "wrong" with GMTs, but I don't use them that much, and I suspect 98% of others don't as well. I fly several times each month and usually put on more than 50,000 miles each year (I know, that's not close to Rave). But I really need 2 timezones on a watch a few times a year --when I travel more than 3 timezones. Other than that, plus or minus one or two hours is pretty easy.

When I'm in California and want to figure out the time in Chicago, i can easily add 2 hours. It's only an issue when I'm in Europe or Asia --which happens a few times a year, at best -- that I need to "think". And even now --when I sit at my office and need to call or e-mail Switzerland, it's not difficult to add 7 hours. No GMT needed, thank you.

So, to me, a GMT function is useless 98% of the time. And also it is, to me, horologically uninteresting. IWC's GMT complication is better than most, but a second hour hand works on most watches (like Rolex's GMT) and that requires almost no watchmaking finesse. And setting some GMT watches, like the IWC UTC, can be a problem for some.

On the other hand --a retrograde function, which seldom is discussed here-- is much more interesting to me. It's fun to watch, daily if you wish, and it's horologically much more interesting than another hour hand. I would prefer one, especially for seconds or minutes, every time I could choose.

Your thoughts? I'm ready for brickbats --I know GMTs are sacred cows here, but I think they're superfluous 98% of the time and a lot less watchmaking than other complications. But, on the other hand, I think a retrograde is something overlooked by IWC --and something modestly special.

Regards,
Michael

Contrarian's view: GMTs-no way, but retrogrades, yes

Michael,

Forgive my ignorance, by what is a 'retrograde' function?

--Sancerre

more information*

on the retrograde function "jumping back" to 12 o'clock? would be welcomed.

I like the UTC function and since it is an IWC innovation and brings pride to Kurt Klaus in discussion - thats good enough for me ... until I learn more about the Retrograde function in this context.

Thanks, Andrew

PS: A quick google search didnt give me enough details.

I sense a new Grand Complication is ...

... on the drawing board but it lacks a GMT function. I am rushed off my feet today (just put out corporate results) but if I had time I would post a spreadsheet with complications from second hand, date wheel through to pressure gauge with repeater, moonphase and perpetual calendar along the way. I would then rate each complication on a 1 to 5 basis with useful or nice to have. I might throw up some useful thoughts.

Must dash ...

GMT

sorry, but I disagreed completely with your thougts. I find that a GMT is a good help while travelling, and , even if everybody is able to calculate + or - some hours, to watch immediately the real time where you are , is very practical.
I only regret iwc doesn't produce yet a gmt + alarm ( I know they did many years ago, but it was a quartz mov...) that is the perfect traveller watch. ( I am obliged to wear a GP to get these function)
On the other side I find the retrograde very nice to watch but completely useless.
Just my thoughts

To adapt the regulator to accommodate ...

a retrograde complication would by a small step for a watchmaker but a great leap for IWC. I would probably be a buyer.

Has daylight saving changed how useful GMT is?

Things were fine when time zones were fixed but daylight saving has changed the equation. Sometimes I'm 10 hours different then 11 hours and the offset is different for other cities, with some choosing to adopt daylight saving and others not. And some adopt it weeks apart.

The days of the bezel showing the different cities (as seen on the IWC Porsche Design but I think the Tissot Navigator was the first by decades) as a fixed offset are no longer relevant with daylight saving.

Cheers from the cellar

Usefulness versus marketing

About the GMT, I agree it is not very useful. It is about as useful as a chronograph, which is left untouched by most people most of the time. But it may sell nonetheless, being a nice feature.

Of the non-standard features the most useful to me is the power reserve indicator, and this is fun too.

The retrogates: well, personally I don't like them that much. Why go to all the trouble to let a hand jump back when it also can just go on? It may be nice to look at, but it is too much of a gadget to me. It seems to be fragile too when compared to the normal function. It helps designwise when the dial is cluttered with all kinds of other functions and there is not enough space, which leads to an aspect I find important and beautiful: a clean looking dial.

Thank you for these subjects, they give the opportunity to discuss them, they help to make up your mind about them.

Kind regards,
Paul, wearing red gold VC Portuguese, I can't get bored by it

retrogrades are fun...

and if you are looking for more fun and something more interesting in a watch then the addition would be encouraged. Although I may use a chronograph more than others (mostly for cooking), a flyback function is not necessary yet I find it inetersting enough that it did factor into my latest purchase. I am not buying watches purely based on functionality and I would love to see an IWC piece with a retrograde function or two.

Maybe, maybe not; but there was no hint here...

...about any new model, or lack thereof.

Sorry!

Michael

marketing versus craft and horology

I'm not sure the issues have been framed appropriately. To my thinking, not all fine watchmaking is about marketing unless it is useful.

At the low-end of the scale, I recall someone who once posted "any watch that costs more than about $28 is sold for its jewelry value". He was right, in a sense, because if telling time is the criterion then many cheap black plastic watches do that. The incremental difference is really for craft --and not marketing.

At the mid-range scale, the reason a person buys a Vacheron or a Patek or a Lange watch (or an IWC for that matter) rather than, say, an Oris or a Longines, which are in lower price brackets, is craft. All are very good watches, and tell time well. The difference is not marketing, but craft.

At the high-end, if one is lucky enough to own a tourbillon they likewise should be appreciating it for its craft --not its utility Sure, it was invented in an earlier era to deal with gravity, but that is not meaningful mor significant today. It is craft for craft's sake. When I show my tourbillon to a non-watch person, few understand what it really is, nor why it might be so costly,

And, with respect, craft in watchmaking, and fine horology generally, are not marketing. Craft is a true value in itself, even if it doesn't hold the same value to you. The same is true for retrogrades --they represent horology, and they have value as craft.

Regards,
Michael
P.S. I'm trying to respond to what you wrote, but I would prefer that we not "hijack" this string. If you have further comments here, kindly either write me or, if appropriate, start a new string. Thanks.

here's a simple retrograde

...that is seconds-only. Every minute, you see the seconds hand arc instantanly back to zero. This one is made by Paul Gerber, an AHCI artisan watchmaker from Zurich.

Vacheron has a watch with a dual day/date retrograde functions, which of course move back much less frequently (and thereby minimize wear); you can find that easily via Google. There are many others, too --especiallly by Maurice Lacroix, Perrelet, and also for inexpensive quartz watches.

Retrogrades, in and of themselves, are not high horology. It is basically a hand on a spring with a stop mechanism. Adapting the concept to a minute or seconds hand can be somewhat more so, because of the additional wear due to the more frequent "jumping".

But, also, it can make for an interesting dial and is a horological function, with a historical foundation, that to my knowledge hasn't been adapted by IWC. I like the idea, perhaps as much as a Regulateur.

Regards,
Michael
P.S. Of course, I meant no disrepect to Kurt Klaus about his UTC function. It's just not as much for me.

Craftmanship that makes sense

We all love IWC for its craftmanship: I think it is the very basis of our love. Certainly the collectors of older, vintage watches value this, like the love for the 85xx movement.

I do not think that IWC is about craftmanship for craftmanship alone. I wouldn't be surprised if that is the reason retrogade is not part of their feature list, at least until now. If such a watch would appear, good for IWC and their craftmanship, I hope they can sell enough of them. In this respect marketing is an important issue, it ensures in the long run that everybody can enjoy the craftmanship that is presented. As stated above, quite likely such a watch would not be there for me, but who knows, if it looks very nice I could be persuaded.

Kind regards,
Paul, wearing well crafted red gold VC Portuguese, and hoping this post is sufficiently on topic

Equation

retrograde is fun ergo is useless ergo is not IWC.

Simplification for what I mean when I think about IWC.

IWC products are Probus Scafusia, paraphrasing not translating, good things coming from Schaffausen (good sense stuff).

A retrograde function is justifiable in a high complicated watch with small room for all the functions the dial has to host, like Paul said and I don't even think it takes that huge ability to realize it.

A gmt function is useful to me for the same reason the cellar said.

And then, suppose I am very, very poor in maths and also not that familiar with time zones, which is by the way damned true, I better find myself a gmt watch rather than go back to school to learn something by that ugly, ugly mathematic teacher I had!

Regards,

roberto

and I thought you mean Equation of Time!

...which I always thought as too complicated!

But I don't think either the Paul Gerber or Vacheron day/date retrogrades are too complicated, and I think Gerber's is actually quite simple in design and really a nice look. But the concept --a hand that can withstand springback back every minute-- does have some technical merit.

Regards,
Michael

Suggested spreadsheet/questionnaire

Complication ....................Useful................................Nice to have
......................................5 essential/1 pointless.......5 very/ 1no thanks
Date
Large digital date
Chrono
Doppel/Rattrapante
GMT
7 day movement
Power reserve indicator
UTC
Moonphase
Annual calendar
Perpetual calendar
Digital calendar
Pressure guage
Compass
Tourbillon
Minute repeater
Alarm

GMTs are not just for travellers...

I need GMTs, as I need to know at a glance if my suppliers/clients located in around the globe are open or not (office hours).

Honestly, my next watch might be a world timer, perhaps a GP wwtc FTC.

I would love to see more GMT/Worldtimer products from IWC.

I do like some utility...

to the features on my watch dial and I think the UTC provides a useful function for some folk. However, your illustration about the craftmanship and enjoyment of your tourbillon is good case in point about utitily not being the only factor for a complication...and in that context, I think the retrograde would be an interesting dial variation that some would enjoy...though probably not me.

Best regards,
Jim