Quote:
Originally Posted by robo_robb
Could I pick someone’s brain in this thread— do you think the 22xx movement found in the OP 34 is susceptible to the same issues as the 32xx movement? The 22xx doesn’t have the chronergy escapement.
|
Who knows
It hasn't been explored and probably because it's not as mainstream as the 32xx.
Your proposition merits some consideration, as it seems there is a minimum amount of Amplitude which is required for reliable movement performance across a reasonable expected service interval.
Movements with the Chronergy escapement start out with a deficite and can unexpectedly slide down hill rather quickly for some unknown reason.
After all, other watch manufacturers seem to be able to achieve elevated performance targets without too much difficulty, with the exception of promoting outrageous service interval periods like 10 years. At the end of the day, the escapement isn't the only part of the movement which requires servicing in a timely manner and a good nunber of 32xx movements aren't getting out of the warranry period without developing timekeeping issues
This has been discussed in the context of the Omega Co-axial with no absolute conclusions except that the possibility exists that the Co-axial escapement may have been an answer to a question that nobody in the mainstream was really asking.
It's all very interesting though and then we have the service intervals for the GS high beat equivalent which are more in keeping with reduced service interval timeframes.
But i digress, though it's all food for thought
