Likes Likes:  3
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 11

Thread: why don't more chronos use the 2894-2?

  1. #1
    rolex pic as answer guy mikeylacroix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Location
    KL, Malaysia
    Posts
    1,291

    why don't more chronos use the 2894-2?

    granted i haven't googled the pros and cons of the 2894-2 vs the 7750
    but look at how balanced the dial is!
    http://www.ablogtowatch.com/rado-hyp...s-court-watch/



  2. Likes JAGtime, Henry Krinkle liked this post
  3. #2
    There's a great smaller-sized classic-looking Breitling that uses it. Wonder if I can remember which one....

  4. #3
    lost in translation birdynamnam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Location
    france
    Posts
    1,697
    ETA 2894 needs a module (most of the time Dubois-Depraz)
    A modular chrono is not really easy to regulate causing sometimes terrible headaches to watchmakers...

    The Valjoux is not really sexy ,fat, but known as "workhorse"

    Maybe one hypothesis
    "chirp, chirp"

  5. #4
    Quote Originally Posted by Der Amf View Post
    There's a great smaller-sized classic-looking Breitling that uses it. Wonder if I can remember which one....
    cal 41 montbrillant !
    Last edited by shameless; May 12, 2015 at 03:09 PM.

  6. #5
    Transocean 38. Calibre 41 is based on 2892.


  7. #6
    Member Perseus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Location
    Denver, CO
    Posts
    1,714
    Some people heard from someone who heard from someone online that piggy back chronos are not as good as integrated chronos. Everyone has used the ETA piggy back including AP, but internet myths are strong.

    Watch makers can service the piggy back movement but some just send them back to the manufacturer and install a new movement. The one in my Monaco has never had any issues in the three years I've owned it.


  8. #7
    Super Member Raza's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Location
    Philadelphia
    Posts
    20,000
    Blog Entries
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by Perseus View Post
    Some people heard from someone who heard from someone online that piggy back chronos are not as good as integrated chronos. Everyone has used the ETA piggy back including AP, but internet myths are strong.

    Watch makers can service the piggy back movement but some just send them back to the manufacturer and install a new movement. The one in my Monaco has never had any issues in the three years I've owned it.
    In my experience, they cost more to service.

    Monaco service cost me $700.
    7750 service was $400.

  9. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by birdynamnam View Post
    ETA 2894 needs a module (most of the time Dubois-Depraz)
    A modular chrono is not really easy to regulate causing sometimes terrible headaches to watchmakers...

    The Valjoux is not really sexy ,fat, but known as "workhorse"

    Maybe one hypothesis
    Actually, the 2894 includes the chronograph module, which is made by ETA (who no longer uses Dubois-Depraz or Technotime modules). The base movement is a 2892.

    2894 movements are perfectly decent and have been installed in some high-grade watches. There's nothing wrong with a module, except that many watchmakers won't work on them. So, the module is removed, the movement is serviced, and the module reinstalled. For a chronograph, this is not a big issue, given that the chronograph complication is used only intermittently anyway. It does reduce the cost of servicing compared to an integrated chronograph, but if there is a part that needs to be replaced in the module, often the whole module will be replaced. So, cheaper for a service that doesn't require parts for the chronograph function, but more expensive if it does.

    Lots of high-end watches have used modular chronograph designs, so there is little conclusion that can be drawn with respect to the prestige of the movement. But for watches with a display back, a modular chronograph isn't nearly as fun to look at--the actuating levers and whatnot are on the dial-side of the movement were one can't see them. But for all that, some movements cover up the fun stuff anyway (the JLC 751 hides much of the chronograph mechanism behind the winding bridge, for example, with just a display hole to look at the column wheel).

    For the life of me, I can't figure why a modular chronograph would be any more difficult to regulate than an integrated chronograph, noting that COSC wouldn't be running the chronograph complication during testing in any case. Depending on the module, running the chronograph might have a bigger effect on rate than with an integrated chronograph, but I suspect that execution has a bigger effect than type.

    I have one watch with a 2894, and I find the pusher feel is rather notchy compared to my better integrated chronographs (including Zeniths and Ebels), but no more notchy than a 7750. The 2894 requires more commitment when pushing the button to start the chronograph.

    Is a 2894 more or less of a workhorse than a 7750? That's a tough call. My experience is that both are quite durable.

    But I have to say that I'm not fond of the running-seconds subdial being adjacent to the stem. I'm one who understands about running seconds hands being attached to the fourth wheel, and the fourth wheel could never be adjacent to the stem. Most chronographs use the Lepine arrangement, putting the fourth wheel opposite the stem.

    Rick "wondering if people will complain that the Rado minutes totalizer is obscured by subdial overlap, the way they complain about similar overlaps on some Zenith dials" Denney
    More than 500 characters worth of watches.

  10. Likes Seriously liked this post
  11. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by Raza View Post
    In my experience, they cost more to service.

    Monaco service cost me $700.
    7750 service was $400.
    Were both TAG-Heuers? Did both go through the same service process?

    I ask because it's the opposite of what I've heard from several watchmakers. The Monaco is an upper-line watch from Heuer, and might get a higher service price just because of that. I wonder what the service prices are in comparing a modular Monaco with a caliber 36 Monaco?

    Rick "apples and apples" Denney
    More than 500 characters worth of watches.

  12. #10
    Looking up the 2894 it seems it's using a module but an in-house one rather than an out-house one but both appear to have the same service requirement, replacement. I think the lower thickness is a good thing but I have found the 7750 to be so rugged and reliable that I would be careful looking at any other auto-chrono movement.

    there was a seamaster chrono that used a modular movement, best looking dive chrono I ever saw but never tried one (I have an 18 year old SMP chrono, 7750 based movement that has never been serviced and it still functions perfectly) the desire to try one has not outpaced the cost of buying one, I did try out the TAG Aquagraph, a very good dive chrono (for me a dive watch must be able to dive and use all of its functions underwater) but the offset crown made wearing it full time a bother, they should have put the crown at least at 9 or reversed the whole thing.

    the 2892 is one of the best wrist watch movements of all time so anything with that at the heart is bound to be good.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
About Us
We are an independent and wide-ranging forum for watch enthusiasts. From mainspring to microchip, from Europe to Asia, from micro-brand to boutique - we cover it all. Novice or expert, we want you to feel at home. Whether it's asking a simple question or contributing to the fund of horological knowledge, it's all the same hobby. Or, if you like, you can just show us a picture of your new watch. We'll provide the welcoming and courteous environment, the rest is up to you!
Join us