Since 1887 is discontinued, what should I do if I have to repair or service my watch?

Jim Dollares

Ah yes thank you. So like I thought it is false to say stuff like "entirely made by Tag"

imagwai

Hmm, well I'm not sure I actually did say that, at least I didn't mean it to come across like that - could probably have worded it better. What I meant was it fully qualifies as an "in house" movement. All the assembly is done by TAG themselves in Switzerland, and yes, there are a handful of specialist parts that are bought in (which is what most watch manufacturers who make "in house" movements do as well!). I guess I was trying to also make the point that Seiko have nothing to do with the manufacture of this movement!

Jim Dollares

Yes I understood what you meant but another post in this thread also stated "It is still 100% done / made in switzerland and improved by TAG Heuer." which made me wonder what was true.

Now we know that in-house in this case means 84% of the parts made in Switzerland and some of them made by Tag 😀

The fact that most Swiss watch manufacturers have the same setup and market it as "in-house" doesnt make it less of a bluff though 🙄

imagwai

I'm not sure what difference it makes really. Tag are still assembling all those components themselves and applying their own quality control, and if another company can specialize in, say hairsprings, and produce those to a higher quality, then why would Tag try and produce their own just for the sake of saying they can? Likewise, does the fact they don't mine the steel out of the ground in Switzerland themselves too mean it's less "in-house"?

Jim Dollares

The problem is not the actual manufacturing, the problem to me is how it is marketed as something premium and more expensive comboned with the lack of transparency in this area. I think they should establish law or praxis or something similar to the "a watch can only be called swiss made if..." so buyers would know that if a movement is "in-house" it means that it meets certain criteria.

Aquagraph

I thought there was some rule about what can be called 'Swiss Made', but it's (deliberately) pretty vague.... something about 60% of the 'value' of the watch (whatever the hell that means...)

Jim Dollares

Yes yes there is, on the move I did not remember the specifics of that law so just quoted it as I remember to give an example of how I think the "in-house" should be treated in the same way

Aquagraph

I think the whole 'in-house' thing is totally ridiculous really... isn't Patek the only company that can actually make everything? If I remember correctly Rolex make their own hairspring but not their own hands.... could be wrong about that mind you.

Aquagraph

I think the whole 'in-house' thing is totally ridiculous really... isn't Patek the only company that can actually make everything? If I remember correctly Rolex make their own hairspring but not their own hands.... could be wrong about that mind you.

imagwai

Someone needs to explain why having an in house movement makes it a better watch. I can't. But then for some reason I'd also much prefer to have a Heuer 02 in my watch than a top-grade ETA. What's that all about? 😀

imagwai

Yes, the Heuer 01 is essentially the 1887 rebadged.

And whilst you may already understand this, I still feel at pains to point out that the 1887 is fully manufactured in-house by Tag Heuer. Nothing is provided or manufactured by Seiko. The movement was simply an adaptation of a Seiko patent that TH acquired.

imagwai

Someone needs to explain why having an in house movement makes it a better watch. I can't. But then for some reason I'd also much prefer to have a Heuer 02 in my watch than a top-grade ETA. What's that all about? 😀

Jim Dollares

One aspect that is pro "in-house" for me is that the movements often have better power reserve between 70-100h. In today's world the 38h of the Sellita feels a bit low

Mr_Orange

That feature is very recent. There are plenty of in-house movements that have the paltry 38 hours of reserve. Longer power reserves tend to be associated with manual winds too.

Gambba

The whole in-house thing for me has always been to show if you’re an actual watch manufacturer or simply a fashion watch manufacturer. If all you do is buy in movements, can you say you make watches, as the core of it you had nothing to do with.

I don’t see it as a bluff, but does show that a brand has a genuine understanding of time pieces and not just can churn out pretty jewellery. TH were seen as one such “fashion” brand back in the 90’s due to the lack of actual TH movements.

Aquagraph

So before 2004 Patek's chronographs were fashion watches?