Return to Index  

Personally I prefer the GF interpretation.Or Opus 6. Here's why..

September 1 2006 at 11:35 PM

bernardcheong  (Login bernardcheong)
AP Discussion Group

Response to Why not 45 degree?


From my own small collection of tourbillons, of which soon I intend to add a GF. I enjoy the aesthetic most of all.

The balance must be large enough, and visible enough.

It must oscillate in such a way that it dances across the stage set by the cage and aperture made for the visual display of the tourbillon at work.

Now, technically, there will be both purely mathematical arguments for a nd against either version. On the surface, it would seem a true multi axis is superior, but deeper than that, the variations in torque and transmission will be greater...whatever.

Now, the crunch...I dare say, as a long time owner of various forms of these devices, I would go for visual aesthetic FIRST. Therefore...a fine finish to the ENTIRE tourbillon assembly is paramount and a very forward presentation of the tourbillon rotation is VERY pleasing and soothing to the senses.

That's what I pay for.

Which is able to tell time better??? Does it really matter at the level of this machine? It may to some, and there's nothing wrong about that.

This message has been edited by bernardcheong on Sep 1, 2006 11:35 PM

 Respond to this message   
 Copyright © 1999-2018 Network54. All rights reserved.   Terms of Use   Privacy Statement Home Page