Marcus Hanke
[PuristSPro Moderator]
11295
Why massive gold chronograph hands are impossible ...
... sometimes I read statements like "all hands are made from solid gold", being a statement of quality and exclusivity. Normally, a watch's hands are made from steel, which is either heat-blued, lacquered or coated with another metal, mostly rhodium or gold. Solid gold hands would have 24k, but I assume the manufacturers take 18k alloys, the same that is used for gold cases. Technically, they make no sense at all, other than massively increasing the service bills: hands made from gold are so soft that they are very likely to be damaged, when they are pulled from the pionions, in order to disassemble the watch during service. Consequently, the manufacturer does not use the original hands during reassembly, but takes new ones, which of course have to be paid by the customer.
If the claim of "all hands are massive gold" is raised for a chronograph, this is even plainly wrong. A chronograph hand cannot be made from massive gold, otherwise it would be hopelessly bent after first use. To prove this, please look at this very enlightening slowmotion video, made with a high-speed camera:
www.youtube.com
The steel chronograph hand of this Zenith El Primero chronograph (I had the same one, an awsome watch!) is deccelerated so massively when reset to zero, that it is still wobbling for some time, until finally coming to a rest. A soft gold hand just does not offer that kind of elasticity.
Even the short hand of the thirty minutes subcounter can be seen swinging!
Best regards,
Marcus
This message has been edited by Marcus Hanke on 2008-12-25 11:50:00
Why massive gold chronograph hands are impossible ...
With all respect
When "solid gold" is stated, I normally expect 24k, 18k at least ...
