Tip of the Week: How good were those HF Chronometers made by GP in the 60s? Check it out......

[KokChoon]

Hi folks,

We have been discussing something about the history of Girard-Perregaux in the past few weeks and we have also mentioned the all-important milestone of the modern history of Girard-Perregaux, the Observatory Centenary Prize. So, do you know how good were those High Frequency (HF) Chronometers made by Girard-Perregaux in the 60s? check this out.....

So, do any of you have one of these wonderful time pieces with you? If you do, please share with us your experience and photos if possible.


Cheers
KokChoon

[sensas]

Not this watch, but I finded 4 pocketwatches in this case

No. 80545 from 1875 "Awarded a Bulletin de Première Classe at the Observatory of Neuchâtel"
No. 80648 from 1876 "Awarded a Bulletin de Première Classe at the Observatory of Neuchâtel"
No. 26996/111543 from 1895 "Awarded a Bulletin de Première Classe at the Observatoire Cantonal of Neuchâtel"
No. 289447 from 1907 "First prize winner at the 1907 Observatory of Neuchâtel Timing Contest"

[KokChoon]

Wow Milán,

Do you have photos of all these? Did you collect all these pocket watches, or examples you have come across? It would be nice to see some photos of these pocket watches and see how they are working today


Cheers
KokChoon

[sensas]

I didn't have this type pocketwatches, a "little" expensive items most of them with the legendary 3 gold bridges movements ! I will try sahe pictures later !

[sensas]

Hi KC,
what about Observaroty Chronometer ?

case : 18K yellow gold
caliber : 32A567
sold : 1967.12.25.

[Monochrome]

Oooo Sensas... that looks like a nice and rare piece you have there!

[KokChoon]

Originally Posted by sensas

Hi KC,
what about Observaroty Chronometer ?

Ciao Milán,

WOW and WOW again

I like this, looks really nice and "observatory chronometer", wow again and the gorgeous watch case containing the watch.... nice. Please tell me it belongs to you.... because I think a guru like you deserve such beauty to go along with your vast knowledge on vintage watches and calibres



Cheers
KokChoon


p.s. why are you banging your head, its a great watch, unless it does not belong to you, which I will be banging my head in that case too

[pj.m]

that is pretty impressive that out of 63 million time pieces, only 40 were regarded as regular wear super chronometers. All GP! I think that says alot about the manufacture.

Thanks for the info KC.

Phil

[sensas]

Please don't put me out of countenance
I like the GP Manufacture, when I'm surfing and find some thoughtfulness piece, archived the minutiae, that's all. It's not a magic

...and this is not my watch!

for your p.s. question, just I find funny this bagging icon, It's doesn't matter !

[PeterCDE]

G'day,

the line
"No. 80545 from 1875 "Awarded a Bulletin de Première Classe at the Observatory of Neuchâtel"
deserves a little clarification.
Like almost all GP Three Bridges units between 1865 and 1910, the round about 65 tourbillons almost all passed the Observatory trials at Neuchatel. The tourbillons are not just a beautiful design, but made on purpose - as a precision watch.
The respective unit does sport a 20-ligne-movement with tourbillon and pivoted detent escapement, which was regulated by F. Jacot and was rated 2nd place in class D at the Neuchatel observatory 1884.

As far as the wrist watches are concerned, the initial (very good) question touches on how these can do today.
Naturally, as with historic cars, timing performance always reflects maintenance and condition; a beaten up unit may not do overwhelmingly well today after 40 years.
But actually a finely restored/repaired piece can perform as good as then, which is easily on par with any current production piece (noting this mostly depends on how it passed the decades since initially made). Today lubricants are fairly better, as well as measuring methods and regulation instruments. In this, an anecdote may tell: the GP Museum includes a historic pre-1900 pocket tourbillon once passing the Neuchatel Observatory tests with very good examples. After careful restoration roughly 100 years later, the same watch was tested with modern computer-controlled test equipment again. This time, the timing result was even better!
This may show GP´s precision watches were made to be fine instruments in first degree. The wrist models of the 1960´s may be "plain janes" on casual sight, but they were groundbreaking then and with a little luck can do exceptionally well today.

Cheers,
Peter

[KokChoon]

Hi Peter,

Thanks for dropping by and provide those insight of the Girard-Perregaux history, really appreciate that my friend. A good read indeed.

Unfortunately I will not be going to Geneva this coming January due to work commitments but seriously hope to see you soon and learn more from you.


Cheers
KokChoon

[PeterCDE]

Hi KC,

the pleasure is on my side!

Cheers,
Peter

[Wenda]

Wow! Very interesting write ups. Love the look of 39 jewels movement which is actually pretty similar to the presumably older 17 jewels Gyromatic movement. Anyhow, even without the observatory mark, like what Peter has described, my Gyromatic can do well within COSC specs.

[PeterCDE]

Answering Wenda´s points, actually the base is similar (not identical).
The very first Gyromatic movements basically can be seen as "Cheeseburgers", if one may put it simply: GP used a manual wind base movement and added a propietory automatic winding unit (rotor, transferring wheel train, reversers) to it.
Later Gyromatic movements were based on a raw movement by AS, which initially started life as a 17-jewel construction. The Gyromatic "free-drive" transmission unit between rotor and mainspring barrel required ruby reversers, which in fact increased the jewel count.

Nonetheless, the real difference is found in the beat rate, which itself required to change almost any detail including a much smaller balance and a different escapement, as well as a completely different method to lubricate moving parts.

GP submitted a total of slightly more than 600 watches to receive the famous Observatory Chronometer award between 1966 and 1967. The "civilian" counterpart, the ChronometerHF model, of course is a certified chronometer itself; just not by the Observatory Neuchatel, but the Bureau Officiels (today known as COSC).
That´s the sensational part in history - GP took serial production pieces made to be worn in daily life on a more random base from ongoing production, instead of submitting especially prepared movements too fragile to be worn and tweaked in performance over years. It´s like winning a Formula-1 race with a serial production car - something which would probably be a similar sensation today.

Cosmetically, differences are not that great. Attached are two brethren, the "civilian" version in steel and the Observatory variant in gold. They are not very different, but throughout the years of watchmaking only very very few (slightly over 5.000) movements actually managed to pass the Observatory certification process. Given all the brands put out much more than 50 million mechanical wrist watches before 1970, it´s truly a very rare species.

Cheers,
Peter

[KokChoon]

Excellent excellent information Peter. Thank you so much for this educational post

Really appreciate it my friend.


Cheers
KokChoon
(still stuck in China )

[ebbstar]

. . . a favorite topic of mine and some of the great classic wristwatches of all time.

Thanks KC and Peter!

Jack

[PeterCDE]

Ok, one question remains - what were these creations really possible of doing?
The attached document may tell, as it´s the front of an actual Observatory timing certificate (called a "bulletin"). Looking closer, you may see it´s been tested to an average gain of 0.24 seconds per day, which equals about 1 second every 4 days or roughly 7.5 seconds per month. Or roughly 90 seconds per year, that´s about 1 1/2 minutes.
Naturally these results were achieved under controlled laboratory conditions in a 40-days-test.

As per figures, the difference between "conventional" chronometer-rated and observatory-submitted units may be apparent by the 1961 statistics:
In 1961, a total of 127.345 movements was tested by the BO control (today this is C.O.S.C.), of which 101.795 or roughly 80% did pass the tests and became a certified chronometer. In the same year, only 344 movements were tested by Observatory Neuchatel during chronometer competitions; of these, only 160 did pass the tests (2 of them being a GP, although not a high-frequency movement like those above). The test period was 3 times the one by BO/COSC and the specs about double as hard.

So yes, GP´s high-frequency technology resulted in an awesome performance - reason enough to grant it a Centennial Prize by the Observatory Neuchatel in 1967.

Cheers,
Peter

[KokChoon]

Hi Peter,

Yes, this definitely put a better perspective when doing comparison with COSC standard and how tough the Observatory of Neuchâtel's test is really is!

Thanks again for sharing such wonderful information to us and I am sure those who are interested in this topic (including myself of course ) will find this extremely educational and amazing. Thank you so much my friend.


Cheers
KokChoon