Velociphile is not one to mince words, but he really tears my beloved Big Bang (Hublot continues “their dull theme of apeing the Royal Oak albeit without nicely aligned bezel screws”) a new pooper. The most egregious offense? Calling a modified ETA movement an “in-house” piece.
My view is simple. The predominating IP in this design is from outside ETA/Valjoux. All the tricky side of it, the tolerancing, productionisation and so on was hard won by Valjoux a long time ago. Making it to drawing is easy peasy; simply substituting another material and upgrading with a few bushes and bits and bobs no great shakes. I have no evidence but would surmise Hublot still buy in the geartrain and possibly escapement from ETA. And, you can anglage and polish it till you can see your face think Lemania 2310 in Patek 5070 but it doesnt change its genes and the fact that Hublot had NO part in creating the base clever, super cheap and effective tractor. However, admittedly, what theyve done is at least one step – no lets be generous two steps – up from buying in a finished movement.
Thank you for reading this WristWatchReview post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
WristWatchReview is one of the few remaining truly independent watch news outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent watch sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis. We don't play the games the other sites play and we've paid for it when it comes to ad revenue.
We would love for you to support us on Patreon and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The WWR Team