The tourbillon of opinions

From the workbench

Vincent Calabrese - I showed my first tourbillon to mark the creation of the Académie Horlogère des Créateurs Indépendants, in July 1985 at the Musée d’Horlogerie in Le Locle. I spent a lot of time explaining to connoisseurs and journalists what a tourbillon was.

Karrusel by Vincent Calabrese and Blancpain (1) © Vincent Calabrese

Front view of the tourbillon (2) © V. Calabrese

Back view of the tourbillon (2) © V. Calabrese

Front view of the karrusel (2) © V. Calabrese

Back view of the karrusel (2) © V. Calabrese

Vincent Calabrese

I showed my first tourbillon to mark the creation of the Académie Horlogère des Créateurs Indépendants, in July 1985 at the Musée d’Horlogerie in Le Locle. I spent a lot of time explaining to connoisseurs and journalists what a tourbillon was. It was so long since anyone had actually made one that for the majority of watchmakers it was a case of "out of sight, out of mind." Unfortunately, the few people who did remember were obsessively rooted in tradition. As far as they were concerned, my tourbillon was no more than a vulgar karrusel. This is when I discovered the tourbillon of opinions.

Out of loyalty to my own opinions, here I am again giving my view on revolving systems, hopefully for the last time. Except for a handful of stubborn die-hards, the proof I give, in collaboration with Blancpain, should end the tourbillon vs. karrusel debate once and for all. There are various reasons for the strength of feeling prompted by the tourbillon and, as the title of this exposé suggests, I will give my opinion as a watchmaker on each one before going on to compare tourbillon and karrusel.

Historical aspects

Despite trying numerous escapements, Breguet encountered difficulties in properly regulating his watches. His solution was to introduce a revolving movement and, in 1801, he filed a patent for the tourbillon. We all know what a success this has been from a marketing point of view. Chronometrically speaking though, he was wrong. The tourbillon makes not the slightest difference in improving the watch’s rate.

Before Breguet, another renowned watchmaker made the same mistake of using complicated means to achieve precision. It was by taking the simplest approach that he finally reached his goal. I am, of course, referring to Mr John Harrison and his most significant contribution to accuracy in portable timekeeping.

Aura

It would be wrong to forget what an arduous task making a tourbillon would prove to be. So much so in fact that Breguet never saw one function correctly in his lifetime. It wasn’t until after his death, that his company finally delivered its first tourbillon. Although machine-tools were fashioning more complex mechanisms long before Breguet thought of the tourbillon, no tool or mechanical procedure was capable of machining a tourbillon cage from steel and hardening it without deforming it. The entire process had to be done by hand. Not until electrical discharge machining was perfected in the late 1980s was it possible to machine the tourbillon.

The intricacies involved in making a tourbillon were such that the few watchmakers who succeeded were singled out for their talent. Certain experts have estimated that between 1801 and 1985, no more than six to seven hundred tourbillons were made. This does not include industrially-manufactured tourbillons, meaning American mass-production post-1880 and tourbillons made in the French and Swiss Jura after 1900. Among these mass-produced tourbillons, the moving parts - which could be just the escapement or the entire movement - revolved at speeds varying from one minute to one and a half hours. All these industrially-manufactured tourbillons, with their brass or nickel silver cages, proved that the difficulty lay not with producing a rotating cage or movement but in making a steel cage and hardening it without deformation.

An analysis of the technical aspect

The tourbillon compensates errors of rate in vertical positions by constantly varying this position. This effectively gives an average rate for all the vertical positions but does nothing to improve the quality of the watch. Because these variations do not include horizontal positions, not only does the biggest defect - that of the plat-pendu or dial-up and pendant-up position - persist, it is made worse by the presence of the cage.

In short, to include a tourbillon in a marine chronometer, which is held horizontally in gimbals, is pointless. To include a tourbillon in a wristwatch, given the wearer’s constant and random wrist movements, is pointless. The only sensible use for a tourbillon is in a clock that remains in the same vertical position, although there would be no justification for this: a decent pendulum clock gives better results for less. The tourbillon, which for almost two centuries was a rarely-seen complication, has become so commonplace today that it could well have signed its own death warrant.

We have seen how there is no technical justification for the tourbillon, but is this a reason to discard it all together? In terms of results, yes, in which case we should cheerfully abandon each and every mechanical watch part which has a far more efficient electronic counterpart. The fact remains that the tourbillon still has a bright future thanks to the visual enchantment of its revolving cage, its aesthetic appeal and the beauty of its escapement’s functioning. This future is brighter still when the tourbillon is conceived and executed to a high standard.

Discord

The tourbillon continues to provoke heated debate as to its manufacturing, the legitimacy of those who make it, and the relevance of the double, triple and other such tourbillons that are currently in vogue. The most violently-argued point is the difference between the tourbillon and the karrusel. As someone who has been personally involved in this polemic, I hope this article will put an end to the debate. According to the most authoritative texts on watchmaking and Swiss watch school manuals, the difference between a tourbillon and a karrusel resides in the speed with which the cage rotates and the position of the balance. When the cage makes one revolution per minute and the balance is mounted coaxially with the cage it is a tourbillon. Anything else is a karrusel.

Breguet, in his patent application, suggests an ideal speed of one revolution per minute, although he did himself experiment with other speeds. He also suggests mounting the balance in the centre of the rotational movement. In neither case does he claim these two points are set in stone. Nor does he mention which metal should be used to make the cage. The core of his invention is the roue immobile C.C. (the title of his patent application), in other words the fixed wheel which causes the cage to rotate. All known rotating systems, whether they make one revolution per minute or per day, whether their balance is in the centre of the cage or not, have one thing in common. They all have a fixed wheel and they are all tourbillons.

When Bonniksen invented his karrusel in 1892, he looked beyond the fixed wheel that was part of Breguet’s invention and instead used a differential effect to make his cage rotate. In terms of timekeeping, there was little difference between the two and Bonniksen’s invention can, for this reason, be deemed superfluous. However, for reasons that are anything but technical the intelligentsia has always refused to acknowledge his merit and, whenever a rotating system has failed to impress, have invariably labelled it a karrusel.

In collaboration with Blancpain and Mr Marc Hayek, we have decided to set the record straight, to give credit where credit is due and acknowledge Bonniksen’s merit. (1)We have made a watch with a karrusel escapement whose balance is mounted in the centre of a cage which makes one revolution per minute. Technically speaking, the result is the same as with a tourbillon. Aesthetically speaking, its greater complexity and the one-minute rotation give it a clear advantage. Among this tourbillon of opinions, it’s my view that it’s time to rewrite the school books. ■

(2) Illustrations
Front and back views of the tourbillon and karrusel. The same parts are shown in the same colours. Additional colours for the karrusel indicate additional parts.

Print
Ad a comment
Send to a friend

Articles from this issue

Hot off the press...

Advertising