Chinese Watch Industry Wiki - Page 13
Like Tree12Likes

Thread: Chinese Watch Industry Wiki

Page 13 of 16 FirstFirst ... 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 LastLast
Results 121 to 130 of 153
  1. #121
    Member J. F. Sebastian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    473

    Re: Chinese Watch Industry Wiki

    Quote Originally Posted by soviet View Post
    Many thanks for your new effort!
    For some unknown reasons, my connection to WUS has been very slow for the last couple of years, and the links to your new site is broken at the moment.:(
    Sadly, the wiki is down right now due to some problem with the host provider. This started a few hours ago. This happens very occasionally, it's cheap hosting and they get hit by DDoS attacks once or twice a year. It should be back up sometime in the next 24 hours, sorry about the inconvenience. :(

    EDIT: The wiki is back! It was down for something like 5 hours.
    Last edited by J. F. Sebastian; October 6th, 2014 at 09:26.
    No VCM, no life | The Hidden Content is back! Serve the People by contributing your knowledge.

  2. #122
    Member saskwatch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Saskatchewan
    Posts
    2,738

    Re: Chinese Watch Industry Wiki

    Thank you, J. F. Sebastian, for reviving the wiki. I'm willing to help, but before I go much further I have a few questions.

    What is the preferred spelling: Seagull, Sea Gull, Sea-Gull? Even on the company website the spelling is inconsistent.

    For the list of movements, should we list different variants of the same movement, e.g. SM1A and SM1A-K, together or separately?

    I can add exhaustive factory and brand name lists. Are we aiming to be as complete as possible, or should we include major names only? Alphabetical order?
    See my collection of Vintage Chinese Mechanical watches at Hidden Content

  3. #123
    Member J. F. Sebastian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    473

    Re: Chinese Watch Industry Wiki

    Quote Originally Posted by saskwatch View Post
    Thank you, J. F. Sebastian, for reviving the wiki. I'm willing to help, but before I go much further I have a few questions.

    What is the preferred spelling: Seagull, Sea Gull, Sea-Gull? Even on the company website the spelling is inconsistent.

    For the list of movements, should we list different variants of the same movement, e.g. SM1A and SM1A-K, together or separately?

    I can add exhaustive factory and brand name lists. Are we aiming to be as complete as possible, or should we include major names only? Alphabetical order?
    Excellent questions, Saskwatch, I have been thinking about these kinds of things myself. I welcome input from others, but here are my thoughts so far:

    On Seagull/Sea Gull/Sea-Gull: I started out using "Seagull" when I was trying to quickly get as much stuff up on the wiki as possible, so that's currently (I think) the majority spelling. But I did notice pretty early on that a lot of the old wiki articles used "Sea-Gull". I am surprised and a little dismayed to hear that their own website is inconsistent. I suppose the authoritative source would be whatever their registered business name in China is: I don't know if that's easy to find out (on a similar note: the old wiki calls them "Tianjin Sea-Gull Watch Factory", Wikipedia calls them "Tianjin Seagull Watch Group" and usseagull.com calls them "Tianjin Seagull Watch Co., Ltd." - ignoring the hyphenation issue, is it Factory, Group or Company?). It is possible to make, e.g., the wiki page "Tianjin Seagull" redirect to "Tianjin Sea-Gull", so that contributors can link to either without thinking too much and readers won't really notice, but it would be nice to aim for consistent usage.

    A similar question revolves around the placing of hyphens in movement names. For now I have just been copying whatever source I am using, but there is probably inconsistency among them. Do we use A581 or A-581? ST5 or ST-5? Do different factories have different conventions on this?

    With the list of movements: At the moment, the SM1A and SM1A-K are listed separately, but I had imagined making both link to the same page (with the second one possibly linking to a specific section of that page). However, I am starting to reconsider this, because it will seriously expand the list in some cases (e.g., the old wiki lists 9 different variants of the ST19) for relatively little benefit. So perhaps we should just list the "base" model in all cases (SM1A, ST5, ST19) and let the individual articles expand things out (I noticed this morning that you corrected and expanded my list of ST5 variants in the ST5 article, which I'm most grateful for).

    With factories and brands, I think we should aim for completeness, and alphabetical order seems to make sense (I know that so far I've not alphabetised those lists). I think even minor brands should show up in the list, but I expect that only major brands will end up having articles written about them (unless of course there are some especially interesting minor brands). There are a few things I have been thinking about on the factory front:

    One is how to name the article for factories/companies which have changed their name a lot. Following the old wiki, the new wiki's article for Seagull is entitled "Tianjin Seagull" (though see my question above about what their full name really is), but whenever I link to it I've been careful to use the text "Tianjin Watch Factory" in articles about movements or brands from that time, and "Seagull" for articles about modern movements. I think this is a good practice. Of course, we could just as easily have called the article "Tianjin Watch Factory" and still kept the convention of using context-appropriate link text. Which ones makes more sense? Using a factory's oldest name seems to make more sense than using its latest name, only because the oldest name never changes while the newest name might. But by that convention, Seagull's page should actually be called "Tianjin WuYi Watch Factory", which is neither the name they are most well-known by or the name under which they did their best-known work. Factory renaming seems to have been fairly common in the 50s and 60s, so this is not just an issue which affects Tianjin/Seagull.

    The other is what to do about situations like Shanghai, where there is a No. 2 factory, a No. 3 factory, etc. I do think it is best to list these separately in the table, because they have distinct dates of operation and distinct factory codes, and it's best to separate those out. But I don't know if those entries should link to separate pages, or if all the Shanghai factory links should point to the "Shanghai Watch Factory" page and we should just list all the other factories there. I'm uncertain on this because I don't actually have any understanding of to what extent No. 2, No. 3 etc. were/are just extra manufacturing facilities for "the one true" Shanghai Watch Factory or were actually distinct and autonomous organizations who got those names simply because all factories in Shanghai were given a name of the form "Shanghai Watch Factory No. X". Linking them all to one page sends the message that they are all basically parts of the same whole, and I don't know if that's true.
    No VCM, no life | The Hidden Content is back! Serve the People by contributing your knowledge.

  4. #124
    Member J. F. Sebastian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    473

    Re: Chinese Watch Industry Wiki

    Quote Originally Posted by J. F. Sebastian View Post
    A similar question revolves around the placing of hyphens in movement names. For now I have just been copying whatever source I am using, but there is probably inconsistency among them. Do we use A581 or A-581? ST5 or ST-5? Do different factories have different conventions on this?
    Oh dear, oh dear. I was just looking over this great post on early Shanghai movements, with the plan of integrating that information into the wiki. The 2nd entry is:

    A-581
    1958-1967
    dials w. applied indicators appeared around 1964
    A-581 1958-1963
    A581 1963-1965
    581 1966-1967

    So it looks like it was hyphenated originally, but then after 5 years they dropped the hyphen?! And then 2 years later they took a year off and when they came back decided to drop the A too? This is worse than Seagull vs Sea-Gull!

    It's also unclear to me to what extent that list is tracking movements and to what extent it is tracking watch models. Sometimes it's very clear, e.g. there is an SS1 entry and it lists 1120, 1523, 1524, etc. under it. Other times it's not so clear, e.g. there is an entry for A-582, but it seems likely that this is actually a watch model, which is just the A-581 watch with lume and not a new movement? Maybe the answer is hidden in here. Lots and lots of work to do!
    No VCM, no life | The Hidden Content is back! Serve the People by contributing your knowledge.

  5. #125
    Moderator soviet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    4,802

    Re: Chinese Watch Industry Wiki

    南京手表廠(26)
    上世纪六十年代,手表做为高消费进入中国普通市民生活。年青人参加エ作后还是买不起手表的。降低手表价格, 市場无穷大,南京手表廠看准商機应运而生,
    1955年2月几家私营商店集资建成江南造钟厂股份有限公司筹备处。1956年改名江南造钟厂股份有限公司 。
    1958年改名“紫金山造钟厂”。 主要生产闹钟,地址南京中山门外四方城1号。
    1958-1960年开始研制“七一”手表;
    1959-1960年研制生产“紫金山”手表。“紫金山”表,机芯是“粗機粗馬”機芯,6鉆,型号为:“S N1”。 后被轻工部列为定点生产经济表的厂家。企业代号为:“SN”。生产了大量廉价的“紫金山”牌手表,外表看不 出與其他表的区別,投放市場后很受广大人民群众欢迎,滿足了低工资人们的需求。


    但是這種手表精度低,故障率高,尽菅价格低,但不能载,所以很快被市場淘汰。但确是收藏家追求 的目标。.
    钟山牌手表的前身是“紫金山” 牌手表, 1968年前后在SN1基础上又研制了,“粗機细马”9鉆機芯,“SN2”型。由于改为细马所以精度大为提 高,增加到9鉆,故障率大为降低,基本上达到可载程度,
    1971年,手表和闹钟分厂经营,正式成立南京手表厂.
    用SN2组装的手表1968年更名为:“鐘山”牌。从此开始了南京手表廠的大发展,钟山牌手表在全国打开銷 路。目前該表存世量很大。随后該廠又研制了17钻“SN3”男表机芯,该机芯为细机细马,形似统机,又不是 统机,用其机芯装配不少中型“钟山”表。根据市场需要又研制出“SN4”女式细機细马機芯,生产不少女式“ 钟山”表。
    总之,南京“钟山”表存世量很大,很容易收集到。
    由于厂址在紫金山明萧陵神道上,故2006年10月搬迁到城北伏家厂128号。
    1974年左右生产定型的九钻钟山表,钟山表生产步入成熟期。
    1976-1984年,钟山表鼎盛时期,1984年年产量达到220万只。
    1986年,以钟山表为龙头,以南京手表厂为主体成立了南京手表工业公司.该厂是轻工部和南京市定点生产手 表的重点骨干企业.现有生产设备,仪器3000余台(套),其中大型,精密,稀有设备仪器89台(套),通 用设备,仪器1209台(套),手表加工与检测的专用设备,仪器959台(套). 拥有3000多名职工的老厂。生产的”钟山”手表是国产5大名表之一.
    主要产品有:钟山牌系列机械手表;照相机快门;电子表;9钻机械系列手表及表机芯(单机、单日历),0钻系 列机械手表机机芯(单机、单历),17钻系列机械手表及机芯(单机单日历、双日历),17钻系列手表及机芯 ,钟表仪器设备、材料、元器件等。
    1990年曾风靡一时的“钟山表”停产。
    1990年与台商联合组成:台发钟表有限公司,开始生产“时友”牌手表。
    南京手表厂的手表收藏主要应集中在:试制品“七一”表;早期产品“紫金山”。两个品种。当然四块专用机芯不 能少。SN1机芯(紫金山);SN2机芯(钟山)SN3(时友)
    SN4(钟山女)。南京手表厂产品没有统一机芯表。
    ================================================== ===============================

    Nanjing Watch factory

    It is mentioned in this article that the SN1 is a 6 jewels movement. I alway thought it was a 5 jewels one. The earliest Roamer copy movement is not mentioned.
    J. F. Sebastian likes this.

  6. #126
    Member J. F. Sebastian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    473

    Re: Chinese Watch Industry Wiki

    Thank you, Soviet! I have just quickly updated the movement list to include all the SN* models which were missing. Later tonight I will read through the Google translation more carefully and add any further info on these movements or on the factory which I can find.

    I quite enjoyed the way the different SN movements were described (or at least Google's rendition of it)! The SN1 is "rough machine, rough horse", the SN2 is "rough machine, fine horse", and finally the SN3 is "fine machine, fine horse".
    No VCM, no life | The Hidden Content is back! Serve the People by contributing your knowledge.

  7. #127
    Member J. F. Sebastian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    473

    Re: Chinese Watch Industry Wiki

    Soviet, can you please confirm that I have understood the following correctly?

    From 1958-1960, Naning made watches under a brand that Google translates as "July". I think the hanzi is “七一” and the pinyin is "qiyi"? Could be wrong. No details on movement used.
    From 1959-1960, Nanjing made watches with the SN1 movement under a brand that Google translates as "purple". I think the hanzi is "紫金山" and the pinyin is "zijinshan"? Could be wrong.
    From 1968-1990, Nanjing made watches with the SN2 movement under the brand "Zhongshan".
    There is also an SN3 movement, but I'm not sure when it was made? In the 1990s it was used in some "friendship with Taiwan" watches, but I think the movement must be older than that?
    There is also an SN4 movement, made for women's watches, but again I am not sure when it was made.

    谢谢!
    No VCM, no life | The Hidden Content is back! Serve the People by contributing your knowledge.

  8. #128
    Member saskwatch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Saskatchewan
    Posts
    2,738

    Re: Chinese Watch Industry Wiki

    Quote Originally Posted by J. F. Sebastian View Post
    Excellent questions, Saskwatch, I have been thinking about these kinds of things myself. I welcome input from others, but here are my thoughts so far:

    On Seagull/Sea Gull/Sea-Gull: I started out using "Seagull" when I was trying to quickly get as much stuff up on the wiki as possible, so that's currently (I think) the majority spelling. But I did notice pretty early on that a lot of the old wiki articles used "Sea-Gull". I am surprised and a little dismayed to hear that their own website is inconsistent. I suppose the authoritative source would be whatever their registered business name in China is: I don't know if that's easy to find out (on a similar note: the old wiki calls them "Tianjin Sea-Gull Watch Factory", Wikipedia calls them "Tianjin Seagull Watch Group" and usseagull.com calls them "Tianjin Seagull Watch Co., Ltd." - ignoring the hyphenation issue, is it Factory, Group or Company?). It is possible to make, e.g., the wiki page "Tianjin Seagull" redirect to "Tianjin Sea-Gull", so that contributors can link to either without thinking too much and readers won't really notice, but it would be nice to aim for consistent usage.

    A similar question revolves around the placing of hyphens in movement names. For now I have just been copying whatever source I am using, but there is probably inconsistency among them. Do we use A581 or A-581? ST5 or ST-5? Do different factories have different conventions on this?

    With the list of movements: At the moment, the SM1A and SM1A-K are listed separately, but I had imagined making both link to the same page (with the second one possibly linking to a specific section of that page). However, I am starting to reconsider this, because it will seriously expand the list in some cases (e.g., the old wiki lists 9 different variants of the ST19) for relatively little benefit. So perhaps we should just list the "base" model in all cases (SM1A, ST5, ST19) and let the individual articles expand things out (I noticed this morning that you corrected and expanded my list of ST5 variants in the ST5 article, which I'm most grateful for).

    With factories and brands, I think we should aim for completeness, and alphabetical order seems to make sense (I know that so far I've not alphabetised those lists). I think even minor brands should show up in the list, but I expect that only major brands will end up having articles written about them (unless of course there are some especially interesting minor brands). There are a few things I have been thinking about on the factory front:

    One is how to name the article for factories/companies which have changed their name a lot. Following the old wiki, the new wiki's article for Seagull is entitled "Tianjin Seagull" (though see my question above about what their full name really is), but whenever I link to it I've been careful to use the text "Tianjin Watch Factory" in articles about movements or brands from that time, and "Seagull" for articles about modern movements. I think this is a good practice. Of course, we could just as easily have called the article "Tianjin Watch Factory" and still kept the convention of using context-appropriate link text. Which ones makes more sense? Using a factory's oldest name seems to make more sense than using its latest name, only because the oldest name never changes while the newest name might. But by that convention, Seagull's page should actually be called "Tianjin WuYi Watch Factory", which is neither the name they are most well-known by or the name under which they did their best-known work. Factory renaming seems to have been fairly common in the 50s and 60s, so this is not just an issue which affects Tianjin/Seagull.

    The other is what to do about situations like Shanghai, where there is a No. 2 factory, a No. 3 factory, etc. I do think it is best to list these separately in the table, because they have distinct dates of operation and distinct factory codes, and it's best to separate those out. But I don't know if those entries should link to separate pages, or if all the Shanghai factory links should point to the "Shanghai Watch Factory" page and we should just list all the other factories there. I'm uncertain on this because I don't actually have any understanding of to what extent No. 2, No. 3 etc. were/are just extra manufacturing facilities for "the one true" Shanghai Watch Factory or were actually distinct and autonomous organizations who got those names simply because all factories in Shanghai were given a name of the form "Shanghai Watch Factory No. X". Linking them all to one page sends the message that they are all basically parts of the same whole, and I don't know if that's true.
    From the company website: 天津海鸥表业集团公司. It appears that Seagull is used in the company name more often than not, but the brand name seen most frequently is Sea-Gull. Maybe we should use that as the standard until a more knowledgeable person corrects us?

    Factories weren't always consistent in their use of hyphens. I would suggest that the listings of base movements avoid hyphens, but variants on the individual movement pages could have them when appropriate.

    Re complete lists: there were dozens of factories and hundreds of brand names -- the lists will be long. In the brand name list I think it would be best to use the factory name(s) when the brand was manufactured.

    Re manufacturer articles: It might be best to use the current name of factories/companies that are in business now. For closed factories, the best known name seems appropriate.

    Although the Shanghai factories operated under a larger organisation, they should be listed separately. Each had its own history and purpose.
    See my collection of Vintage Chinese Mechanical watches at Hidden Content

  9. #129
    Member saskwatch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Saskatchewan
    Posts
    2,738

    Re: Chinese Watch Industry Wiki

    Quote Originally Posted by J. F. Sebastian View Post
    Soviet, can you please confirm that I have understood the following correctly?

    From 1958-1960, Naning made watches under a brand that Google translates as "July". I think the hanzi is “七一” and the pinyin is "qiyi"? Could be wrong. No details on movement used.
    From 1959-1960, Nanjing made watches with the SN1 movement under a brand that Google translates as "purple". I think the hanzi is "紫金山" and the pinyin is "zijinshan"? Could be wrong.
    From 1968-1990, Nanjing made watches with the SN2 movement under the brand "Zhongshan".
    There is also an SN3 movement, but I'm not sure when it was made? In the 1990s it was used in some "friendship with Taiwan" watches, but I think the movement must be older than that?
    There is also an SN4 movement, made for women's watches, but again I am not sure when it was made.

    谢谢!
    I can help with some of it:

    “七一” = 71 = qiyi = July 1. I've never seen one.

    Zijinshan = Purple Mountain.

    SN3 (looks like tongji but not tongji?), "friendship with Taiwan" = Shiyou.

    My Shiyou has what I think is an SN5 inside, but it appears that the article is calling it an SN3. Or is the SN5 based on the SN3?

    What happened between 1960 and 1968?
    See my collection of Vintage Chinese Mechanical watches at Hidden Content

  10. #130
    Moderator soviet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    4,802

    Re: Chinese Watch Industry Wiki

    Quote Originally Posted by J. F. Sebastian View Post
    Thank you, Soviet! I have just quickly updated the movement list to include all the SN* models which were missing. Later tonight I will read through the Google translation more carefully and add any further info on these movements or on the factory which I can find.

    I quite enjoyed the way the different SN movements were described (or at least Google's rendition of it)! The SN1 is "rough machine, rough horse", the SN2 is "rough machine, fine horse", and finally the SN3 is "fine machine, fine horse".
    I have read a watch repair book that listed all the nick-names of what those parts and componets were called by local guys. It would give a good translator a very hard time to cope with.:)
    SN1 is one of the few pin-lever (粗马,rough horse) movements China ever made.

Page 13 of 16 FirstFirst ... 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

    Posting Permissions

    • You may not post new threads
    • You may not post replies
    • You may not post attachments
    • You may not edit your posts
    •