How do Seagull and Hangzhou compare to a ETA: An in-depth look... - Page 2
Like Tree55Likes

Thread: How do Seagull and Hangzhou compare to a ETA: An in-depth look...

Page 2 of 12 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 115
  1. #11
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Las Vegas
    Posts
    1,541

    Re: How do Seagull and Hangzhou compare to a ETA: An in-depth look...

    Its like many many years ago when Honda introduced CIVIC on US soils, How we treated like JUNK, The time has come not to underestimate the "GIANT"

    Thanks for the photos and testing results.
    Rednapper likes this.

  2. #12
    MLC
    MLC is offline
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    36

    Re: How do Seagull and Hangzhou compare to a ETA: An in-depth look...

    Why does the Rado inscribed rotor on the 2824 declare 17 jewels? Should have 25 jewels if it's a 2824.

  3. #13
    Member lysanderxiii's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    N 32 deg, 47' 27.9168"; W 79 deg, 54' 30.3372"
    Posts
    8,783

    Re: How do Seagull and Hangzhou compare to a ETA: An in-depth look...

    Quote Originally Posted by MLC View Post
    Why does the Rado inscribed rotor on the 2824 declare 17 jewels? Should have 25 jewels if it's a 2824.
    The 2824-2 was available in 17 or 25 jewels (as was the 7750,) since then, ETA has discontinued offering 17 jewel versions of its mechanical automatics, all are 20 jewels or higher, except for maybe the 7-3/4 ligne lady's models.

    You will see in the following posts, that the Rado does not have any jewels in the automatic winding system, this is where the additional eight jewels are located.

  4. #14
    Member lysanderxiii's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    N 32 deg, 47' 27.9168"; W 79 deg, 54' 30.3372"
    Posts
    8,783

    Re: How do Seagull and Hangzhou compare to a ETA: An in-depth look...

    Before I go any further, if you what to see a particular part of either of the movements go ahead and ask now, as space constraints on my desk top may require these to be reassembled.

    Part two: b) Comparison of Quality.

    The easiest way to do this is line up the parts side by side and let you see what differences there are. All parts are laid out in the same manner, from left to right; Seagull, Hangzhou, ETA 2824. The 2004 parts are so different, as it is based on the 2892 architecture they are not included in the side-by-side comparison.

    The pallet fork:

    Seagull:


    Hangzhou:


    ETA 2824:



    ETA 2004:


    The two ETAs certainly use less shellac on the pallet stones. The Seagull seems to have allowed some bubbles as well.

    Pallet and pallet bridge:



    Balance and balance cock:




    Escape wheel:




    Seagull:


    Hangzhou


    ETA:

    Hoppyjr likes this.

  5. #15
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    5,844

    Re: How do Seagull and Hangzhou compare to a ETA: An in-depth look...

    What is the significance of the lack of oil in the SeaGull?
    myke likes this.

  6. #16
    Member lysanderxiii's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    N 32 deg, 47' 27.9168"; W 79 deg, 54' 30.3372"
    Posts
    8,783

    Re: How do Seagull and Hangzhou compare to a ETA: An in-depth look...

    Part two: b) Comparison of Quality (cont’d).

    Train wheels:



    Seagull center wheel:


    Hangzhou center wheel:


    ETA center wheel:


    Close-up of the third wheel:



    More 3rd wheels:

    Seagull:


    Hangzhou


    ETA:


    Barrel:



    Barrel and train bridges:



    Autowind bridge (disassembled):



    Rotors:



    Rotor center gear and bearing:

    Seagull


    Hangzhou:


    ETA:


    Date wheel:


    Close-up of the Seagull autowind bridge rotor axle:


    Same shot of the Hangzhou:


    Just a shot of the same place on the underside of the three movements:

    Seagull:


    Hangzhou:


    ETA:
    Hoppyjr likes this.

  7. #17
    Moderator Martin_B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    6,066

    Re: How do Seagull and Hangzhou compare to a ETA: An in-depth look...

    Wow, the hole in the Seagull autowind bridge rotor axle is quite misaligned!

  8. #18
    Member lysanderxiii's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    N 32 deg, 47' 27.9168"; W 79 deg, 54' 30.3372"
    Posts
    8,783

    Re: How do Seagull and Hangzhou compare to a ETA: An in-depth look...

    Quote Originally Posted by nhoJ View Post
    What is the significance of the lack of oil in the SeaGull?
    A follow on to that, the balance pivots were oiled, more oil than I would have used, this fact and the fact that I have run across a fair number of Seagull movements, all oiled to some degree, leads me to conclude that this is a "quality escape."

    What would be the consequence of not having any oil? Nothing you would notice immediately, accelerated wear and tear mostly.

    But, on the bright side, it will never dry out and gum up on you.

    Over oiling will probably lead to more immediately noticeable problems.

  9. #19
    Member lysanderxiii's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    N 32 deg, 47' 27.9168"; W 79 deg, 54' 30.3372"
    Posts
    8,783

    Re: How do Seagull and Hangzhou compare to a ETA: An in-depth look...

    Quote Originally Posted by Martin_B View Post
    Wow, the hole in the Seagull autowind bridge rotor axle is quite misaligned!
    The problem with these image heavy posts is it is hard to keep track of all the things you are trying to show.

    That is one reason why I posted it, but would you like to know why it is off center?

    The rest of the story is told from the back side of the autowind bridge: (Seagull on the left, as usual, ETA not shown, as it is the same as the Hangzhou, except for three jewels)



    Close-up, Seagull:


    Close-up, Hangzhou:


    The original design for the autowind bridge is that the rotor post be a separate part staked into the bridge. This was probably done so at some point the post could be removed (the autowind bridge design is shared with other movements without ball bearing rotor). However, the current application with only a ball bearing rotor and no relative motion the post, this is a superfluous requirement. So, Seagull simplified the design to eliminate one part and three manufacturing operations

    Aside from the unsightlyness of the off-center hole, it really has no influence on the operation of the rotor, the screw that goes in the hole is only there to retain the inner bearing race.

    And, just as a point of reference, although it looks huge in the picture the screw hole is only off-center by 0.044 mm (or 0.0017 inches, for US.)
    Last edited by lysanderxiii; December 28th, 2008 at 23:37.

  10. #20
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Surrey, B.C. Canada
    Posts
    8,842

    Re: How do Seagull and Hangzhou compare to a ETA: An in-depth look...

    I'll bet the Hangzhou doesn't work when you reassemble it

    Maybe it's just my monitor but the Sea Gull looks to be better finished over all than either of the others and in some respects the Hangzhou even bearts out the ETA.
    I also notice that the Sea Gull is much better finished than the one that was dissected over on TZ or that other forum.

    When it comes to dropping your pants for an inspection; this expose really should have the ETA folks feeling nervous or litigous :oops:

    So far, the only thing that worries me about the Sea Gull is the lack of lubrication...what's that all about???

Page 2 of 12 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ... 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
    •