Smiths Cal 0144 G is described in Automatic Wristwatches from Germany, England, France, Japan, Russia, & the USA, Heinz Hampel, Schiffer Publishing, 1997. Heinz Hampel goes on to say;
"Several reasons made this watch, which had been very carefully made and was a sturdy everyday watch, commercially unsucessful; it was more expensive than comparable Swiss watches - the steel version cost 25 pounds, the 9 karat gold version 50 pounds. Second, the noises made by the rotor and the reversing mechanism were loud and disturbing. Its similarity to the excenter reversing wheel system by IWC also bought costly patent problems".
Good to see your example Catherine, is it more noisy than the Ingenieur shown?
670 Discussions and CommentsMember since Sept. 13, 2002
Good to see your example Catherine, is it more noisy than the Ingenieur shown?
I'm not too sure to be truthful Cellar, The Smiths never met a strap and still shows it original factory sticker to the rear. I know from early chat with my watchmaker that not everyone is exactly enamoured with Schaffhausens winding system. Thankfully i'm not that way made to let bias steer me.
3,778 Discussions and CommentsMember since March 28, 2001
cellar Wrote:... but there was clearly a violation of IWC's intellectual property.
I am not sure there is. Assuming both watches are from the 1950-1960 era, watches looked much more alike than nowadays. I see two noticeable differences: the minule lines and the lugs. That makes those watches quite different to me. By the way, wasn't Smiths the brand that made the Mount Everest the first time?
Kind regards, Paul
What you do may not be so important, but it is very important that you do it well. (my variation of a saying by Gandhi)
Last edited: 20 October, 2010 - 03:16
Smiths Cal 0144 G is described in Automatic Wristwatches from Germany, England, France, Japan, Russia, & the USA, Heinz Hampel, Schiffer Publishing, 1997. Heinz Hampel goes on to say;
"Several reasons made this watch, which had been very carefully made and was a sturdy everyday watch, commercially unsucessful; it was more expensive than comparable Swiss watches - the steel version cost 25 pounds, the 9 karat gold version 50 pounds. Second, the noises made by the rotor and the reversing mechanism were loud and disturbing. Its similarity to the excenter reversing wheel system by IWC also bought costly patent problems".
Good to see your example Catherine, is it more noisy than the Ingenieur shown?
Cheers from the cellar
cellar@gregsteer.net
Last edited: 4 January, 2013 - 22:35
I'm not too sure to be truthful Cellar, The Smiths never met a strap and still shows it original factory sticker to the rear. I know from early chat with my watchmaker that not everyone is exactly enamoured with Schaffhausens winding system. Thankfully i'm not that way made to let bias steer me.
Certainly - I love that INGE !!!!!
Best regards
Mark
Best regards
Mark
Last edited: 16 April, 2013 - 00:36
I'm not sure "clone" is the word but there was clearly a violation of IWC's intellectual property.
Cheers from the cellar
cellar@gregsteer.net
Last edited: 4 January, 2013 - 22:35
I am not sure there is. Assuming both watches are from the 1950-1960 era, watches looked much more alike than nowadays. I see two noticeable differences: the minule lines and the lugs. That makes those watches quite different to me. By the way, wasn't Smiths the brand that made the Mount Everest the first time?
Kind regards,
Paul
What you do may not be so important, but it is very important that you do it well. (my variation of a saying by Gandhi)
Last edited: 23 October, 2011 - 13:31
Mark's question was "I asume the "winding mechanism" refered to here Cellar, is a clone of the Pellaton - right cellar?"
My reply "I'm not sure "clone" is the word but there was clearly a violation of IWC's intellectual property."
It is the winding mechanism we are discussing.
Cheers from the cellar
cellar@gregsteer.net
Last edited: 4 January, 2013 - 22:35