Community Stories

1863 vs. 3861, Hand finished vs. machine finished?

OmegaOwner2019
Posts
151
Likes
131
1745460853740.webp 1745460868845.webp


I have run into several written and video sources reporting that 3861 is entirely machine finished, and 1863 actually had some hand finishing (particularly the beveling).
The 3861 being machine finished is quite obvious, as the tool marks are visible on macros.

Is there any evidence that 1863 was hand finished?

In this day and age where even the Holy Trinity are leaning more on machine finishing, I am surprised that the ol' 1863 actually contain more manual work than Vacheron Fiftysix.
 
97TJ
Posts
130
Likes
175
Everything I could find said they were the last of the hand finished, here's mine. Took me a while to find one serviced, but I finally did at Swiss Watch Expo.
IMG-2243.webp IMG-2224-1.webp
 
pdxleaf
Posts
6,020
Likes
20,703
Which is preferred? Is hand made better than machi ed? If so, why?

I'm not trying to be provocative. People often use hand-made to mean the pinnacle or better than machine made. But it doesn't seem that way to me.

Hand-made is great for one of a kind, but is it better for mass production? A machine is built by people because the machine can not only consistently perform the same task in the same manner more predictably than a human, but it can often perform it to a higher standard.

In the photos above, 1861 is suspected to be finished by hand and has a finer finish because it doesn't have tool marks on the bevels. It is more polished, but the edges are rounder. The levels on the 3861 are sharper. Depending on what a person might prefer, but the sharper edges on the bevel produced by the machine seem to me to indicate that the machine can produce a higher standard of quality.

There may be the odd craftsman who can outperform a machine, but not the majority of craftsmen. We people use jigs and developed machines because they can perform tasks better than we can, provided they know how to use them.

Anyway, just a thought. I wasn't aware of the difference, that 1861 were finished by hand versus 3861s. It's interesting to learn that.
 
Tag0935
Posts
320
Likes
374
The 1863 is hand finished, unlike the 1861, which is machine done. There is a YT video that compares 1863 vs. 3861, concluding the 1863 is subjectively nicer... Well, hard to judge. In my case, I have the 1863, I like it, but only after I clean the case. Most of the time it is dirty and covered by dried sweat. So from a practical perspective, which one is nicer is an academic debate 馃榾
 
Tag0935
Posts
320
Likes
374
OmegaOwner2019 OmegaOwner2019
1745460853740.webp 1745460868845.webp


Is there any evidence that 1863 was hand finished?

The evidence would be if you compare 1861 and 1863 side-by-side. If I am not mistaken, the 1863 was only used in exhibition saphire casebacks while 1861s had a full steel cover.
 
97TJ
Posts
130
Likes
175
The precision of repetitive angles and adornment is what makes a hand finished watch so impressive. Sorta like the difference between hand engraving and mechanical engraving on a firearm, the hand engraved will always be exponentially more valuable.
 
OmegaOwner2019
Posts
151
Likes
131
pdxleaf pdxleaf
Which is preferred? Is hand made better than machi ed? If so, why?

I'm not trying to be provocative. People often use hand-made to mean the pinnacle or better than machine made. But it doesn't seem that way to me.

Hand-made is great for one of a kind, but is it better for mass production? A machine is built by people because the machine can not only consistently perform the same task in the same manner more predictably than a human, but it can often perform it to a higher standard.

In the photos above, 1861 is suspected to be finished by hand and has a finer finish because it doesn't have tool marks on the bevels. It is more polished, but the edges are rounder. The levels on the 3861 are sharper. Depending on what a person might prefer, but the sharper edges on the bevel produced by the machine seem to me to indicate that the machine can produce a higher standard of quality.

There may be the odd craftsman who can outperform a machine, but not the majority of craftsmen. We people use jigs and developed machines because they can perform tasks better than we can, provided they know how to use them.

Anyway, just a thought. I wasn't aware of the difference, that 1861 were finished by hand versus 3861s. It's interesting to learn that.
It is really not about precision, but more luxury and craftsmanship.
Heck, my worst performing watch is the one with Geneva Seal.

Nowadays, the most expensive thing is manpower, so the definition of luxury is pouring a large amount of manpower into making a watch. It is the reason why the top independent watchmakers all go nuts on movement finishing.

Manual beveling and movement finishing is rarely seen below high horology level watches. Most of the popular watches, like those by Rolex, contain very little to no handfinishing. Hand assembled, sure, but no handfinishing on the movement.

I am just kinda surprised to learn that some of the moon watches actually get manual finishing.
The Holy Trinity themselves are being accused of abandoning handfinishing in their entry level models.
Alas 鈥榯is no more with the 3861.
 
Archer
Posts
29,221
Likes
75,514
I've not seen anything that would indicate that the 1863 (or any other Speedmaster movement) has any hand finishing. If someone has information that it is, please post a link thanks.

So just for fun, I checked the pricing of the same bridge across 3 movements. The escape wheel bridge for the 1861, 1863, and 3861 (in the last case it's called the intermediate escape wheel bridge).

The price for this bridge does not change between these three movement, even though the finishing is clearly different. In each case, the current US cost is about $93. To me that is not a price that suggests anything was done by hand...

Note that the other bridges in these movements also cost the same across the three movements. So the main wheel train and barrel bridge is $400 US on all three movements.
 
Archer
Posts
29,221
Likes
75,514
pdxleaf pdxleaf
Which is preferred? Is hand made better than machi ed? If so, why?

I'm not trying to be provocative. People often use hand-made to mean the pinnacle or better than machine made. But it doesn't seem that way to me.
Very high quality finishing in very high end watches is almost always done by hand - not big brands, but more the realm of the very skilled and traditional independents. Machines can get close certainly, but here's an example...back in the day I spent some time in the shop of Philippe Dufour. He was busy making his Simplicity model, and he had a couple of watchmakers in the shop helping with that. I took a very short video of one who was polishing countersinks...here is the part and the countersink:

5653ac94-e97c-4fc5-b362-18db3cd075e5.webp


Here is the video:


In speaking with the watchmakers that were doing this, using a ebony stick with very fine abrasive powder, rotating it with a bow as you see in the video, it was clear that determination of the final polish being done was as much about how the process felt in his hands, as it was about how the part looked. He said the resistance of the process changed when it was finally done.

For a more in depth discussion, here is a video of a watchmaker visiting Vianny Halter, talking about polishing the lug of the case...the case...not even the parts inside the watch...

 
bsowers34
Posts
1,762
Likes
6,980
Not the best picture since the bracelet is on, but it looks pretty nice to me.
IMG_5227.webp
 
ibis888
Posts
602
Likes
564
The fact that you can get a Speedmaster with the 1863 movement for $4-5k is pretty extraordinary. A hell of a lot of watch for the money.
 
97TJ
Posts
130
Likes
175
I guess we have to define "hand finished", the only thing I could find is that it's partially hand finished. Compared to a Patek or their like I guess not at all, but it seems there is some hand finishing involved. it certainly doesn't appear all machined finished so I guess it having some qualifies it on the open market enough to make this statement?
On line it says...
"Yes, the Omega Calibre 1863 movement is partially hand-finished, but not to the same degree as some high-end movements. While the movement's parts are precisely machined, some components are hand-finished, particularly those that are more visible, such as the bridge and the dial-side, to achieve a higher level of aesthetic appeal."
It's certainly pretty to look at.
 
Sign up or log in to reply...

Similar threads

lucreative

3861 vs. 1863 movement finishing and decoration comparison?

lucreative Modern Omega Watches
Evitzee
Evitzee
Posts
7
Views
4K