So as most know the modular chronographs that use a module placed on top of a normal base movement (often and ETA 2892) will have a particular feature in that the pushers and crown are not aligned. Here is a photo of a side view of a Speedmaster reduced, and you can see that the pushers centerline is well above the crown centerline:



This is sort of a tell tale sign that the watch uses a modular chronograph, and although some brands have tried to disguise this by using oversized pushers, you can usually still tell.

Joe Horner, a UK based watchmaker posted some photos of a Breitling he received on another site - I've edited them to make the images clearer but these are his photos. Side view appears to have the crown and pushers line up as a normal integrated chronograph:



But inside, there is a 2892....curious...



When he removed the spacer, it was all clear...



Breitling has installed a set of gears to shift the position of the crown so that it matches the height of the pushers, all in an effort to disguise the fact that this is a modular chronograph. I suspect that since many chronograph fans do shy away from modular chronographs, they have done this to help with sales.

The alignment of these parts is sort of a key indicator in knowing if the watch contains and integrated chronograph or a modular chronograph movement...now that indicator isn't one you can trust to tell you the whole story.

Thought this was interesting to say the least.

Cheers, Al

 

That is interesting. I presume that adding an unnecessary gear chain to the winding mechanism wouldn't be particularly desirable from a function/maintenance or economic perspective, so I guess they REALLY wanted the watch to look symmetrical.

 

Do integrated chronographs normally function better than modular? Both in robustness and longevity of the movement?

 

Very broad question, but generally, yes.

 

Hard to tell, but is that a newer Breitling? Just curious if it's made within the current ownership.

 

Not sure how old it is...that information wasn't provided and I don't really follow the brand.

 

Sorry for my rookie question but.. why do chronograph fans avoid modular chronographs? Seen lot of hate concerning Speedmaster reduced in particular?

Thanks in advance.

 

An interesting feature. It would interest me as to how the hand setting would function, given that the “transfer case’ would have to shift outwards to connect the setting function. And there has to be some kind of a detent screw to permit removal of the crown. Also, this is a model with a date. If there is a quick change date setting function, that would factor into it. Hmmm! Many questions.

 

Described this way...

"When you drop the movement in (with the crown already in place) a U shaped cut-out in the outer plate of the "gearbox" engages with a groove in the shaft's crown so the crown can move the stem "proper" in and out."

Also there's an idler gear there so the crown/hand directions are maintained as you would expect.

 

Think your question was answered, but I've observed that there is a lot of fondness for the Reduced models among a particular set. It's not all hate. It's just the hardcore Speedy fetishists that see the Reduced lovers as borderline perverts.

I picked a reduced up late last year, but have yet to wear it. Thought I'd love it, but I don't.

 

In my opinion, Breitling wasn't trying to "fool" anyone with regard to modular vs. integrated chronograph. I'd bet a lot of watch lovers don't know there's a difference, and couldn't care less. My guess is that Breitling was simply going for esthetics: crown and pushers aligned just looks better than crown offset from pushers.

 

I was going to reply with the same sentiment - totally agree with you.

 

Let’s just be thankfull it didn’t use a paper clip.
I was honestly expecting the pushers to be moved via a linkage and not the crown. It seems an easier solution.
But again as noted above it may not have visually worked to do it that way.

 

This to me is all made up internet bullshit. It was only brought up as a “thing” to try and put modular chronograph movements down. I even remember a reviewer of a modular chronograph stating how the crown now digs into his wrist due to the crown being lower. If Patek Phillipe decides to build a chronograph movement, and raises the pushers to make them easier to use, it would be hailed as a great advance in chronograph movements.

 

It's speculative at best when assigning motivation to people or watch brands. You could be right. But it seems unlikely that Breitling was not aware that there are watch people who place a higher value on integrated chronographs. It's probably true that many watch lovers don't know, if even care about the difference. But the information is widely available and believed, even if there may be disagreements. People who buy luxury watches seem more likely to do some research or have an interest in particulars like movements or history. It doesn't take much effort to find a discussion about modular versus integrated.

Personally I suspect their motivation lies somewhere in between bait and switch and innocent design. While I like the brand even though I don't own any, it is difficult for me to believe they didn't have some business motivation to hide the modular chronograph feature.

 

Anyone who cares can easily research the movement and determine that it's modular.

 

I think they did it because it just looks nicer, especially with those pusher designs. An offset crown would probably have messed up the visual line on the side of the case. Modulars might not be fun to have serviced, but the only real issue I have with them beyond that is that yeah. sometimes that crown is a bit unsightly.

 

Exactly. Whatever the motivation it's an interesting feature.

 

VS

 

There are just as many of us who don't mind modular chronographs one bit because other than maintenance time, there isn't a practical difference in daily use. I will clarify that I don't love most reduced models because of the snap back, so my modular chrono of choice is the Dynamic chrono. (Photo found online.)