Zenith vs. Patek regarding pocket watch movements

[dennisljacob]

Can anyone do a comparison of the quality and function of these two company's pocket watches. Most of the watches I'm looking at are late 1880 to mid 1900's. I am more drawn to the case engraving and decoration. But function needs to be more important than just looks. Thanks Dennis

[dennisljacob]

Can anyone do a comparison of the quality and function of these two company's pocket watches. Most of the watches I'm looking at are late 1880 to mid 1900's. I am more drawn to the case engraving and decoration. But function needs to be more important than just looks. Thanks Dennis

[Dr. Jon]

Most would say there is no comparison.

Zenith has always made solid watches that function well. Zenith watches tend to be spare, free of decoration and extra jewels. They did what was needed to keep time well and little else.

Zenith won a lot of military contracts for good time keepers.

Patek polished everthing, beveled all gears, used elaborate levers and won a lot of timing competitions.

Watches from both brands should run very well with good care.

[RON in PA]

This is going a bit off topic perhaps, but how do Hamilton pocket watches of the 1900-1910 period compare to Swiss watches like Patek of the same period?

[Dr. Jon]

Same kind of comment. Hamilton was very well made in the essential elements.

I have never seen an American pocket watch with as elegant a lever as made by the top Swiss makers. Sadly, this refinement has no measureable effect on timekeeping. Some Hamiltons went to some time trials and did credably.

The difference is in the amount of hand polish and finishing. Hamilton and possible Zenith may have had the better machine cpability. Sometimes the hand finish work did not make the piece more accurate and may have even been counter productive.

Both Zenith and Hamilton did a great job of getting good timekeeping to a lot of people. Patek built works of art for the few who could afford them.