The development of the Peregrine

Prototypes and sketches of non-production watches.
Forum rules
This part of the forum contains prototype-material, information and photo's kindly provided by CW. No high-quality photography of the final product, just a great opportunity to get an insight of what is going on over at CW!
User avatar
Hans
Administrator Emeritus
Posts: 2266
Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2005 11:24 am
CW-watches: 7
LE-one: yes
LE-two: yes
Location: The Netherlands

The development of the Peregrine

Post by Hans »

The photos of the Peregrine on this forum where all made of prototype models. Obviously CW is still refining the design. Here are some recent changes made to the design, some changes might very well be based on comments on this forum:

1. The Strap needs to be a little longer maybe 1 or 2 cm and carry 2 more sets of holes
2. The buckle needs to have the CW logo in the area that is rounded and the two prongs need to work as one rather than independently.
3. The stitching needs to be bulked up and longer…almost the size of the index…you can see the relationship on the photo.
4. The stitching colour should be ecru…not white…for both black and brown versions.
5. The colour of brown and black is OK as per sample
6. The steel bracelet needs brushing to match case and CW logos as per previous production
7. The outer case…..the case needs to be brushed more heavily in the brushed areas to create a greater contrast
8. The crown has been increased in height as per the sketch approximately 40% but the photo gives a better indication of the required portion
9. The crown protection shoulder has also been increased ever so slightly
10. The luminous dot at 12hr on the outside bezel has changed to a set in piece…
11. All the markings on the outside bezel are to be engraved deeper as depicted by minutes 2/3/4/5 on the photoshop doc…perhaps an extra 50% deeper again
12. The quarter hr markings look as if they are just dropped on without any mathematical thought or accuracy…so they should be calculated as per the diagram red lines…as you will see the width of each marker is 3min and the gaps are 2 mins from a line taken from the centre of the watch through the minute markers.
13. The Tachymeter is OK
14. The indexes at 1/2/5/6/7/8/10/11hr are all OK
15. The indexes at 3/9hr have replaced the numbers
16. The Triangular index at 12hr has been increased to compliment the main indexes…please follow the new photo
17. The CW logo and device have been separated as per the photo…this is correct for colour and size and position
18. If the aperture for date can be increased it may be worth considering….but perhaps it can not …in fact it cant because the next day will begin to show through
19. The Peregrine icon on the chrono hand is OK
20. The chrono hand needs to be extended to the outer minute markers
21. The ratio between luminous and silver on the main hr and minute hands has been changed…please adjust according to the new photo
22. The Alarm hand colour has changed….
23. For silver dial….. use electroplated blue
24. For Black Dial …` use electroplated scarlet
25. For Blue Dial …..` use Silver
26. sapphire gasket is semi transparent colour

Image

Image
User avatar
El Tiempo
Senior Guru
Senior Guru
Posts: 785
Joined: Sat Dec 24, 2005 12:53 am
CW-watches: 0
Location: Parts Unknown

Post by El Tiempo »

Holy crap that thing is huge.

I like that the numbers have been dropped and the bezel will recieve some attention.

What do you guys think of the stitching on the bottom? Too broad or just right?
MYND
Junior
Junior
Posts: 42
Joined: Fri Jan 13, 2006 3:56 am
CW-watches: 0
Location: Dordrecht, The Netherlands

Post by MYND »

I am wearing my malvern again today, and still loving it!

As for the changes being made on the peregrine model, i think the watch looks better now then before. The strap looks also awesome.

This silver peregrine and the new ''corax'' chronograph will make a great couple if you ask me.

I also think that it's great that CW keeps us updated about the progress, that's true watchmaking!
DavidM1
Senior
Senior
Posts: 65
Joined: Sun Jan 15, 2006 5:05 pm

Post by DavidM1 »

I agree, and yes the revised version looks just great. Much cleaner IMHO.