Freak 1, Freak 2, Freak 1.5, Freak 2 again ... are we speaking about software releases, Tango dancing steps, or what? No, of course not. We are speaking about an episode in the technical history of wristwatches, about Ulysse Nardin’s “Freak”.

 

Already when the original Freak was released in 2001, it was clear to any observer of the business that Ulysse Nardin had left the fields of traditional watchmaking and entered a new territory; high tech material, nano-technology silicium parts, all this cannot be described or evaluated with the vocabulary and experiences of conventional watch production.

 

As so often in the history of Ulysse Nardin, an idea from Ludwig Oechslin was the beginning. But unlike the former developments, which all - more or less - could be realised by using conventional machinery and materials already known in watchmaking, this time, his concept of a radically new and simple escapement, that would need a minimum of moving parts and maintenance, caused problems.

 

After but a short while, it became clear that escapement wheels made from steel or similar metal would not work, because of their too large mass inertia. Consequently, lighter alternatives had to be found. It appeared to be a stroke of luck, when CSEM, a company specialised on the production of nano-precision parts from layered silicium, entered the scene, and a collaboration resulted in the first working movements with what was designated the "Dual Direct escapement". Back then, the watchmakers had no idea of what the silicium engineers were speaking about, it was techno-babble for them, and they had no other choice than to trust that the wheels delivered would work as announced. Tests were conducted, another tests, early prototypes were produced and test-worn by some people (you won’t believe how difficult it is to keep something secret in the small watch-producing community of the Swiss Jura, where virtually everyone knows everybody!), and after a time, green lights were given for series production.

It is the curse of new technologies that, despite long and thorough tests, no testing procedure can be a substitute for real life. And so, problems started to arise long after the test procedures were successfully concluded, when the Freak was in use. The first one was an unforeseen magnetising that built up extremely slowly, over months or even years. This problem was the first to be discovered and the easiest to resolve. Many Freaks continued to be working perfectly fine, without any further troubles, and still do so until now. A few of them, however, appeared to have a bad spell on them: Whenever the watchmakers - after thorough tests, of course - were absolutely certain to have them repaired, they would pop up again at the service centre a few months, sometimes even weeks later, not working any more. The reason for this is still not exactly known. Apparently, the process employed to produce the silicium wheels in batches still was not perfectly repeatable, and some of them offered too much resistance to the energy flow from the mainspring and blocked. Yet a simple exchange of the escapement wheels would not resolve the problem.

 

In the Dual Direct escapement, the mainspring’s energy is transmitted to the escapement wheels during specific impulse peaks, while during the other oscillations, the wheels are running „empty“. For these energy peaks, the wheels need an ultra-small level of production tolerance, otherwise they could suffer damage. Additionally, the whole system has to be „in harmony“ - if you permit me using this esoteric term. In this respect, despite its high-tech approach, the Freak 1 was a product of „voodoo science“, it worked flawlessly only if all components were perfectly in harmony with each other. To reproduce that seemed impossible, and the more the watchmakers tried to achieve it with the watches returning defect, the less it seemed possible. Finally, the interaction of the silicium with the other parts in the movement, especially the friction, also appeared not to follow the predicted specifications.

 

Meanwhile, Ulysse Nardin’s technical director, Pierre Gygax, had an idea:

The reason why the Dual Direct escapement was so sensitive to minor perturbations was the very low level of energy or torque involved. The torque and other forces involved in a watch escapement are in reverse proportion to the number of teeth of the escape wheel for a given oscillator.The problem was forwarded to Ludwig Oechslin who came up with another dual escapement (Dual Ulysse) with eighteen "active" teeth instead of the former five in the Dual Direct escapement.

 

After all, the „Freak 28,800“, aka „Freak 2“ was launched, but due to the various delays, production had to be interrupted in favor of the upgrades for the Freak 1.

Yet all this still did not resolve the issue of the few (yes, in spite of prominent coverage those malfunctioning Freaks received, they remained a minority) Freaks that were still in the service workshop for treatment of their malady. After numerous and long debates, and the Dual Ulysse escapement’s success, there was only one way to go, only one option that would finally put an end to the issue, that was stressing the patience of customers and manufacturer alike: The suffering Freak 1s had to be healed by somehow equipping them with the Dual Ulysse escapement. 

 

What followed was a substantial constructive effort, which finally saw a very specific evolutionary step in the Freak history: What is sometimes dubbed as „Freak 1.5“ now has the Dual Ulysse escapement with the new silicium wheels , equipped with a differently dimensioned driving pinion, and the larger balance wheels with inertia screws. However, the hairspring is smaller than that of the Freak 2, and also its oscillation frequency is still 21,600 A/h, versus the faster 28,800 A/h of the Freak 2. Also a new movement bridge with slightly changed design also has to be produced.

 

This „upgrade“ delivers a reliably working Freak, equipped with substantially more costly components than it originally was.

 

It should be pointed out, though, that there is no need to send in that majority of Freak 1s, that are working fine, for that upgrade. If they did not experience the problems mentioned in the beginning, they will continue working. However, at some point, the regular service is due, and then Ulysse Nardin will perform the upgrade with the new escapement.

 

Why are they doing that? Why wouldn’t they just leave the original escapement? It is said: „Never touch a running system!“, so why touching it? Because it needs service, as every mechanical watch. Not in a year, not in two, three or four, if worn with care, but at some time, it is necessary. And now I ask you to remember what I wrote about the „harmony“ in these working movements: After disassembly, cleaning and reassembly, nobody can guarantee that the watch will be „in harmony“ again. When performing any watch service, Ulysse Nardin has to warrant its flawless working, but cannot do this with the original escapement in place. A full afterservice warranty can only be granted with the upgrade to 1.5 standard.

 

Does this reduce the watch’s value? No, in the contrary: First of all, I would think that a reliably working watch is always worth more than one that incorporates a larger expectation of failure. I am sure that the vast majority of owners will be happy to find their Freaks fit for the next decades. And, what is most important, its typical layout has not been altered at all; you need a very close look to see the difference. The two features highest valued , the innovative escapement and the new way of displaying time, remain.

 

What about originality? Since the upgrade is produced and assembled by Ulysse Nardin, the new „Freak 1.5“ is a 100% original Ulysse Nardin, and not a mariage. Yet it has been stated that the fact it is not a „Freak 1“ any more makes it less desirable, even „less original“. I could understand this argument if the original Dual Direct escapement had performed flawlessly and reliably from the beginning. Unfortunately, it did not, and it was the manufacturer’s responsibility to do whatever possible and necessary to make it reliable.

 

However, if the Dual Direct Freak is considered a historical timepiece, a step in the evolutionary development of mechanical timepieces, then, and only then, concerns about its technical modification are really justified. Being a historian, I understand this. If I had Leonardo da Vinci’s helicopter in my museum collection, I would certainly not be amused to get it back from restoration with a 4,000 hp gas turbine and latest carbon fibre rotor technology. Yet I would have never expected Leonardo’s vehicle to really take me off the ground, I would be satisfied exhibiting it as a memorial for the da Vinci genius. The Dual Direct Freak collected as a historical piece will most probably never see an upgrade, since its value lies in demonstrating the progress in watchmaking, and - let’s face it - a dead end therein. For such a timepiece, reliable longtime operation is not necessary, it just has to be there.

Does this mean that Ulysse Nardin did not tell the truth when presenting the Dual Direct Freak as the newest, best in watch history? No, certainly not. Technological progress is the result of successes and failures, and the best and most sustaining successes are those when people learn from their failures. Sometimes, history has to take detours. Today, hybrid powered cars are presented to us as the best and most recent technology, but did you know these cars were invented 80 years ago? When they are so good as everybody keeps telling, then why where we using combustion engines almost exclusively during these 80 years? While the hybrid principle sounded nice already back then, it failed due to contemporary technical limits.

 

At the time being, the Dual Direct escapement appeared to be a very good answer to the problems of the traditional Swiss anchor escapement, most notably its demand for regular maintenance. The Dual Direct escapement promised to introduce simplicity, longevity and the lack of wear into watchmaking, but the material and production processes currently available apparently were not able to fulfil the promise. The Dual Ulysse escapement was a consequence, and not a radical departure from its predecessor’s principles, and simply continued the path. So I cannot see a reason why anybody actually using this fine timepiece would not want it to be upgraded, so that it works reliably.

 

Therefore I think it is clear why Ulysse Nardin performs the upgrade on all Dual Direct Freaks, as soon as they are returned for service (AGAIN: if a Freak I is running fine without the upgrade, it is no need to have it upgraded immediately, but it is perfectly fine to leave it alone). The company feels an obligation to pursue its path of innovation, and does not want leaving behind dead watch corpses, even if they are as attractive as the Freak Is; they should work, and UN did take care about it.

(c) Marcus Hanke, PuristSpro 2007

 

Respond to this post |