![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | It is requested that one or more audio files be
included in this article to
improve its quality. Please see Wikipedia:Requested recordings for more on this request. |
Is there any information about Prof. Hall and his clock? The obituary quoted in the article is essentially content-free. "18 tons of concrete" isn't an interesting feature... and the alleged 0.01 seconds in 3 months would make it better than a Shortt clock. If that is true, it would be good to know how it was done; if there is no data perhaps it should be deleted as an unsupported tale. Paul Koning 22:00, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
The same goes for Fedchenko. I asked Google for help, but about the only real description I can find is a hobbyist reconstruction, which describes a mechanism that sounds fairly decent but is unlikely to be anywhere near as good as Shortt (and his measurements are reasonably good but not great, a few seconds per day). Paul Koning 19:29, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
A silicium escapement wheel is a revolutionary development in mechanical watchmaking. It does not require lubrication and is, in my humble opinion, superior to George Daniels Co-Axial Escapement. Such new development should not be deleted from the Escapement page. Please do not delete:
A major improvement is an escapement that does not require regular lubrication. Frédérique Constant of Geneva developped a mechanical movement that incorporates a silicium escapement wheel that will no longer need lubrication. Silicium is the ideal material for use in watch making as it is not magnetic, is extremely hard (1100 Vickers compared to 700 Vickers for steel), and is highly resistant to corrosion. The biggest advantage of a silicium escapement wheel is that it does not need to be lubricated. As it does not need to be lubricated, previously mentioned disadvantages such as age-related thinning and drying of lubrication will no longer occur. Pcstas 11:23, 21 February 2007 (UTC) — Pcstas ( talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
This is an article on similar 'revolutionary' escapement wheel from Patek Philippe, a company that is extensively described on Wikipedia. Pcstas 11:38, 21 February 2007 (UTC)— Pcstas ( talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
Your conclusions and accusations are invalid: Frederique Constant created and produced revolutionary silicium escapements wheel and we take full credit of it! File:Frederique Constant Silicium Escapement2.jpg
Pcstas 13:04, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
Re "silicium": Pcstas says, a few paragraphs up this page, "Silicium" versus "Silicon", both are fine, Silicium is however the term used in watch industry. So, if you want the article to be in line with what is customary in watch industry, use Silicium'. I'm sorry, I believe this is a mistranslation. The chemical is invariably known as "silicon" in English. However, the French chemical name for it is "silicium", and the German name for it is "Silicium" (non-chemical German speakers also call it "Silizium"). Despite Pcstas's confident assertion that "silicium" is the term used in English horology, I can find almost no examples of this, and lots of examples of "silicon". Do a Google search for silicium site:www.timezone.com and you will find one example of silicium. Now search for silicon site:www.timezone.com and you will be shown 12 results, several of which contain the word "silicon" several times. I am quite sure that when "silicium" appears in English horology, it is simply because someone has been reading French or German articles about watchmaking and not realised what the correct English translation was. I can see no evidence that this mistranslation has become the standard English horological term. UBJ 43X ( talk) 11:33, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
Shouldn't the escape wheel turn counter-clockwise in the animation? The way it is drawn shows the recieving pallet on the left, and the discharge pallet on the right.
There should be a section on magnetic escapement, used principally and for many years in watches of the tuning-fork type.
Clifford magnetic escapement: http://p098.ezboard.com/fhorofindfrm13.showMessage?topicID=2.topic
Elgin magnetic escapement: http://p098.ezboard.com/fhorofindfrm13.showMessage?topicID=3.topic
-- Wfaxon 06:58, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
Under 'anchor escapement', it says "The anchor escapement is the immediate ancestor of the escapements used in nearly all modern mechanical wristwatches." Unfortunately, the article does not tell us which escapement is actually used in nearly all modern mechanical wristwatches... Can someone add this? -- Wws 02:43, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
Hi. Removed that sentence since the anchor escapement is only distantly related to the lever escapement. I quickly added very brief comments on the lever, chronometer and cylinder escapements. Wrs1864 03:16, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
I was wondering whether 'lock' and 'draw' were, in reference to escapement. Could this be added?
I want to compliment whoever wrote the description of the Shortt free pendulum escapement. I've read a number of explanations of that escapement, and this is the first one I've really understood. Thanks! -- Chetvorno 16:18, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
Under History it says that the earliest known escapements were Chinese: in Xi Ying's 723 astronomical globe and Su Song's 11th century clock tower. Is it known what type of escapement they were? Were they verges? I believe the Chinese government has constructed a working model of the Song clock, so they must know about the mechanism. -- Chetvorno 16:59, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
I'd like to question whether Seiko Spring Drive deserves a heading as a separate escapement. As I understand it, it's simply a quartz watch whose power comes from a generator run by the spring, with an electromechanical linkage to move the sweep hand smoothly. This sounds like a typical watch company marketing-driven novelty, rather than an actual technological improvement. What qualifies as an escapement? I think it should have something to do with the timekeeping part of the watch, not just the indicating part. This section should be merged into Quartz clock, Watch#Electronic movements, or somewhere else. -- Chetvorno 17:58, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
The current article is solely concerned with clock escapements. A contribution I made concerning another type of escapement was removed with subsequent notice to me as follows"
It appears that this was considered "off topic".
In addition to this material was about to add escapements as used in piano keyboard actions, typesetters, and other devices.
I suggest that it would be more appropriate to move the bulk of the existing article (those sections discussing particular types of clock escapement in detail) to Escapement (clock), to make room for an article here appropriate to the title. Clock specific articles would reference the new article. Should any other article become too weighty it too could be moved partially to an appropriate subarticle (e.g. Escapement (radio control), Escapement (electric typewriter), etc.).
Comments here are solicited. - Leonard G. ( talk) 18:20, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
I removed the following sentence: It also keeps the pendulum or balance wheel moving by giving it small pushes. since it didn't seem to make any sense. If I'm mistaken, feel free to put it back. - Special-T ( talk) 04:14, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
OK - sorry to make extra work! It is a complicated mechanism to describe. - Special-T ( talk) 13:35, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
Would the Escapement page benefit from an animation of the Gravity Escapement? I've done this one in order to explain the operation of the Trinity College Clock Hughhunt ( talk) 10:29, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
Yes, will do. Glad you like it. Produced using Matlab. Hughhunt ( talk) 00:33, 24 February 2010 (UTC) It's annoying that rescaling of gifs has been disabled. I've changed the size of the gif to avoid the need for rescaling. Hughhunt ( talk) 22:42, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
The article contains 54 references in support of its content. However, only the first 37 appear in the 'Notes' section at the end of the article. I cannot figure out how to make the missing 17 appear. Also should not the 'notes' section be entitled 'references' to match the majority of other articles? 86.149.78.201 ( talk) 17:14, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
Mechanical escapements can be categorized into three categories, which also follow roughly the historical order of their invention: (a) recoil escapements; (b) deadbeat escapements; (c) free escapements. Wouldn't it be worthwhile to organize the currently 13 mechanical escapements under these headings (as does, e.g., the German WP)? haraldmmueller 16:09, 22 September 2013 (UTC)--
The article states twice that only about 10 escapements "stood the test of time and were widely used" / "about 10 have seen widespread use." Of course, the truth of this depends on what is meant by "widespread" - but I am quite sure that the number of "important" (my word) escapements is higher. For example, Riefler's free escapement (which even has its own article here in the English WP) and Riefler's gravity escapement are definitely worth mentioning as the climax of mechanical escapement design for astronimical clocks. Of course, the number built of these two is small (at most a few 100), but in the world of high-precision clocks, this already amounts to "widespread" use. In the same vein, a number of escapements for tower clocks must IMHO be added to those in "widespread use".
Together, I am very sure that the number will then be more on the order of 20 or even 25, not 10.
Therefore, I propose to change the two 10s to 20s.
(And if challenged, I might find time to create a short list here about these "important escapements" to prove my point ... ;-) )
haraldmmueller 16:21, 22 September 2013 (UTC)-- — Preceding unsigned comment added by Haraldmmueller ( talk • contribs)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Escapement. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 12:28, 4 July 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Escapement. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4158/is_20010816/ai_n14411695When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 17:10, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Escapement. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 03:29, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
Is there someway the floating balance escapement can be added? ⠀— Glosome 💬 02:13, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
The Coaxial escapement section's last paragraph says:
>Although a highly ingenious escapement design, the Daniels coaxial nevertheless still needs lubrication to the lever pallet pivots. In addition, because of its geometry the impulse wheel can only have a limited number of teeth, thus it is necessary to have an extra wheel and pinion in the wheel train the pivots of which also need lubricating. Therefore, the advantages of this escapement over the lever are of an uncertain value.
This has no citation, and I think it's also incorrect. Daniels and Omega used to mate the driving gear with the teeth of one of the impulse wheels, but both Omega and R. W. Smith now instead stack a driven pinion co-axially with the two impulse wheel layers, just like the lever escapement does with its impulse wheel. Therefore there isn't an "extra" wheel and pivot in the wheel train.
Also, the first sentence describes another similarity the coaxial escapement shares with the lever escapement, and is superfluous. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Poultryjimmy ( talk • contribs) 04:26, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
Under the heading "History" the final sentence makes the claim that "Oscillating timekeepers are used in every modern clock." This is incorrect, so I qualified it by adding "mechanical", as in "Oscillating timekeepers are used in every modern mechanical clock". User:Roly Williams reverted this, claiming that "Even modern electronic clocks rely on a quarts crystal oscillator for time keeping." This is patently false. There are indeed modern timekeepers which do NOT have oscillators. To cite just two examples: clocks with synchronous DC motors were the most common kitchen clocks in the US between the 1930s and 1980s. And here is an electronic digital clock that likewise has no oscillators; it simply uses the incoming AC current at 50 (or 60)hz and decade dividers to drive the readout: [1] https://hackaday.com/2010/04/07/logic-clock-without-an-on-board-oscillator/ No, these are not clocks with oscillators; they are clocks without oscillators that happen to tap into the oscillations of externally-supplied DC power. That is not a trivial difference. Consequently I am going to change the sentence in question to read as follows: "Oscillating timekeepers are used in most modern clocks." (emphasis added) Anyone who wants to revert this had damned-well better debate it here first. Bricology ( talk) 10:02, 26 September 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | It is requested that one or more audio files be
included in this article to
improve its quality. Please see Wikipedia:Requested recordings for more on this request. |
Is there any information about Prof. Hall and his clock? The obituary quoted in the article is essentially content-free. "18 tons of concrete" isn't an interesting feature... and the alleged 0.01 seconds in 3 months would make it better than a Shortt clock. If that is true, it would be good to know how it was done; if there is no data perhaps it should be deleted as an unsupported tale. Paul Koning 22:00, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
The same goes for Fedchenko. I asked Google for help, but about the only real description I can find is a hobbyist reconstruction, which describes a mechanism that sounds fairly decent but is unlikely to be anywhere near as good as Shortt (and his measurements are reasonably good but not great, a few seconds per day). Paul Koning 19:29, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
A silicium escapement wheel is a revolutionary development in mechanical watchmaking. It does not require lubrication and is, in my humble opinion, superior to George Daniels Co-Axial Escapement. Such new development should not be deleted from the Escapement page. Please do not delete:
A major improvement is an escapement that does not require regular lubrication. Frédérique Constant of Geneva developped a mechanical movement that incorporates a silicium escapement wheel that will no longer need lubrication. Silicium is the ideal material for use in watch making as it is not magnetic, is extremely hard (1100 Vickers compared to 700 Vickers for steel), and is highly resistant to corrosion. The biggest advantage of a silicium escapement wheel is that it does not need to be lubricated. As it does not need to be lubricated, previously mentioned disadvantages such as age-related thinning and drying of lubrication will no longer occur. Pcstas 11:23, 21 February 2007 (UTC) — Pcstas ( talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
This is an article on similar 'revolutionary' escapement wheel from Patek Philippe, a company that is extensively described on Wikipedia. Pcstas 11:38, 21 February 2007 (UTC)— Pcstas ( talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
Your conclusions and accusations are invalid: Frederique Constant created and produced revolutionary silicium escapements wheel and we take full credit of it! File:Frederique Constant Silicium Escapement2.jpg
Pcstas 13:04, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
Re "silicium": Pcstas says, a few paragraphs up this page, "Silicium" versus "Silicon", both are fine, Silicium is however the term used in watch industry. So, if you want the article to be in line with what is customary in watch industry, use Silicium'. I'm sorry, I believe this is a mistranslation. The chemical is invariably known as "silicon" in English. However, the French chemical name for it is "silicium", and the German name for it is "Silicium" (non-chemical German speakers also call it "Silizium"). Despite Pcstas's confident assertion that "silicium" is the term used in English horology, I can find almost no examples of this, and lots of examples of "silicon". Do a Google search for silicium site:www.timezone.com and you will find one example of silicium. Now search for silicon site:www.timezone.com and you will be shown 12 results, several of which contain the word "silicon" several times. I am quite sure that when "silicium" appears in English horology, it is simply because someone has been reading French or German articles about watchmaking and not realised what the correct English translation was. I can see no evidence that this mistranslation has become the standard English horological term. UBJ 43X ( talk) 11:33, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
Shouldn't the escape wheel turn counter-clockwise in the animation? The way it is drawn shows the recieving pallet on the left, and the discharge pallet on the right.
There should be a section on magnetic escapement, used principally and for many years in watches of the tuning-fork type.
Clifford magnetic escapement: http://p098.ezboard.com/fhorofindfrm13.showMessage?topicID=2.topic
Elgin magnetic escapement: http://p098.ezboard.com/fhorofindfrm13.showMessage?topicID=3.topic
-- Wfaxon 06:58, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
Under 'anchor escapement', it says "The anchor escapement is the immediate ancestor of the escapements used in nearly all modern mechanical wristwatches." Unfortunately, the article does not tell us which escapement is actually used in nearly all modern mechanical wristwatches... Can someone add this? -- Wws 02:43, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
Hi. Removed that sentence since the anchor escapement is only distantly related to the lever escapement. I quickly added very brief comments on the lever, chronometer and cylinder escapements. Wrs1864 03:16, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
I was wondering whether 'lock' and 'draw' were, in reference to escapement. Could this be added?
I want to compliment whoever wrote the description of the Shortt free pendulum escapement. I've read a number of explanations of that escapement, and this is the first one I've really understood. Thanks! -- Chetvorno 16:18, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
Under History it says that the earliest known escapements were Chinese: in Xi Ying's 723 astronomical globe and Su Song's 11th century clock tower. Is it known what type of escapement they were? Were they verges? I believe the Chinese government has constructed a working model of the Song clock, so they must know about the mechanism. -- Chetvorno 16:59, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
I'd like to question whether Seiko Spring Drive deserves a heading as a separate escapement. As I understand it, it's simply a quartz watch whose power comes from a generator run by the spring, with an electromechanical linkage to move the sweep hand smoothly. This sounds like a typical watch company marketing-driven novelty, rather than an actual technological improvement. What qualifies as an escapement? I think it should have something to do with the timekeeping part of the watch, not just the indicating part. This section should be merged into Quartz clock, Watch#Electronic movements, or somewhere else. -- Chetvorno 17:58, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
The current article is solely concerned with clock escapements. A contribution I made concerning another type of escapement was removed with subsequent notice to me as follows"
It appears that this was considered "off topic".
In addition to this material was about to add escapements as used in piano keyboard actions, typesetters, and other devices.
I suggest that it would be more appropriate to move the bulk of the existing article (those sections discussing particular types of clock escapement in detail) to Escapement (clock), to make room for an article here appropriate to the title. Clock specific articles would reference the new article. Should any other article become too weighty it too could be moved partially to an appropriate subarticle (e.g. Escapement (radio control), Escapement (electric typewriter), etc.).
Comments here are solicited. - Leonard G. ( talk) 18:20, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
I removed the following sentence: It also keeps the pendulum or balance wheel moving by giving it small pushes. since it didn't seem to make any sense. If I'm mistaken, feel free to put it back. - Special-T ( talk) 04:14, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
OK - sorry to make extra work! It is a complicated mechanism to describe. - Special-T ( talk) 13:35, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
Would the Escapement page benefit from an animation of the Gravity Escapement? I've done this one in order to explain the operation of the Trinity College Clock Hughhunt ( talk) 10:29, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
Yes, will do. Glad you like it. Produced using Matlab. Hughhunt ( talk) 00:33, 24 February 2010 (UTC) It's annoying that rescaling of gifs has been disabled. I've changed the size of the gif to avoid the need for rescaling. Hughhunt ( talk) 22:42, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
The article contains 54 references in support of its content. However, only the first 37 appear in the 'Notes' section at the end of the article. I cannot figure out how to make the missing 17 appear. Also should not the 'notes' section be entitled 'references' to match the majority of other articles? 86.149.78.201 ( talk) 17:14, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
Mechanical escapements can be categorized into three categories, which also follow roughly the historical order of their invention: (a) recoil escapements; (b) deadbeat escapements; (c) free escapements. Wouldn't it be worthwhile to organize the currently 13 mechanical escapements under these headings (as does, e.g., the German WP)? haraldmmueller 16:09, 22 September 2013 (UTC)--
The article states twice that only about 10 escapements "stood the test of time and were widely used" / "about 10 have seen widespread use." Of course, the truth of this depends on what is meant by "widespread" - but I am quite sure that the number of "important" (my word) escapements is higher. For example, Riefler's free escapement (which even has its own article here in the English WP) and Riefler's gravity escapement are definitely worth mentioning as the climax of mechanical escapement design for astronimical clocks. Of course, the number built of these two is small (at most a few 100), but in the world of high-precision clocks, this already amounts to "widespread" use. In the same vein, a number of escapements for tower clocks must IMHO be added to those in "widespread use".
Together, I am very sure that the number will then be more on the order of 20 or even 25, not 10.
Therefore, I propose to change the two 10s to 20s.
(And if challenged, I might find time to create a short list here about these "important escapements" to prove my point ... ;-) )
haraldmmueller 16:21, 22 September 2013 (UTC)-- — Preceding unsigned comment added by Haraldmmueller ( talk • contribs)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Escapement. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 12:28, 4 July 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Escapement. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4158/is_20010816/ai_n14411695When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 17:10, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Escapement. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 03:29, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
Is there someway the floating balance escapement can be added? ⠀— Glosome 💬 02:13, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
The Coaxial escapement section's last paragraph says:
>Although a highly ingenious escapement design, the Daniels coaxial nevertheless still needs lubrication to the lever pallet pivots. In addition, because of its geometry the impulse wheel can only have a limited number of teeth, thus it is necessary to have an extra wheel and pinion in the wheel train the pivots of which also need lubricating. Therefore, the advantages of this escapement over the lever are of an uncertain value.
This has no citation, and I think it's also incorrect. Daniels and Omega used to mate the driving gear with the teeth of one of the impulse wheels, but both Omega and R. W. Smith now instead stack a driven pinion co-axially with the two impulse wheel layers, just like the lever escapement does with its impulse wheel. Therefore there isn't an "extra" wheel and pivot in the wheel train.
Also, the first sentence describes another similarity the coaxial escapement shares with the lever escapement, and is superfluous. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Poultryjimmy ( talk • contribs) 04:26, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
Under the heading "History" the final sentence makes the claim that "Oscillating timekeepers are used in every modern clock." This is incorrect, so I qualified it by adding "mechanical", as in "Oscillating timekeepers are used in every modern mechanical clock". User:Roly Williams reverted this, claiming that "Even modern electronic clocks rely on a quarts crystal oscillator for time keeping." This is patently false. There are indeed modern timekeepers which do NOT have oscillators. To cite just two examples: clocks with synchronous DC motors were the most common kitchen clocks in the US between the 1930s and 1980s. And here is an electronic digital clock that likewise has no oscillators; it simply uses the incoming AC current at 50 (or 60)hz and decade dividers to drive the readout: [1] https://hackaday.com/2010/04/07/logic-clock-without-an-on-board-oscillator/ No, these are not clocks with oscillators; they are clocks without oscillators that happen to tap into the oscillations of externally-supplied DC power. That is not a trivial difference. Consequently I am going to change the sentence in question to read as follows: "Oscillating timekeepers are used in most modern clocks." (emphasis added) Anyone who wants to revert this had damned-well better debate it here first. Bricology ( talk) 10:02, 26 September 2023 (UTC)