For more than two centuries, the Swiss lever escapement reigned unchallenged. But at the end of the twentieth century, a brilliant independent watchmaker, George Daniels (1926-2011), shook the industry's giants with a revolutionary invention: the coaxial escapement — an idea it would take him nearly thirty years to see adopted.
The hidden flaw of the Swiss lever
In the traditional lever escapement, the impulse is transmitted by sliding: the wheel tooth rubs against the pallet's impulse face before leaving it. This sliding action requires lubrication with a very fine epilame-treated oil (Moebius 9415). Over time, however, this oil oxidises, migrates, and loses its properties. The result: after five to seven years, amplitude drops, the rate drifts, and the watch must be fully overhauled.
Daniels' insight: switching to rolling motion
Daniels transformed sliding friction into near-pure rolling. His escapement uses three pallets spread across two levels (hence "coaxial") and two escape wheels stacked coaxially, meshing with each other so that the impulse occurs almost perpendicular to the pallet's face. Sliding is not entirely eliminated, but reduced by a factor of roughly 8 to 10. The direct consequence: lubrication becomes far less critical, and pallet wear plummets.
The long uphill struggle
Daniels began developing the concept in 1974. It took six years of refinement before he filed his patent, in 1980. He presented his invention to Patek Philippe, Rolex, and Audemars Piguet — polite refusals all round. The industry had invested decades in tooling for the Swiss lever and had no appetite for a system that would render its stocks obsolete. It was not until 1999 that Omega, under the impetus of Nicolas Hayek, industrialised the coaxial escapement in calibre 2500. Today, Omega's entire mechanical range is fitted with it (Master Chronometer, calibre 8500 and its successors).
Coaxial versus Swiss lever: the match-up
Coaxial advantages: the escapement becomes far less dependent on the condition of the oil on the pallets, giving superior long-term rate stability and reduced pallet wear. Drawbacks: more complex manufacturing (two coaxial wheels), sensitivity to initial adjustment, higher industrial cost. This is why the Swiss lever remains dominant in entry-level and mid-range calibres, while the coaxial escapement has become a longevity argument for industrial Haute Horlogerie.
Before comparing escapements, the Swiss lever must be understood in depth — that is Unit 3 of our online watchmaking course, summarised in how to learn watchmaking online.
Frequently asked questions
Is the coaxial escapement exclusive to Omega?
Omega holds the industrial licence. Daniels himself produced around thirty coaxial pieces, and Roger W. Smith (his apprentice) continues to make them by hand on the Isle of Man.
Does a coaxial Omega really need fewer overhauls?
Omega officially recommends a complete service every 5 to 8 years, with no distinction between coaxial and Swiss lever movements. The real benefit of the coaxial escapement is not a longer advertised interval, but that the watch's rate becomes less dependent on the condition of the oil on the pallets, so it tends to maintain its performance better between services.
Are there other alternative modern escapements?
The Genequand silicon concept (LVMH), Urban Jürgensen's detent spring escapement, and Audemars Piguet's Constant escapement. None has reached the coaxial's industrial scale.
Draw inspiration from the greatest creators. Décalibre offers dedicated modules on complications and alternative escapements to feed your technical passion.