28Watch housesProfile details
An interpretive historical profile, reviewed 3 October 2026. Model-specific construction and handling vary; cited manufacturer histories are primary accounts, not independent performance tests. No claim of market value or investment return.
A name that describes a working method
MB&F began in 2005, and the initials expand to Maximilian Büsser and Friends. The wording is important: collaboration is part of the identity, not an inconvenient footnote beneath a manufacture claim. Designers, movement constructors, finishers and other specialists contribute different kinds of expertise. Studying those credits offers a more useful understanding of watchmaking than assuming that excellence requires every operation to happen beneath one roof.
The first Horological Machine, HM1, appeared in 2007. Its separated displays, central tourbillon and conspicuous three-dimensional architecture established a direction rather than a conventional model template. MB&F describes four mainspring barrels connected in a combination of series and parallel. A barrel stores the energy that drives a mechanical watch. Multiple barrels are an architectural choice; their number alone does not tell you how long the watch runs or how evenly it supplies energy.
Evidence for this section: MB&F milestones · Horological Machine No. 1. Primary accounts are attributed; the association is not an independent performance test.
Horological Machines change the viewing angle
The Horological Machine name gives the designers permission to start with an imagined object instead of a familiar round dial. HM4 Thunderbolt, launched in 2010, makes that approach especially clear. Two projecting pods contain the time and power-reserve displays, with a transparent central section exposing the mechanism. Its aviation character grew from Büsser’s enthusiasm for model aircraft, according to MB&F’s own account.
The interesting result is a change in the relationship between watch and viewer. Instead of reading a flat diagram from above, the wearer encounters a small structure with several viewpoints. That structure needs a purpose-built arrangement to bring power to its displays. It is worth distinguishing inspiration from historical function: an aircraft-like case is an artistic and engineering interpretation, not proof that the watch is a certified cockpit instrument.
Evidence for this section: HM4 series official technical history. Primary accounts are attributed; the association is not an independent performance test.
Legacy Machine 1: a different imagined past
Legacy Machine No. 1, introduced in 2011, took a round case and nineteenth-century watchmaking as its starting points. Jean-François Mojon and Kari Voutilainen are credited with its movement development. A large balance wheel sits above the dial plane beneath an arched bridge, making the regulator the visual centre. The balance is the oscillating wheel whose back-and-forth motion helps establish the watch’s rhythm; it is not a miniature rotor for automatic winding.
Two time displays can be set independently, rather than being confined to whole-hour differences, and a standing power-reserve indicator makes stored energy visible in another plane. Traditional finishing on the back supplies a deliberate counterpoint to the theatrical front. The underlying thought experiment was Büsser imagining what he might create in an earlier age. LM1 therefore reads as an invented historical possibility, not a reproduction of a surviving antique.
Evidence for this section: Legacy Machine No. 1. Primary accounts are attributed; the association is not an independent performance test.
A perpetual calendar reconsidered
The 2015 Legacy Machine Perpetual, developed with Stephen McDonnell, shows that an unconventional appearance can accompany a substantial mechanical rethink. A perpetual calendar represents unequal month lengths and the usual four-year leap-year cycle. Many traditional arrangements work around a nominal 31-day month and mechanically skip unnecessary dates. MB&F’s account describes a different approach: start from 28 days, the common minimum, and add the days the particular month requires.
The brand calls the mechanism a mechanical processor. That term describes an arrangement of mechanical parts, not an electronic computer hidden in the movement. Safety measures disable the calendar adjusters while the calendar changes. The design is a meaningful response to handling vulnerabilities, but it does not remove the need to follow the manual or maintain the watch. A perpetual calendar also remains a model of a calendar system; the label should never be read as a claim that no future correction can be required under any circumstances.
Evidence for this section: Legacy Machine Perpetual official technical account. Primary accounts are attributed; the association is not an independent performance test.
Looking beyond novelty
Examine an MB&F in stages. First identify the time display and how easily it can be read from the intended viewing angle. Then distinguish the energy source, the regulating organ and the decorative framework. Finally turn it over and look at the bridges, bevels and changes of finish. A spectacular shape can draw attention, but the quality of the small transitions is often what sustains it.
The wider project includes mechanical art and collaborations beyond wristwatches, reflected in the M.A.D.Gallery opened in Geneva in 2011. That context helps explain why the machines are best approached as functional mechanical sculpture. It does not make comfort, servicing or legibility irrelevant. Those practical concerns create a productive tension with imagination. MB&F’s contribution is to keep asking how far a timekeeper can depart from convention while remaining an intelligible, working object.
Evidence for this section: MB&F milestones. Primary accounts are attributed; the association is not an independent performance test.
Sources & reading
- MB&F milestonesmbandf.com · 2026-10-03
Primary source in the supplied bibliography. The section links above identify its relevant subject; manufacturer narratives and specifications remain attributed accounts, not independent specimen tests.
- Horological Machine No. 1mbandf.com · 2026-10-03
Primary source in the supplied bibliography. The section links above identify its relevant subject; manufacturer narratives and specifications remain attributed accounts, not independent specimen tests.
- HM4 series official technical historymbandf.com · 2026-10-03
Primary source in the supplied bibliography. The section links above identify its relevant subject; manufacturer narratives and specifications remain attributed accounts, not independent specimen tests.
- Legacy Machine No. 1mbandf.com · 2026-10-03
Primary source in the supplied bibliography. The section links above identify its relevant subject; manufacturer narratives and specifications remain attributed accounts, not independent specimen tests.
- Legacy Machine Perpetual official technical accountmbandf.com · 2026-10-03
Primary source in the supplied bibliography. The section links above identify its relevant subject; manufacturer narratives and specifications remain attributed accounts, not independent specimen tests.