FPJ vs Rolex

[vliberman]

https://www.hodinkee.com/articles/in...urne-dial-case

reading this article and comparing notes to the write up on Rolex facility, aren't these very close in spirit? Link to the Rolex one below:

https://www.hodinkee.com/articles/inside-rolex

How different do you think manufacturing at PP or AP is? So maybe all of the them are similar and spirit and market assigns random luxury value to one brand vs another.

For the record, I admire FPJ watches and am hoping to get one from boutique, so by no means this is criticism. Rather wanted to understand what is left there between Rolex and other brands as one of the best of them, FPJ uses very similar production process. And before people start to argue that PP does everything on different scale and have special Elfs producing everything by hand, clearly this shows it ain't so... Especially with respect to highly complicated models that one cannon produce without using modern technology!

[WatchTimes]

The level of finishing on an FPJ is miles ahead of Rolex.
I love Rolex but they are not in the same world as FPJ.

[GB-man]

Hamburgers vs ribeye.

Ngl sometimes I want a burger regardless!

[hl0m4n]

+500 more elegante....

[dubins930]

Rolex is a watch…. FPJ is wrist art
Not in the same league

[vliberman]

Originally Posted by WatchTimes

The level of finishing on an FPJ is miles ahead of Rolex.
I love Rolex but they are not in the same world as FPJ.

Isn’t article specifically dismisses finishing as end goal for FPJ? And rather concentrates on watchmaking?

[GB-man]

Originally Posted by vliberman

Isn’t article specifically dismisses finishing as end goal for FPJ? And rather concentrates on watchmaking?

You definitely don’t get into FPJ for movement finishing. So many brands do it better for less. Movement design, aesthetics of dial side, the overall cohesive vision and execution from FP making his company what it is today. They wear beautifully. Exclusivity without attention something you use to be able to get with patek and AP.

Chronometric performance is not an afterthought either FPJ it’s a the heart of many of their watches. All of mine have been within a few seconds a day like my Rolex. Some other HH brands seem content with 30 seconds or more sadly.

[Ichiran]

Journe produces watches like this Rolex doesn't.

[vliberman]

Originally Posted by GB-man

You definitely don’t get into FPJ for movement finishing. So many brands do it better for less. Movement design, aesthetics of dial side, the overall cohesive vision and execution from FP making his company what it is today. They wear beautifully. Exclusivity without attention something you use to be able to get with patek and AP.

Chronometric performance is not an afterthought either FPJ it’s a the heart of many of their watches. All of mine have been within a few seconds a day like my Rolex. Some other HH brands seem content with 30 seconds or more sadly.

Thank u for the thoughtful and informative response..

[vliberman]

Originally Posted by Ichiran

Journe produces watches like this Rolex doesn't.

This is an incredible watch…. Now if I take something like SkyDweller I would argue that it offers level of complexity that is superior to resonance in usability and functionality. It doesn’t sacrifice accuracy at all which resonance suppose to enhance yet offers robustness that this particular model probably doesn’t have?

[kunlun]

Originally Posted by vliberman

Isn’t article specifically dismisses finishing as end goal for FPJ? And rather concentrates on watchmaking?

If you learn more about finishing it will help you understand what the article is talking about better.

FPJ has hand finishing, Rolex has none, Patek at most levels of its models has none, but has much nicer looking machine finishing than Rolex.

You don't understand enough about watches to know what the article is talking about, which has to do with fetishized hand finishing popularized by Philippe Dufour. This style of finishing is not the end goal for FPJ, but PD himself did tell Mr. Journe that his watches were well finished. By contrast, any FPJ, literally any, is more horologically interesting than a Dufour Simplicity (and yes, I'd be fine with someone giving me a simplicity, or course).

[Ichiran]

Originally Posted by vliberman

This is an incredible watch…. Now if I take something like SkyDweller I would argue that it offers level of complexity that is superior to resonance in usability and functionality. It doesn’t sacrifice accuracy at all which resonance suppose to enhance yet offers robustness that this particular model probably doesn’t have?

The SD has only entry-level complications, an AC and GMT. It is not "complex" at all. Journe makes MR, tourbillon, resonance, astronomical, split-second chrono, perpetual calendar and the crazy FFC.

It's not even close. And Rolex is 100% machined. There is no hand-finishing on their movement. Journe has some.

[vliberman]

Originally Posted by kunlun

If you learn more about finishing it will help you understand what the article is talking about better.

FPJ has hand finishing, Rolex has none, Patek at most levels of its models has none, but has much nicer looking machine finishing than Rolex.

You don't understand enough about watches to know what the article is talking about, which has to do with fetishized hand finishing popularized by Philippe Dufour. This style of finishing is not the end goal for FPJ, but PD himself did tell Mr. Journe that his watches were well finished. By contrast, any FPJ, literally any, is more horologically interesting than a Dufour Simplicity (and yes, I'd be fine with someone giving me a simplicity, or course).

From the article describing Rolex process:

It is in this facility that I also saw something that I really never expected to see – a finishing department. Rolex does finish their watches, and expertly at that, just without the traditional aesthetic flourishes that we as consumers tend to look for when we are examining haute horlogerie, which of course, Rolex is not. Cases are held against a polish wheel by humans, just as they are at Jaeger-LeCoultre or Audemars Piguet. At any given time, there are between 50 and 60 people polishing the cases of Rolex watches. The human element in Rolex watchmaking is more than substantial and very real.

Doesn’t that kinda show that your assessment of your knowledge of at least Rolex processes is perhaps lacking??????

Perhaps both Rolex and FPJ choose to finish movements differently?

[kunlun]

Originally Posted by vliberman

From the article describing Rolex process:

It is in this facility that I also saw something that I really never expected to see – a finishing department. Rolex does finish their watches, and expertly at that, just without the traditional aesthetic flourishes that we as consumers tend to look for when we are examining haute horlogerie, which of course, Rolex is not. Cases are held against a polish wheel by humans, just as they are at Jaeger-LeCoultre or Audemars Piguet. At any given time, there are between 50 and 60 people polishing the cases of Rolex watches. The human element in Rolex watchmaking is more than substantial and very real.

Doesn’t that kinda show that your assessment of your knowledge of at least Rolex processes is perhaps lacking??????

Perhaps both Rolex and FPJ choose to finish movements differently?

Nope, I'm already familiar with Rolex. It's your first article, not mine.

Have I mentioned you should learn more?

And yes, Rolex and FPJ have very different levels of finishing.

If you learned more, you would understand why even when making a silly point, the author still says that Rolex is not haute horology.

[vliberman]

Originally Posted by kunlun

Nope, I'm already familiar with Rolex. It's your first article, not mine.

Have I mentioned you should learn more?

And yes, Rolex and FPJ have very different levels of finishing.

If you learned more, you would understand why even when making a silly point, the author still says that Rolex is not haute horology.

Look, your condescending tone doesn’t square with facts! U said no finishing on Rolex which is wrong! That is not my article, it is work done by Ben Clymer.

Quoting u: FPJ has hand finishing, Rolex has none, Patek at most levels of its models has none, but has much nicer looking machine finishing than Rolex.

I do need to learn more about watches and that is why I ask and comment and discuss. U try to come at it from position of authority which I am not sure u deserve!

[Ichiran]

Originally Posted by vliberman

Look, your condescending tone doesn’t square with facts! U said no finishing on Rolex which is wrong! That is not my article, it is work done by Ben Clymer.

Quoting u: FPJ has hand finishing, Rolex has none, Patek at most levels of its models has none, but has much nicer looking machine finishing than Rolex.

I do need to learn more about watches and that is why I ask and comment and discuss. U try to come at it from position of authority which I am not sure u deserve!

Kunlun is right - he was referring to hand-finishing in the movement. You were referring to finishing outside of Rolex cases. They are vastly different. The movement components are much smaller and those sharp interior angles along the bridges and plates can only be hand-polished. Rolex watches have no sharp interior angles in their movement and the bevels in the bridges and plates are machined-finished.

Cases have no interior angles and they are much bigger in surface compared to movement parts. Those Rolex "finishers" are merely buffing the case to achieve a mirror shine effect. The number of hours used to buff a Rolex vs using a wood or metal with a sharp tip to hand file a sharp interior angle is vastly different.

When we discuss finishing, we are 99% of the time referring to movements.

Journe has some hand-finishing in their movement. Look at their steel components in their movement.

[vliberman]

Originally Posted by Ichiran

Kunlun is right - he was referring to hand-finishing on the movement. You were referring to finishing of Rolex cases. They are vastly different. The movement components are much smaller and those sharp interior angles along the bridges and plates can only be hand-polished. Rolex watches have no sharp interior angles in their movement and the bevels in the bridges and plates are machined-finished.

Cases have no interior angles and they are much bigger in surface compared to movement parts. Those Rolex "finishers" are merely buffing the case to achieve a mirror shine effect. The number of hours used to buff a Rolex vs using a wood to hand file a sharp interior angle is vastly different.

Journe has some hand-finishing on the movement. Look at their steel components in their movement.

Thank you for clarification, I appreciate it

[unknown]

I'll keep repeating thins on every post that goes about finishing.


Please buy this book ( 80 euro) and read it. Its very well documented with pictures and it's no rocket science. But believe me, this is what's Haute horlogerie is all about.

It's easy to read and talks about, and shows all the different techniques
Things that can be done with a machine and things only human hands can


https://watchprint.com/en/technical-...ecoration.html


If you're really into high end watch making it's a must read !
Imo its the best book you can buy. Not about brand XX that need to promote itself and has to bother us with their history and how good they are :-)

[llngoc]

Originally Posted by Ichiran

The SD has only entry-level complications, an AC and GMT. It is not "complex" at all. Journe makes MR, tourbillon, resonance, astronomical, split-second chrono, perpetual calendar and the crazy FFC.

It's not even close. And Rolex is 100% machined. There is no hand-finishing on their movement. Journe has some.

FPJ actually has more hand finish on the higher end references. I can definitely see better finishing on the Tourbillion Vertical over the Resonance. And the AST definitely has much better finishing which makes me think that it is not a FPJ.

[llngoc]

Originally Posted by unknown

I'll keep repeating thins on every post that goes about finishing.


Please buy this book ( 80 euro) and read it. Its very well documented with pictures and it's no rocket science. But believe me, this is what's Haute horlogerie is all about.

It's easy to read and talks about, and shows all the different techniques
Things that can be done with a machine and things only human hands can


https://watchprint.com/en/technical-...ecoration.html


If you're really into high end watch making it's a must read !
Imo its the best book you can buy. Not about brand XX that need to promote itself and has to bother us with their history and how good they are :-)

Ordered. Thanks for the pointer!

[charger_vital]

Originally Posted by vliberman

This is an incredible watch…. Now if I take something like SkyDweller I would argue that it offers level of complexity that is superior to resonance in usability and functionality. It doesn’t sacrifice accuracy at all which resonance suppose to enhance yet offers robustness that this particular model probably doesn’t have?

Your argument is right from utilitarian perspective. Though if that’s what we are debating here I’d raise you by a smart watch.

As smug as some of the responses are on here about finishing / work of art / different level / haute horology / etc. it’s hard to disagree, I don’t think Rolex is on the same level as FPJ… they are both great brands in their own category. But they really are a different category of watch. And you don’t need much more than the eye test on this.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[codecow]

I came in here for comedy based on the title, and comedy I found!

[llngoc]

Originally Posted by vliberman

From the article describing Rolex process:

It is in this facility that I also saw something that I really never expected to see – a finishing department. Rolex does finish their watches, and expertly at that, just without the traditional aesthetic flourishes that we as consumers tend to look for when we are examining haute horlogerie, which of course, Rolex is not. Cases are held against a polish wheel by humans, just as they are at Jaeger-LeCoultre or Audemars Piguet. At any given time, there are between 50 and 60 people polishing the cases of Rolex watches. The human element in Rolex watchmaking is more than substantial and very real.

Doesn’t that kinda show that your assessment of your knowledge of at least Rolex processes is perhaps lacking??????

Perhaps both Rolex and FPJ choose to finish movements differently?

My Rolex AD used to have a case polishing machine to buff off the scratches. I would not call it finishing

[dakkonmc]

Originally Posted by vliberman

This is an incredible watch…. Now if I take something like SkyDweller I would argue that it offers level of complexity that is superior to resonance in usability and functionality. It doesn’t sacrifice accuracy at all which resonance suppose to enhance yet offers robustness that this particular model probably doesn’t have?

This is like comparing a BMW M240i to a Mclaren 720.

The BMW is the more usable, the lower maintenance, probably a better reliability long term. How many of us here would take the 2 series over Mclaren as non daily?

It's a completely different vehicle with different purposes.



Sent from my SM-S918U using Tapatalk

[ILoveFerrari]

Originally Posted by vliberman

This is an incredible watch…. Now if I take something like SkyDweller I would argue that it offers level of complexity that is superior to resonance in usability and functionality. It doesn’t sacrifice accuracy at all which resonance suppose to enhance yet offers robustness that this particular model probably doesn’t have?

Don't rush. It's a learning process. Just be open minded. Study resonance first.

Sent from my SM-S918U using Tapatalk

[ILoveFerrari]

Originally Posted by vliberman

Look, your condescending tone doesn’t square with facts! U said no finishing on Rolex which is wrong! That is not my article, it is work done by Ben Clymer.

Quoting u: FPJ has hand finishing, Rolex has none, Patek at most levels of its models has none, but has much nicer looking machine finishing than Rolex.

I do need to learn more about watches and that is why I ask and comment and discuss. U try to come at it from position of authority which I am not sure u deserve!

You asked questions on a public forum which some serious watch connoisseurs answered. If you are not prepared for the answers you do not like, or you will only accept the answer if the tone of delivery is acceptable to you, then by all means be at least be consistent with the original stance you took when you asked a question, I.e. student who is here to learn thus you chose to ask us.

Otherwise what is the point? We are happy to teach and share what we know. But we are not here to be told how we should teach you when you are the one to approach us to begin with.

Just be humble.

Sent from my SM-S918U using Tapatalk

[ILoveFerrari]

Originally Posted by dakkonmc

This is like comparing a BMW M240i to a Mclaren 720.

The BMW is the more usable, the lower maintenance, probably a better reliability long term. How many of us here would take the 2 series over Mclaren as non daily?

It's a completely different vehicle with different purposes.



Sent from my SM-S918U using Tapatalk

It is actually Honda Accord vs Ferrari 812 CA.

Sent from my SM-S918U using Tapatalk

[dakkonmc]

Originally Posted by ILoveFerrari

It is actually Honda Accord vs Ferrari 812 CA.

Sent from my SM-S918U using Tapatalk

From a Rarity perspective, I think you're spot on.

I'll change my example to 675 LT Coupe.

Sent from my SM-S918U using Tapatalk

[rockdrock]

I do love FPJ soooo much and in the indie space, FPJ is the Rolex of that space. It is all relative.

[swish77]

In the end, it’s all about how it looks on the wrist. I don’t care how well they’re finished, I find many FBJs way too fussy. Same way I can’t stand eating at haute cuisine restaurants. If I’m going to go upscale I’d much rather go VC or Patek.

Rolex finishing is great for what it is (which is obviously not on the same level as FBJ), and many of them are super handsome to wear.