Do Patek Phillippe watches keep better time?

[watch watcher]

As an automatic, do PP keep better time than say, Rolexes and others in that category? I'm only asking out of curiosity, and for the record, I have never measured the accuracy of my Rolex.

Do 'you guys' expect, and get, better accuracy from your pieces?

[brian8121]

That's a tough question to answer, because for the most part, you're talking about a difference of a few seconds +/- per day. As far as expectations go, I "expect" all my PP and Rolex watches to keep time within COSC specs. So I guess the answer to your question of whether I expect to get better accuracy from a PP vs Rolex is: Not really, because I expect accurate timekeeping of all my watches.

IMHO, differences in accuracy are not a major factor in determining what sets Patek apart from Rolex since all watches at this level are expected to keep time within certain (tight) tolerances. If you want to see what sets PP apart, look at movements (innovation, complication, finishing, etc), case, dial, etc.

[FeelingTheBlues]

I'll have to go with Brian on this one. I'm afraid it would be very difficult to compare the accuracy of both brands because they both regulate their watches to respect the same specifications. A better regulated Rolex will keep better time than a Patek that needs a watchmaker to play in its movement. Unless they sell a watch that is guaranteed to work withing better specifications than COSC I'll personally assume that both keep time just as well.

[perpetualman88]

Pateks standards is much higher than COSC I believe. I think PP does their own set of test and standards that go beyond that of COSC.

Also patek makes a complication (most consider a complication) which rolex does not called the tourbillon that counteracts gravity helping to keep the watch more accurate. This complication is only seen on a few different models it does not apply to their whole lineup thats for sure

[topcat30093]

All the Pateks that I have been fortunate to of owned have easily surpassed the COSC standards.

And since they bought at their own PP seal, they have set even higher standards on virtually everything and that of course includes not remaining accurate but also consistent.

My 5205G is easily one of the most accurate & reliable watches that I have owned.

Regards

Tony

[FeelingTheBlues]

Originally Posted by perpetualman88

Also patek makes a complication (most consider a complication) which rolex does not called the tourbillon that counteracts gravity helping to keep the watch more accurate. This complication is only seen on a few different models it does not apply to their whole lineup thats for sure

I guess you are right about the Patek standards, I kind of forgot that the Patek seal was considering accuracy as well.

However, as much as I love tourbillons myself, please allow me to quote Peter (Padi56) who wrote a little something about them. I think it's worth a read.

Originally Posted by padi56

Well apart from a bit of very expensive horological skill in the making of them nothing IMHO more.The Tourbillon IMHO they serve no real purpose in any wrist watch at all,only the fact the watchmaker can make them.And today you would be quite surprised how many watch brands Tourbillons are made now in china,and they make them very very well too to equal the Swiss.I sometimes wonder why there so much admiration for the tourbillon,perhaps the unquestioned and deserved prestige of Breguet, the inventor.But the Tourbillon works best in one position and in theory the tourbillon is always modifying the slight timing errors in the vertical position.The Tourbillon does not correct position variations, it only prevents them being detected in the usual testing conditions. But when placed on say a vibrograph, the Tourbillon reveals its weaknesses immediately.The Tourbillon does not correct anything,in wrist movements, it only prevents the detection of any beat errors that still exists in natural gravity with wrist movement.

The Tourbillon is in fact an additional mechanism that consumes energy without producing anything except misinformation.The energy it consumes is taken from the reserve destined to the regulator. As a result, the balance wheel with less energy will have reduced advantages.Now I agree totally the skill needed to make the cage plus Tourbillon etc is a great horological skill.But in reality the watch is no more accurate that several other non Tourbillon watches that cost very much less.And even todays modern watches,with or without Tourbillons are not so accurate as one produced almost 300 years ago.Gravity is one of the main causes of rate variations in watches,by creating the Tourbillon,when Breguet thought he was eliminating its effects,It looks like it was an big error on his part,he only masked them like Tourbillons do.Now if someone could come up and counteract the effect on gravity on a wrist watch totally.Now that would be a big break through but until then Tourbillons,IMHO are just good to look at,and they are very expensive to own,and they make them because they can.But again looking at the other side of the coin,in Breguets day when he invented the Tourbillon and the tools he had then.And now today with modern machines and computers puts a different perspective on the making side of Tourbillons today.
__________________

[Slider817]

Yes, a Patek should be more accurate than a Rolex, obviously, a Patek that has not been serviced recently, compared to a well maintained Rolex is not a fair comparison, but apples to apples, brand new from the factory the Patek should win hands down against Rolex.

On an slightly unrelated note, I just had my new Audemara Puguet Dual Time electronically tested for accuracy (by a watch repair specialist) and it is accurate to less than 1 second +\- a day, I don't think you get that from Rolex, but I'm sure Patek does.

[p_mcgee]

I timed my manual Patek vs. time.gov for the first time since buying it in 2008 & it was dead-on after 24 hours. Impressive.

[dddrees]

I've go to be honest I've never checked any of my watches to ensure they even meet COSC standards.

However like Brian said, I didn't buy the Patek because it would keep better time than any of my other watches. Most good mechanical watches are capable keeping much better than COSC now a days.


I bought the Patek for other reasons.

[FeelingTheBlues]

Originally Posted by dddrees

I've go to be honest I've never checked any of my watches to ensure they even meet COSC standards.

However like Brian said, I didn't buy the Patek because it would keep better time than any of my other watches. Most good mechanical watches are capable keeping much better than COSC now a days.


I bought the Patek for other reasons.

I never took a look at my watches' accuracy either and couldn't care less as long as it's not ridiculously slow. If I had to buy a Patek it would be for something else than the so-called better accuracy it has when compared to Rolex...

Still, as stated, with the Patek seal and their well known craftsmanship I'm wondering if they have higher standards for their movements.

[perpetualman88]

Originally Posted by FeelingTheBlues

I guess you are right about the Patek standards, I kind of forgot that the Patek seal was considering accuracy as well.

However, as much as I love tourbillons myself, please allow me to quote Peter (Padi56) who wrote a little something about them. I think it's worth a read.

great info from padi.
in alot of ways i agree but I do wish we had someone with a true high end tourbilon to see what kind of time its keeping

[bardm]

Originally Posted by Slider817

Yes, a Patek should be more accurate than a Rolex, obviously, a Patek that has not been serviced recently, compared to a well maintained Rolex is not a fair comparison, but apples to apples, brand new from the factory the Patek should win hands down against Rolex.

On an slightly unrelated note, I just had my new Audemara Puguet Dual Time electronically tested for accuracy (by a watch repair specialist) and it is accurate to less than 1 second +\- a day, I don't think you get that from Rolex, but I'm sure Patek does.

My Rolex GMT IIc keeps better than 0 / +1 seconds a day and has done so for over a year after I got it regulated. I know others with the same result. I's all about regulating the watch, not if it's a Patek or Rolex.

[Slider817]

Originally Posted by bardm

My Rolex GMT IIc keeps better than 0 / +1 seconds a day and has done so for over a year after I got it regulated. I know others with the same result. I's all about regulating the watch, not if it's a Patek or Rolex.

That's quite impressive, I can only speak from personal experience, but my 3 Rolexs, do not keep especially good time, Submariner, Milllgaus, and Day Date. All have been recently serviced.

[bardm]

Originally Posted by Slider817

That's quite impressive, I can only speak from personal experience, but my 3 Rolexs, do not keep especially good time, Submariner, Milllgaus, and Day Date. All have been recently serviced.

At first it was regulated from initially -5 to +3 by one of the salesmen at the AD while I waited. I guess the AD didn't realise how anal I am and did a quick fix

When I brought it back they kept it for some days and let the watchmaker fix it. After that it's been almost dead on.

[dddrees]

Originally Posted by perpetualman88

great info from padi.
in alot of ways i agree but I do wish we had someone with a true high end tourbilon to see what kind of time its keeping

I wouldn't mind owning one David.

But if I did, I'm convinced it would be more for aesthetic rather than for added accuracy reasons.

[FeelingTheBlues]

Originally Posted by perpetualman88

great info from padi.
in alot of ways i agree but I do wish we had someone with a true high end tourbilon to see what kind of time its keeping

That would be a very interesting comparison indeed.

Originally Posted by dddrees

I wouldn't mind owning one David.

But if I did, I'm convinced it would be more for aesthetic rather than for added accuracy reasons.

Again, I agree with you Dan. I love the 5216R (I guess you got to know that over the months...) and the tourbillon does have something to do with it but it wouldn't be for accuracy purposes but much more for the beauty of it. This makes me think that the only down side I find on Patek's tourbillons is that, unlike Breguet, Jaeger Lecoultre and Vacheron Constantin, they're not displayed on the dial. To be honest, if I had to pay such an amount for a masterpiece of haute horlogerie I'd like to see it whenever I take a look at my watch.

[dddrees]

Originally Posted by FeelingTheBlues

That would be a very interesting comparison indeed.



Again, I agree with you Dan. I love the 5216R (I guess you got to know that over the months...) and the tourbillon does have something to do with it but it wouldn't be for accuracy purposes but much more for the beauty of it. This makes me think that the only down side I find on Patek's tourbillons is that, unlike Breguet, Jaeger Lecoultre and Vacheron Constantin, they're not displayed on the dial. To be honest, if I had to pay such an amount for a masterpiece of haute horlogerie I'd like to see it whenever I take a look at my watch.

Absolutely Carl, if I bought one, it would have to be something I could look at.