One Patek as an only

[superdog]

I had posed this question a while back. And of course, the answers were mainly “no”, that you can’t.

I think that was because people “want” more than one. And who can blame anyone for that. They are amazing.

But the reason for asking was mostly...can it do the job? Losing it for 4 months every 5 years for service aside. Can it actually do the job and be robust enough to last a lifetime worn everyday?

After a few months of wearing my 5726, I think I can answer the question myself. I believe that yes, one watch can last a lifetime. Easily actually.

I believe the consensus is that Patek is not as robust as a Rolex or an Omega. And of course that is true. But it appears to me that these watches are plenty strong and require no babying. I’m not doing construction every day. But I don’t baby this puppy at all. It’s got a few little personalized additions to nearly daily use. Yet, it’s still looks nearly perfect.

So the only point of this thread really is to again sing the praises of this watch and brand. I like it more each day that I wear it.

And to state that I believe fully it is clearly capable of doing anything needed and lasting a lifetime. With ease.

[GoingPlaces]

If you stay off TRF, yes. Otherwise you just keep getting enticed every day. It's quite an addiction.

[Ichiran]

Yes, the 5726 can be the only watch.

[s.m.b.]

Yeah, TRF definitely feeds the beast that guides one toward thinking they need multiple watches. If I were to start selling off my watches, my Aquanaut would be the last to go, as it's both versatile and comfortable enough to be an amazing daily.

[derekhayden]

The 5726 is my grail watch. If I am ever lucky enough to be able to make such a purchase you better believe I would wear it daily. Congrats on owning such a piece and using it as it should be

[superdog]

Originally Posted by GoingPlaces

If you stay off TRF, yes. Otherwise you just keep getting enticed every day. It's quite an addiction.

This is so very true. TRF is not good for the wallet.

Originally Posted by Ichiran

Yes, the 5726 can be the only watch.

Originally Posted by s.m.b.

Yeah, TRF definitely feeds the beast that guides one toward thinking they need multiple watches. If I were to start selling off my watches, my Aquanaut would be the last to go, as it's both versatile and comfortable enough to be an amazing daily.

Yeah, again so true. I am on hold for a 5164. Do I need it? Absolutely not. But I love the look and styling. Between the two, I might not need any other watch again in my life. Ever. Which would suit me just fine. Trouble is I like it here on TRF. I just need to stay in the open discussion forum and away from the watch pics.

Originally Posted by derekhayden

The 5726 is my grail watch. If I am ever lucky enough to be able to make such a purchase you better believe I would wear it daily. Congrats on owning such a piece and using it as it should be

I hope you get it. I appreciate it more everyday. It is truly an amazing, all around perfect watch.

[danestaff]

Originally Posted by s.m.b.

Yeah, TRF definitely feeds the beast that guides one toward thinking they need multiple watches. If I were to start selling off my watches, my Aquanaut would be the last to go, as it's both versatile and comfortable enough to be an amazing daily.

Totally agree

Sent from my G8141 using Tapatalk

[watchfan0529]

I agree. The 5726 is a fantastic watch. Robust enough, and has a very practical complication (wish they did an annual calendar + chrono Nautilus).

I have been thinking about the exact same idea as you. If I decide to do it, I will probably add some sort of protection to the bezel, this one is the tricky part for me. Light scratches are okay, but I've seen Aquanaut and Nautilus bezels that have been scratched heavily, and it does not look that nice..

[kaiserphoenix]

I wear my 5167 95% of the time and it can easily be the one and only in fact it pretty much is.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[tiberiustime]

Originally Posted by watchfan0529

I agree. The 5726 is a fantastic watch. Robust enough, and has a very practical complication (wish they did an annual calendar + chrono Nautilus).

I have been thinking about the exact same idea as you. If I decide to do it, I will probably add some sort of protection to the bezel, this one is the tricky part for me. Light scratches are okay, but I've seen Aquanaut and Nautilus bezels that have been scratched heavily, and it does not look that nice..

How would you protect the bezel?

[watchfan0529]

Originally Posted by tiberiustime

How would you protect the bezel?

I am trying to find the answer myself.

Easier solution I have thought of would be to find a high quality film that I can put over the bezel, similar to a paint protection film on a car.

On the other end of the spectrum is a crazy idea of getting a 3d scan of the bezel, and have someone custom fit a bezel protector/actual bezel replacement made of ceramic or other scratch-proof material (this is going franken level, i know).

Anyone who has a neat idea, do share your creativity with us.

[s.m.b.]

Originally Posted by watchfan0529

I am trying to find the answer myself.

Easier solution I have thought of would be to find a high quality film that I can put over the bezel, similar to a paint protection film on a car.

On the other end of the spectrum is a crazy idea of getting a 3d scan of the bezel, and have someone custom fit a bezel protector/actual bezel replacement made of ceramic or other scratch-proof material (this is going franken level, i know).

Anyone who has a neat idea, do share your creativity with us.

Duct tape works great for this, and it almost looks like brushed stainless steel from 20 feet.

[Fat_ninja]

I think having a strap makes it easier being an only watch. Much more wearable in my mind.

[The Argonaut]

I'd say 99% of people who wear a watch own one and wear it their entire life. Thus, your question reflects the expansion of niche collectors, which TRF supports (and which has clearly grown with increased wealth). I'm a one watch owner, thinking about a second. The notion of wearing just one watch is something I've done for many decades, and most of my family, friends and colleagues are the same. It's a rare few that have more than one. Thus, could you wear your fabulous 5726 for the rest of your life? Easily. It's a wonderful watch.

It strikes me as ironic that underpinning your question are notions of "normalcy" and "practicality" in wearing just one watch, when that's what most of the planet does and has always done. It speaks volumes about the passion--some would say "fever"--that drives collectors. Many of the posts I read on here smack of a serious addiction, which just happens to concern watches. That's not a value judgment, as we all have our passions and watches are a wonderful thing to be passionate about (totally support this addiction!).

As a one watch guy, the question I struggle with is whether to get a second (a vintage Rolex or PP), or whether I get a PP and then hand over my 1675 to family or a friend. I love the idea of owning many watches, but equally love the notion of just one watch which (mostly) does it all.
The fun is in what to compromise on. At most, I can do two. However, I'd feel bad for the one watch that isn't being worn. Watches are inherently practical and must be worn.

[Vaxe]

I would say you’ll need at least 2, one for water resistance/ sports and during service intervals. But in a vacuum yes any Patek can be an only watch.

[superdog]

Originally Posted by The Argonaut

I'd say 99% of people who wear a watch own one and wear it their entire life. Thus, your question reflects the expansion of niche collectors, which TRF supports (and which has clearly grown with increased wealth). I'm a one watch owner, thinking about a second. The notion of wearing just one watch is something I've done for many decades, and most of my family, friends and colleagues are the same. It's a rare few that have more than one. Thus, could you wear your fabulous 5726 for the rest of your life? Easily. It's a wonderful watch.

It strikes me as ironic that underpinning your question are notions of "normalcy" and "practicality" in wearing just one watch, when that's what most of the planet does and has always done. It speaks volumes about the passion--some would say "fever"--that drives collectors. Many of the posts I read on here smack of a serious addiction, which just happens to concern watches. That's not a value judgment, as we all have our passions and watches are a wonderful thing to be passionate about (totally support this addiction!).

As a one watch guy, the question I struggle with is whether to get a second (a vintage Rolex or PP), or whether I get a PP and then hand over my 1675 to family or a friend. I love the idea of owning many watches, but equally love the notion of just one watch which (mostly) does it all.
The fun is in what to compromise on. At most, I can do two. However, I'd feel bad for the one watch that isn't being worn. Watches are inherently practical and must be worn.

Great post. Loved it.

And you bring up good points.

My point really is that Patek and even AP are known as more fragile watches. So the one watch question comes from "will it be able to survive the rigors".

Personally, the older I get, the more one watch appeals to me. I think two, actually three, is perfect. It is nice to rotate between two, and one "beater" for times when wearing a watch might be concerning for any given reason.

I like the idea of simplifying everything. Especially as life appears to be getting more and more complicated as time goes by.

I am with three right now. When the 5164 arrives, I think I will move one to keep it at three. For financial reasons, and for simplicity.

I would encourage you to get one more. It is nice to rotate IMHO.

[superdog]

Originally Posted by Fat_ninja

I think having a strap makes it easier being an only watch. Much more wearable in my mind.

I happen to agree. I prefer rubber.

I genuinely believe I could wear this, and only this, for all my days and for any reason or occasion at all. And if it ever comes down to it, that’s my plan.

[superdog]

^^^

And for what it is worth, this has been on my wrist A LOT since the day I got it. To my eye, in this picture, on a giant monitor, it is nearly flawless.

If it gets some love dings over the years, and some hairlines, I will not fret.

[danestaff]

Originally Posted by superdog

^^^

And for what it is worth, this has been on my wrist A LOT since the day I got it. To my eye, in this picture, on a giant monitor, it is nearly flawless.

If it gets some love dings over the years, and some hairlines, I will not fret.

Which makes it even more personal to you, at least you wear it

Sent from my G8141 using Tapatalk

[The Argonaut]

Originally Posted by superdog

Great post. Loved it.

And you bring up good points.

My point really is that Patek and even AP are known as more fragile watches. So the one watch question comes from "will it be able to survive the rigors".

Personally, the older I get, the more one watch appeals to me. I think two, actually three, is perfect. It is nice to rotate between two, and one "beater" for times when wearing a watch might be concerning for any given reason.

I like the idea of simplifying everything. Especially as life appears to be getting more and more complicated as time goes by.

I am with three right now. When the 5164 arrives, I think I will move one to keep it at three. For financial reasons, and for simplicity.

I would encourage you to get one more. It is nice to rotate IMHO.

Hi Superdog,

Appreciate the thought. Yes, I'm very much with you. I'm looking very seriously about a second, and then I'm done.

I think the 5164 is one of the most exceptional watches that PP produce. I know many here will howl and yell as its not a GS. However, for an every day watch, its SS, has a wickedly useful GMT feature (deploy when needed, and day/night feature for both local and home time), fantastic movement, and is underpinned by Patek's pursuit of excellence in every part of the watch. It's one hell of a watch. I love the 5164. It's an apex. Having been following the brand for over thirty years, my sense is that owning a PP is like crossing a unique finishing line that only you know of. It has a feeling of having arrived.

I oscillate between another vintage Rolex and the PP. I think the PP will win out for the reasons stated above. They are just wonderful watches, and in a class (almost) of their own.

[The Argonaut]

Originally Posted by superdog

I happen to agree. I prefer rubber.

I genuinely believe I could wear this, and only this, for all my days and for any reason or occasion at all. And if it ever comes down to it, that’s my plan.

Wonderful.

[watchfan0529]

Originally Posted by s.m.b.

Duct tape works great for this, and it almost looks like brushed stainless steel from 20 feet.

wow, really? alright i'll try

[kultschar]

My 5167 was my daily wearer for a year. Shook things up and put a Daytona into the mix.

I think a 5164 would be the perfect one and only for me if I had to (reluctantly mind you!!!)

[The Argonaut]

Originally Posted by s.m.b.

Duct tape works great for this, and it almost looks like brushed stainless steel from 20 feet.

Love it. Just slap some 100 MPH tape on the watch.

[watchfan0529]

Originally Posted by The Argonaut

Hi Superdog,

Appreciate the thought. Yes, I'm very much with you. I'm looking very seriously about a second, and then I'm done.

I think the 5164 is one of the most exceptional watches that PP produce. I know many here will howl and yell as its not a GS. However, for an every day watch, its SS, has a wickedly useful GMT feature (deploy when needed, and day/night feature for both local and home time), fantastic movement, and is underpinned by Patek's pursuit of excellence in every part of the watch. It's one hell of a watch. I love the 5164. It's an apex. Having been following the brand for over thirty years, my sense is that owning a PP is like crossing a unique finishing line that only you know of. It has a feeling of having arrived.

I oscillate between another vintage Rolex and the PP. I think the PP will win out for the reasons stated above. They are just wonderful watches, and in a class (almost) of their own.

The 5164 is nice. I love it for its lightness and the travel time complication.The bezel is relatively prone to scratches though. The risk is high when you're flying often and you slide it against the seat belt, or when you slip it in your jacket pocket with other things at security. I also miss the timer that a chronograph or a diver bezel can offer every time I wear mine. For this reason I'm gravitating towards a 5990 these days.

[The Argonaut]

Originally Posted by watchfan0529

The 5164 is nice. I love it for its lightness and the travel time complication.The bezel is relatively prone to scratches though. The risk is high when you're flying often and you slide it against the seat belt, or when you slip it in your jacket pocket with other things at security. I also miss the timer that a chronograph or a diver bezel can offer every time I wear mine. For this reason I'm gravitating towards a 5990 these days.

The 5990? Now that's one hell of a watch!

[CamSLC]

5167 would be my keeper. If I could have two that would change. (5711, Exp2)

[bh_horology]

Originally Posted by s.m.b.

Yeah, TRF definitely feeds the beast that guides one toward thinking they need multiple watches. If I were to start selling off my watches, my Aquanaut would be the last to go, as it's both versatile and comfortable enough to be an amazing daily.

I totally agree with this.

[Russell996]

My one piece would need to be a Grand Comp or Cloisonné or simply spectacular. There is no need to wear a watch for the time so in limiting myself to a single piece it would have to appeal on a level far beyond practicality. This would rule out all sports watches which seems contrary to most.

[The Argonaut]

Originally Posted by CamSLC

5167 would be my keeper. If I could have two that would change. (5711, Exp2)

Nice pair.