5196 case back

[Wahlberg]

Originally Posted by mongrelnomoad

I find it a travesty that Patek, and Patek customers, accept these under-sized movements. Look at Lange to see how it's done, and perhaps when this crisis has crippled sales and revenues, perhaps Patek will actually have to start trying once more.

I don't get it. Well I kinda do but the watch does what it needs to do. Why would you want a bigger more expensive movement? Would you get the watch for 30-40k if the movement was like an ALS?

[ts3]

Originally Posted by Wahlberg

I don't get it. Well I kinda do but the watch does what it needs to do. Why would you want a bigger more expensive movement? Would you get the watch for 30-40k if the movement was like an ALS?

The closest comp to the 5196 would be the Saxonia Thin 37mm IMO and that has a 24% lower MSRP compared to the 5196. The delta only gets bigger if you get both BNIB from grey dealers.

Personally I'd go ALS or, less likely, 5096 where the movement fits the smaller 33.5mm case and Patek did not shy away from including a screwed display back.

[Tan]

Originally Posted by chloebear

I've lusted after a 5196R for quite some time. First I've seen/heard of this giant spacer. I'm not crazy about that but it's still my top choice for a dress watch.

Any thoughts on versatility of this watch? Jeans and a polo? Jeans and a dress shirt?

Wears great dressed up or down, just get a few different straps that help change the look.

[mongrelnomoad]

Originally Posted by Wahlberg

the watch does what it needs to do.

By that argument, so does a $20 Casio or, if you’re going mechanical, the cheapest Seiko 5.

[AlyRba]

I have never understood the appeal of 5196. If we are talking about getting value among highend watchmakers, you can make a case for Nautilus, Royal Oak, and Aquanaut that they are the best in class sports watches when you look at offerings from Breguet, Vacheron, and Lange. Not saying that I agree with it but yes, you can make a case for them.

When you are talking about getting a dress watch for $20K~ from the top 5, how can anyone pick a 5196 over the following

Lange: Saxonia thin 37, 1815 timeonly (used or new with decent discount)
Vacheron: Traditionnelle manual wind small seconds
Breguet: 5157, 5177 (different dial variations to choose for each reference)

Sure, beauty is in the eye of the beholder but IMHO, each of the above offerings from Lange, Vacheron, and Breguet beat the pants off 5196 in terms of aesthetics, movement finish, and overall package. But sure, let's get the 5196 since it is a Patek. Again, my humble opinion.

And no, you cannot make a case for value retention as a 5196 with 5-10% discount and above watches with 10-25% discount will end up losing the same value once you step out of the AD.

[francoamerican]

I don't even mind if the movement fills the entire case - the 215 is smaller than the 12 120 movement used in the patek 96 - that's what is most astonishing to me. I would have definitely bought a 5196 if it had at least a 12 lign / 26.75 movement and a display back.

I also really dislike the silicon balance spring if i'm going to continue to complain.

[kneedeep]

Originally Posted by campfire

From what I've read, this current 5196 is the one launched in 2004. Is that right? Or were there minor tweaks from that time?

Yes you are correct, the 5196 line launched in 2004 with the 215 movement which launched in 1974 as replacement movement for the 12-120 which was 20 years old when replaced. So PP has milked the 215 for 46 years now

[campfire]

Originally Posted by kneedeep

Yes you are correct, the 5196 line launched in 2004 with the 215 movement which launched in 1974 as replacement movement for the 12-120 which was 20 years old when replaced. So PP has milked the 215 for 46 years now

Thanks kneedeep. Wow that's a long time.

[kneedeep]

Originally Posted by campfire

Thanks kneedeep. Wow that's a long time.

[Wahlberg]

Originally Posted by mongrelnomoad

By that argument, so does a $20 Casio or, if you’re going mechanical, the cheapest Seiko 5.

I don't agree that's a correct analogy. The feeling I got is someone was 'mad' that the movement was so tiny and outdated.

If you weren't aware the movement was so tiny at first, why does it matter now all of a sudden? It keeps perfect time and the watch is stunning as is. So now it needs a bigger movement, something updated? Updated what exactly? The finish? Even though the 'old' movement keeps perfect time it needs to be changed?

The attraction of ALS is the overall design, looks and how beautiful the movement, but those aren't comparable to a Calatrava looking at the prices of the watches since the high end ALS's have the most beautiful movements.


This is the ALS Saxonia 37mm btw. It's rather similar imho. It's no Datograph obviously.

[kneedeep]

ALS are in a league of their own outside of some of the micros in movement finish.

[wisguy]

I've owned the Saxonia thin 37mm and now want a 5196.

The Saxonia is great, bit it's too cold, dull in a way. I find the 5196 has much more character, even if I can't see the movement.

[wisguy]

I've owned the Saxonia thin 37mm and now want a 5196.

The Saxonia is great, bit it's too cold, dull in a way. I find the 5196 has much more character, even if I can't see the movement.

[kneedeep]

The P dial is beyond beautiful.

[MrBenF]

Originally Posted by Wahlberg

I don't agree that's a correct analogy. The feeling I got is someone was 'mad' that the movement was so tiny and outdated.

If you weren't aware the movement was so tiny at first, why does it matter now all of a sudden?

The attraction of ALS is the overall design, looks and how beautiful the movement, but those aren't comparable to a Calatrava looking at the prices of the watches since the high end ALS's have the most beautiful movements.

This is the ALS Saxonia 37mm btw. It's rather similar imho. It's no Datograph obviously.

On the 5196, the subsidiary seconds dial is too close to the centre (too large a gap to the 6 hour marker) making the dial unbalanced.

ALS updates their movements regularly to incorporate improvements and they’re sized appropriately for the cases. Obviously movement architecture varies (chronograph v time-only) but all finishing is performed to the same standard (which imo is higher than Patek’s).


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[kneedeep]

Originally Posted by MrBenF

On the 5196, the subsidiary seconds dial is too close to the centre (too large a gap to the 6 hour marker) making the dial unbalanced.

ALS updates their movements regularly to incorporate improvements and they’re sized appropriately for the cases. Obviously movement architecture varies (chronograph v time-only) but all finishing is performed to the same standard (which imo is higher than Patek’s).


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Maybe a little subjective on the 5196 but overall agree with this.

[gsg]

I can’t believe the kind of arguments you are making to justify this movement. You seem to have been in the hobby for a while now, you should know better. Patek is haute horology, “just because it works” should not be reason enough for Patek. Patek should seek perfection if they aim to stay at the top, and they’ve been taking a lazy approach lately, cutting all kind of corners upsizing their cases without bothering to update many of their movements. They should be embarrassed to have that huge washer filling all that empty space, and they know it, hence the solid case back. As mentioned, if you don’t see what is wrong with it, a Casio might do just as well.

Originally Posted by Wahlberg

I don't agree that's a correct analogy. The feeling I got is someone was 'mad' that the movement was so tiny and outdated.

If you weren't aware the movement was so tiny at first, why does it matter now all of a sudden? It keeps perfect time and the watch is stunning as is. So now it needs a bigger movement, something updated? Updated what exactly? The finish? Even though the 'old' movement keeps perfect time it needs to be changed?

The attraction of ALS is the overall design, looks and how beautiful the movement, but those aren't comparable to a Calatrava looking at the prices of the watches since the high end ALS's have the most beautiful movements.


This is the ALS Saxonia 37mm btw. It's rather similar imho. It's no Datograph obviously.

[AlyRba]

Originally Posted by Wahlberg

I don't agree that's a correct analogy. The feeling I got is someone was 'mad' that the movement was so tiny and outdated.

If you weren't aware the movement was so tiny at first, why does it matter now all of a sudden? It keeps perfect time and the watch is stunning as is. So now it needs a bigger movement, something updated? Updated what exactly? The finish? Even though the 'old' movement keeps perfect time it needs to be changed?

The attraction of ALS is the overall design, looks and how beautiful the movement, but those aren't comparable to a Calatrava looking at the prices of the watches since the high end ALS's have the most beautiful movements.


This is the ALS Saxonia 37mm btw. It's rather similar imho. It's no Datograph obviously.

With due respect, going by this logic,, car manufacturers should not introduce a new design or engine unless something goes wrong with the current generation. Sony and Samsung should have stayed in the tube tv era. Android and Apple should still be offering gen 1 of their OS in phones. And watch manufactures should stay with a 60 year old outdated movement that is put to shame by its competitors in every regard just because it works.

And no, that Lange Saxonia 37, despite being the entry level Lange, has a much better finished movement than the 5196. The Saxonia 37 contains one of the earliest Lange movements and the use of the old movement architecture allows Lange to price it around $15k~. Still, it is finished at the same level as a Lange 1 or 1815 AC despite being less than half the price. And as far as I can tell, Lange is not ashamed to use an open case back to show its movement.

[AlyRba]

Originally Posted by gsg

I can’t believe the kind of arguments you are making to justify this movement. You seem to have been in the hobby for a while now, you should know better. Patek is haute horology, “just because it works” should not be reason enough for Patek. Patek should seek perfection if they aim to stay at the top, and they’ve been taking a lazy approach lately, cutting all kind of corners upsizing their cases without bothering to update many of their movements. They should be embarrassed to have that huge washer filling all that empty space, and they know it, hence the solid case back. As mentioned, if you don’t see what is wrong with it, a Casio might do just as well.

Completely agree. Lange updated Lange 1 in 2015 with with a brand new movement that incorporated a larger, free-sprung balance wheel with completely in-house hairspring, instantaneous date jump at 12, and the stopping of seconds hand at zero everytime the power reserve runs out. No one asked for these updates, but in the words of Ben Clymer “ That is indeed the beauty of A. Lange & Söhne – they do things not because they have to, but because they want to. While their brother and sister brands are recycling the same old movements in new cases, Lange is building entirely new movements for the same cases just because they feel like they should.” That’s how trend setters and market leaders behave in each category.

[MrBenF]

Originally Posted by gsg

I can’t believe the kind of arguments you are making to justify this movement. You seem to have been in the hobby for a while now, you should know better. Patek is haute horology, “just because it works” should not be reason enough for Patek. Patek should seek perfection if they aim to stay at the top, and they’ve been taking a lazy approach lately, cutting all kind of corners upsizing their cases without bothering to update many of their movements. They should be embarrassed to have that huge washer filling all that empty space, and they know it, hence the solid case back. As mentioned, if you don’t see what is wrong with it, a Casio might do just as well.

The use of outdated movements is not limited to their entry level time-only pieces. I’ve a 3940 PC. The reference debuted in 2005 and was their first mass-produced PC wristwatch. The movement is based on the 240Q base caliber which was introduced ~10 years before. So the 240QP caliber is now 35 years old and is still being used in the ref 5327.

In comparison QPs from other makers (Journe, H. Moser amongst others) incorporate technologies such as being able to set the calendars via the crown rather than pushers. In FPJ’s case, it’s a power reserve of 120 hours.

When Patek decides to introduce an all-new PC with updated specifications I’d interested in upgrading (price dependent).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[chows99]

if u can get a 5167 with a 5196, does it make the watch sweeter?

[kneedeep]

Originally Posted by gsg

I can’t believe the kind of arguments you are making to justify this movement. You seem to have been in the hobby for a while now, you should know better. Patek is haute horology, “just because it works” should not be reason enough for Patek. Patek should seek perfection if they aim to stay at the top, and they’ve been taking a lazy approach lately, cutting all kind of corners upsizing their cases without bothering to update many of their movements. They should be embarrassed to have that huge washer filling all that empty space, and they know it, hence the solid case back. As mentioned, if you don’t see what is wrong with it, a Casio might do just as well.

Spot on.

[myporsche]

So much misconception on this thread, one guy says its too small, another says ALS has some finishing issues, one dislikes the silicon balance spring?? never heard that one before (wtf?) the funniest post is the guy that said the 5196 dial is not balanced. Wow lots of folks around here lacking watch knowledge, maybe the same ones that think the Nautilus is the ultimate Patek. GO read some PP history on the 96r and this is coming from an ALS fan.

[AlyRba]

Originally Posted by myporsche

So much misconception on this thread, one guy says its too small, another says ALS has some finishing issues, one dislikes the silicon balance spring?? never heard that one before (wtf?) the funniest post is the guy that said the 5196 dial is not balanced. Wow lots of folks around here lacking watch knowledge, maybe the same ones that think the Nautilus is the ultimate Patek. GO read some PP history on the 96r and this is coming from an ALS fan.

Movement is small for the watch case. Dial is not balanced as the seconds hand placement shows. Further, movement is not as well finished as the comparable offerings from Lange, VC, and Breguet and was last updated when most people on this forum were not even born. These are observable facts. For how the movement should fill the case and what is the ideal location of seconds hand, please check past models of 96 and compare them with the existing 5196. Finally, please do educate all of us who are finding issues in 5916 with your esteemed watch knowledge and what makes this a better buy over others, aesthetics aside as those are subjective, and that will surely make all of us fanboys of 5196.

[myporsche]

Originally Posted by AlyRba

Movement is small for the watch case. Dial is not balanced as the seconds hand placement shows. Further, movement is not as well finished as the comparable offerings from Lange, VC, and Breguet and was last updated when most people on this forum were not even born. These are observable facts. For how the movement should fill the case and what is the ideal location of seconds hand, please check past models of 96 and compare them with the existing 5196. Finally, please do educate all of us who are finding issues in 5916 with your esteemed watch knowledge and what makes this a better buy over others, aesthetics aside as those are subjective, and that will surely make all of us fanboys of 5196.

They are subjective, not facts. Movement is finished up to par with it's price point. Dial is not balance? Give me a break, it arguably has the best balanced dial for a dress watch (yes again subjective). Something being more updated doesn't make it better, that's why there is a charm to vintage pieces, some which come with a very high price tag.

The sub seconds was not moved but the dial was enlarged so it the sub second will stay higher than previous versions. They kept the movement mostly the same and just bumped up the case (and therefore dial) to be more in line with current trends as most men nowadays would not be comfortable with a 31mm watch. The current movement (215 ps) and finishing is almost identical to the same one I opened up from the 50s but with some more modern techniques. The solid back is in line with how it was always traditionally made more gold as a bonus and a nice surface to engrave. Not everyone is a flipper, this is a piece that can be passed down and is often gifted so some wont give a crap about resale.

There is something inherently satisfying to see something that has changed very little and continues to be timeless. It was one of the first Pateks to have an in-house caliber instead of relying on blanks supplied from LeCoultre and the first to be given a reference number (96). Born in the depression era, Stern had taken over and this was his opening act. It's the ultimate understated, conservative, under the radar watch loaded with Patek history. The watch sticks to it's very traditional roots which hasn't deviated much from its birth, something very rare nowadays in horology. This is one of those watches that has pure Patek DNA, the fact that they changed it very little since 1932 is testament to some of the Patek traditions.

[MrBenF]

5096 (33mm) v 5196 (37mm). Both references use the same 215PS movement.



When you place a caliber originally designed for a 33mm case into a 37mm, you will alter the balance and leave more space on the dial.

My point is that they ought to keep the same design but match it in a large movement better suited to the larger case.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[AlyRba]

Originally Posted by myporsche

They are subjective, not facts. Movement is finished up to par with it's price point. Dial is not balance? Give me a break, it arguably has the best balanced dial for a dress watch (yes again subjective). Something being more updated doesn't make it better, that's why there is a charm to vintage pieces, some which come with a very high price tag.

The sub seconds was not moved but the dial was enlarged so it the sub second will stay higher than previous versions. They kept the movement mostly the same and just bumped up the case (and therefore dial) to be more in line with current trends as most men nowadays would not be comfortable with a 31mm watch. The current movement (215 ps) and finishing is almost identical to the same one I opened up from the 50s but with some more modern techniques. The solid back is in line with how it was always traditionally made more gold as a bonus and a nice surface to engrave. Not everyone is a flipper, this is a piece that can be passed down and is often gifted so some wont give a crap about resale.

There is something inherently satisfying to see something that has changed very little and continues to be timeless. It was one of the first Pateks to have an in-house caliber instead of relying on blanks supplied from LeCoultre and the first to be given a reference number (96). Born in the depression era, Stern had taken over and this was his opening act. It's the ultimate understated, conservative, under the radar watch loaded with Patek history. The watch sticks to it's very traditional roots which hasn't deviated much from its birth, something very rare nowadays in horology. This is one of those watches that has pure Patek DNA, the fact that they changed it very little since 1932 is testament to some of the Patek traditions.

Movement is finished upto the price level? Then Lange, VC, and Breguet offerings are finished to punch above their price level by this logic.

So the case was enlarged but movement was kept the same for historical reasons which ended up moving the seconds hand up on the dial? If movement was updated along with the case, the seconds hand would have stayed at the bottom of the dial as previous generations. Maybe look at VC traditionnelle manual wind to see where the seconds hand should be or where it is in 99% of the watches where seconds hands are at 6’o clock position.

No one is denying the history of the reference or how important it is to Patek. The issue is the size and finish of the movement. But let’s keep the same movement in the 96 series for next few hundred years as updating a 60 year old outdated movement will be blasphemy. And yes, if the watch case is further enlarged at some point, let’s move the seconds hand to center of the dial and the Patek brand name will make that watch appear balanced too.

[scurfa]

I’m a big fan and it’s been eating away at me for years, the watch is perfect, size, shape, quality and fit, manual wind gives you the control over when you wear the watch, I bought one 22 December last year and out of all the watches I own and have owned this one has to be the best.

[MrBenF]

Originally Posted by myporsche

They are subjective, not facts. Movement is finished up to par with it's price point.

Quality of finishing is not subjective.

Movement
- blued screws
- good chatons for jewels
- hand engraved balance cock (even on the entry level Saxonia Thin)
- bevelling

Dial
- polishing and bevelling on hour markers
- likewise on hands

The Patek has a MSRP of $22,700. The ALS Saxonia is ~$17,000. And the latter can be had with a decent discount from ADs.

Originally Posted by myporsche

They kept the movement mostly the same and just bumped up the case (and therefore dial) to be more in line with current trends as most men nowadays would not be comfortable with a 31mm watch. The current movement (215 ps) and finishing is almost identical to the same one I opened up from the 50s but with some more modern techniques. The solid back is in line with how it was always traditionally made more gold as a bonus and a nice surface to engrave.

Are you suggesting that Patek chose a solid case-back in this model to maintain relevance with the ref. 96? I believe this is one of the few models in the current catalogue that do not have a sapphire back.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[3 Putt]

Originally Posted by myporsche

They are subjective, not facts. Movement is finished up to par with it's price point. Dial is not balance? Give me a break, it arguably has the best balanced dial for a dress watch (yes again subjective). Something being more updated doesn't make it better, that's why there is a charm to vintage pieces, some which come with a very high price tag.

The sub seconds was not moved but the dial was enlarged so it the sub second will stay higher than previous versions. They kept the movement mostly the same and just bumped up the case (and therefore dial) to be more in line with current trends as most men nowadays would not be comfortable with a 31mm watch. The current movement (215 ps) and finishing is almost identical to the same one I opened up from the 50s but with some more modern techniques. The solid back is in line with how it was always traditionally made more gold as a bonus and a nice surface to engrave. Not everyone is a flipper, this is a piece that can be passed down and is often gifted so some wont give a crap about resale.

There is something inherently satisfying to see something that has changed very little and continues to be timeless. It was one of the first Pateks to have an in-house caliber instead of relying on blanks supplied from LeCoultre and the first to be given a reference number (96). Born in the depression era, Stern had taken over and this was his opening act. It's the ultimate understated, conservative, under the radar watch loaded with Patek history. The watch sticks to it's very traditional roots which hasn't deviated much from its birth, something very rare nowadays in horology. This is one of those watches that has pure Patek DNA, the fact that they changed it very little since 1932 is testament to some of the Patek traditions.

Well said. Watches are subjective. I own a 5196j. It has a perfectly balanced dial, it keeps almost perfect time, wears much larger than 37 mm indicates, the case is finished to a very high standard and it can be very formal or more casual based on the strap.

The movement is small. So what? Does it achieve the objective? Is it accurate, are their quality issues with it, is it durable? Also, anybody that complains about the llongevity of the movement needs to listen to themselves. I find comfort that the 215 has been battle tested for decades. Questioning the work horse movement is silly. I guess if you want to be in the position to take off your watch and show your friends the movement because that is important to you, the 5196 is not for you.