5205 or 5172G - better buy?

[rish111]

Hey guys,

I’m choosing between 5205 or 5172 as my first Patek. I’m looking for something that is quintessentially Patek and one that is expected to hold its value better over time. I’m getting the 5205 (white or rose gold) for around $60K and 5172G for $70-75K. I don’t mind the extra cost if the latter is a better buy.

(I did consider the 5905 but found 5205 to offer better value and sleeker profile in comparison)

Suggestions? Opinions?

Thanks!
Rish

[APWorldTour]

I vote for 5205, love those skeletonized lugs.

[vitalsigns]

The 5205 price doesn't seem great, but frankly I'd just go with whichever of the two watches you like the most. IMO, you're at the level where $10K shouldn't decide the outcome.

[ts3]

As long as you are buying preowned I'd throw in 5170P as a curve ball if you can swing the higher price. In my view prettier and more wearable (= thinner and smaller) than 5172G. As 5170P has been produced for only a very short time (= rare) it may also hold its value better.

Lots of people like the 5205. I don't, for a number of design choices, including the hollow lugs and the AC dial layout. Can't un-see the asymmetry in the width and font of the three windows near the top and much prefer a date ring around the moon phase (vs the 24h ring).

[vitalsigns]

Originally Posted by ts3

As long as you are buying preowned I'd throw in 5170P as a curve ball if you can swing the higher price. In my view prettier and more wearable (= thinner and smaller) than 5172G. As 5170P has been produced for only a very short time (= rare) it may also hold its value better.

The 5170P will be way more expensive. If patient, he could probably find both the 5205 and the 5172 for about the same price combined as the 5170P, the latter of which I think is running around USD $130K.

[Vipes]

Manual wind Patek chrono is more special than an annual calendar, IMO. I would go with the 5172.

[unotaz]

5172G in blue gets my vote.

I have about 20 Pateks in my collection and I have quite a few grand comps and the 5172G holds its own compared to its bigger brothers.

After all these years, I still don't have any 5205 in my collection.

[ChetBaker]

If you fancy the looks of a 5205 I would throw the 5960 into the equation. Preferably the G.

[ts3]

Originally Posted by vitalsigns

The 5170P will be way more expensive. If patient, he could probably find both the 5205 and the 5172 for about the same price combined as the 5170P, the latter of which I think is running around USD $130K.

Sure, curve ball as I said but I think 5170P would be a better buy at its respective price for a number of reasons, last not least in terms value retention which seems to be on OP's mind. I also think if 125k is completely out of scope one should probably not get a watch for 75k either...

[vitalsigns]

Originally Posted by ts3

Sure, curve ball as I said but I think 5170P would be a better buy at its respective price for a number of reasons, last not least in terms value retention which seems to be on OP's mind. I also think if 125k is completely out of scope one should probably not get a watch for 75k either...

:eyeroll:

ok

So if you can't or don't want to afford $125K, then you also shouldn't try to afford $75K?

This is like saying if he can't buy both the 5205 and the 5172, then he shouldn't buy either one!

Yeah, that makes sense.

[ts3]

Absolutely, if 125k is completely out of scope you probably shouldn't spend 75k on a watch either.

[JMac6]

I think the 5172 is technically the better buy - it is a manually wound chronograph and is a good $25,000 more MSRP. That said, I chose the 5205.

The annual calendar is a distinctly Patek invention, and the 5205 is such a unique layout with the apertures. I also think it is beautiful and feels more Patek-y. Have it in your hand and it feels like a jewel. Conversely, the 5172 feels much more casual and just wasn’t what I imagined when I thought Patek.

[Yobrooks]

Originally Posted by ts3

Sure, curve ball as I said but I think 5170P would be a better buy at its respective price for a number of reasons, last not least in terms value retention which seems to be on OP's mind. I also think if 125k is completely out of scope one should probably not get a watch for 75k either...

Great point!

Sent from my SM-S918U using Tapatalk

[Ichiran]

I have another suggestion - if you plan to add a higher complication such as perpetual calendar, perpetual calendar chrono, split second chrono, etc in the future, my recommendation is to go straight to these higher comps.

[unotaz]

That's with the assumption that the OP is purchasing from the grey market.

If it's AD, then he won't be able to qualify for any of those complicated pieces, especially the application pieces.

Originally Posted by Ichiran

I have another suggestion - if you plan to add a higher complication such as perpetual calendar, perpetual calendar chrono, split second chrono, etc in the future, my recommendation is to go straight to these higher comps.

[danwang0520]

I'd go for 5172G....stunning chronograph from the holy trinity

[Coolcamden]

I love them both. LOVE. But if I had to pick just 1, the blue 5172 all day everyday.

[HL65]

5172

[jon_jon]

Originally Posted by rish111

Hey guys,

I’m choosing between 5205 or 5172 as my first Patek. I’m looking for something that is quintessentially Patek and one that is expected to hold its value better over time. I’m getting the 5205 (white or rose gold) for around $60K and 5172G for $70-75K. I don’t mind the extra cost if the latter is a better buy.

(I did consider the 5905 but found 5205 to offer better value and sleeker profile in comparison)

Suggestions? Opinions?

Thanks!
Rish

It really depends on your definition of "better buy". Are you looking at resale value in 1, 2 or 5 years? Or are you looking at practical aspect of how you will wear and use the watch on a daily basis?

AC watches are more practical than chronos as daily watches as you may use the AC complication more frequently. But if you turn the watch over, the movement of the manual wind chrono is definitely more interesting than an automatic AC.

[Calatrava r]

I prefer the 5172 of the two.

[GB-man]

Both great but 5172 for me no questions

[llngoc]

Originally Posted by Ichiran

I have another suggestion - if you plan to add a higher complication such as perpetual calendar, perpetual calendar chrono, split second chrono, etc in the future, my recommendation is to go straight to these higher comps.

I beg to differ. The 5172 is a much thinner watch than a 5270. I think both have a place in a collection so I would not skip a 5172 and go straight to 5270 since the 5172 is more wearable and "pure" IMHO.

[llngoc]

Originally Posted by jon_jon

It really depends on your definition of "better buy". Are you looking at resale value in 1, 2 or 5 years? Or are you looking at practical aspect of how you will wear and use the watch on a daily basis?

AC watches are more practical than chronos as daily watches as you may use the AC complication more frequently. But if you turn the watch over, the movement of the manual wind chrono is definitely more interesting than an automatic AC.

Cannot agree more. 5172 is more interesting and wearable too.

[mps354]

I’m a chrono guy, so 5172 over 5205. But I’d consider a gold 5170 over the 5172

[Ichiran]

Originally Posted by llngoc

I beg to differ. The 5172 is a much thinner watch than a 5270. I think both have a place in a collection so I would not skip a 5172 and go straight to 5270 since the 5172 is more wearable and "pure" IMHO.

The 5270 is less than 1mm thicker than the 5172 (12.4 vs 11.45 both Patek's figures) and it is approximately the size of the Submariner which I have not heard anyone claims it's too thick or big.

Of course you can have both 5172 and 5270 in the same collection but if I can start over again, I won't bother with a 5205 and 5327 before I get my 5270 (I'm not opining that the 5205/5327/5172 are not great watches). It doesn't stop me collecting Calatrava, World Time, Nautilus and Ellipse though because to me they are quite distinctive from the roundish complications line. Just sharing my thoughts with others who may be going the "upgrading along the way" route.

[llngoc]

Originally Posted by Ichiran

The 5270 is less than 1mm thicker than the 5172 (12.4 vs 11.45 both Patek's figures) and it is approximately the size of the Submariner which I have not heard anyone claims it's too thick or big.

Of course you can have both 5172 and 5270 in the same collection but if I can start over again, I won't bother with a 5205 and 5327 before I get my 5270 (I'm not opining that the 5205/5327/5172 are not great watches). It doesn't stop me collecting Calatrava, World Time, Nautilus and Ellipse though because to me they are quite distinctive from the roundish complications line. Just sharing my thoughts with others who may be going the "upgrading along the way" route.

When I tried on the 5270, it did feel bulkier than the 5172. It can also be the ‘p’.

Another plus for you with 5172G. It has a blue dial which should be your cup of tea.

[Mrhenish]

Originally Posted by unotaz

5172G in blue gets my vote.

I have about 20 Pateks in my collection and I have quite a few grand comps and the 5172G holds its own compared to its bigger brothers.

After all these years, I still don't have any 5205 in my collection.

What is in your collection? Appreciate you sharing that you don’t have a 5205. Thank you

[unotaz]

Everything from a simple 5167R to something like 6102P.

Originally Posted by Mrhenish

What is in your collection? Appreciate you sharing that you don’t have a 5205. Thank you

[jon_jon]

Originally Posted by unotaz

Everything from a simple 5167R to something like 6102P.

The 6102P is a beautiful watch! I have tried the watch on the wrist several times, but unfortunagely I have not been able to pull the trigger on the watch. It is definitely a watch like none other and quite an impressive complication

[Just0neMore]

Originally Posted by rish111

Hey guys,

I’m choosing between 5205 or 5172 as my first Patek. I’m looking for something that is quintessentially Patek and one that is expected to hold its value better over time. I’m getting the 5205 (white or rose gold) for around $60K and 5172G for $70-75K. I don’t mind the extra cost if the latter is a better buy.

(I did consider the 5905 but found 5205 to offer better value and sleeker profile in comparison)

Suggestions? Opinions?

Thanks!
Rish

I've never tried on the 5172, but I have a 5205r and think it's an awesome watch.

Are you buying from the gray market? 5250 goes for 57k now from ADs right? Are they hard to get nowadays or are you buying in a different currency maybe?