Took macro shots of my brand new 5164a. Very disappointed

[Vetracer]

Originally Posted by dauster

the responses here from some people sometimes just make me wonder. Also, who can give OP flag for pointing this obvious shortcoming from PP out? You might not care about it - fine. but to say it's just a $20k watch so who cares is delusional. Sorry.

I’m surprised this response troubled you. I thought his point was valid. He was disagreeing with the fact that the Aquanaut could be deemed a lesser watch, and not one to be kept long term.

[dauster]

Originally Posted by Vetracer

I’m surprised this response troubled you. I thought his point was valid. He was disagreeing with the fact that the Aquanaut could be deemed a lesser watch, and not one to be kept long term.

I might have quoted the wrong person but essentially I was agreeing with him and also (quite broadly) voiced my surprise that a lot of people here always side with ADs and or PP when it comes to QC/ defects/ the way the watch world works.

I really don't understand these " well, if you were in the ADs shoes what would do" statements. Stating "the AD should not allocate you another watch because you dared to complain to the almighty AD and he will put you on a blacklist."

At that price point people should be "allowed" to voice concerns to their AD/ point of sale.

For what it's worth I should have referenced the below person I guess - that's what I meant when I mentioned "I don't understand people's statements here".


Originally Posted by cascavel View Post
The Aquanaut is not a watch you buy and keep, it's a trading watch. You buy one from an AD, wear it for a while, then trade it for something else, taking advantage of the premium to MSRP. As such, there are no "end users" so no one should worry about the details of the finishing, movement, durability etc. It is a vehicle to a better place.
Chill, enjoy your Aquanaut and then flip it like everyone else does.

[GreenLantern]

I've been trying to hold back and not say this, but if you don't want to see stuff like this (or like the Lange photos posted earlier in the thread -- and Lange is a step up from Patek with respect to finishing, in my opinion) then your only choice is Greubel Forsey.

I'm not joking.

They're the only ones I know to care about impeccable finishing for parts you will never ever see (and not just undersides of hands, but parts that are deeply embedded under layers in the movement).

That's the harsh reality.

[dauster]

Originally Posted by GreenLantern

I've been trying to hold back and not say this, but if you don't want to see stuff like this (or like the Lange photos posted earlier in the thread -- and Lange is a step up from Patek with respect to finishing, in my opinion) then your only choice is Greubel Forsey.

I'm not joking.

They're the only ones I know to care about impeccable finishing for parts you will never ever see (and not just undersides of hands, but parts that are deeply embedded under layers in the movement).

That's the harsh reality.

fair enough but still a valid point to bring up from OP and also quite interesting to know for people like me that want to buy an aquanaut (5164).

[GreenLantern]

Originally Posted by dauster

fair enough but still a valid point to bring up from OP and also quite interesting to know for people like me that want to buy an aquanaut (5164).

I 100% agree. In fact, I was upset for a long time the first time I noticed laziness and imperfections in my Pateks, Langes, and Rolexes. Then I saw them in Journes. Then I saw them in other indies.

Then I realized I have to get over it. And then I did not see them in a Greubel. And I realized if I wanted perfection, I am screwed because Greubel ain't cheap!

[BNABOD]

Originally Posted by dauster

I might have quoted the wrong person but essentially I was agreeing with him and also (quite broadly) voiced my surprise that a lot of people here always side with ADs and or PP when it comes to QC/ defects/ the way the watch world works.

I really don't understand these " well, if you were in the ADs shoes what would do" statements. Stating "the AD should not allocate you another watch because you dared to complain to the almighty AD and he will put you on a blacklist."

At that price point people should be "allowed" to voice concerns to their AD/ point of sale.

For what it's worth I should have referenced the below person I guess - that's what I meant when I mentioned "I don't understand people's statements here".


Originally Posted by cascavel View Post
The Aquanaut is not a watch you buy and keep, it's a trading watch. You buy one from an AD, wear it for a while, then trade it for something else, taking advantage of the premium to MSRP. As such, there are no "end users" so no one should worry about the details of the finishing, movement, durability etc. It is a vehicle to a better place.
Chill, enjoy your Aquanaut and then flip it like everyone else does.

Hard to disagree with this ....
Just because it is a PP or a Lange doesn’t excuse the brand from poor quality and / or QC. I would say quite the opposite , when you taut yourself as the pinacle of old school horology , then NO, you don’t get a pass on constructive criticism...

[thomaspp]

Originally Posted by Murcielagoboy2

I’m not sure what you expect.
That Patek’s entry level sports watch. I think the finish is consistent with that .

100%


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Russell996]

Originally Posted by GreenLantern

I've been trying to hold back and not say this, but if you don't want to see stuff like this (or like the Lange photos posted earlier in the thread -- and Lange is a step up from Patek with respect to finishing, in my opinion) then your only choice is Greubel Forsey.

I'm not joking.

They're the only ones I know to care about impeccable finishing for parts you will never ever see (and not just undersides of hands, but parts that are deeply embedded under layers in the movement).

That's the harsh reality.

In truth there will be a magnification level when even pieces by Greubel Forsey will no longer look perfect, the only real question is at what level of magnification should we still expect to see no imperfections.

I would suggest that absolutely anything that looks less than perfect to the naked eye is unacceptable, going beyond this level needs to be done sensibly. I believe the loupes used by watchmakers typically range from 3x to 10x but that using a loupe higher than this for working is virtually impossible due to the eye strain and extremely small field of vision - I myself use a 6x loupe. So if the piece is finished to the highest standard using a 6x loupe I wouldn’t expect a 50x magnifier to look perfect, no matter who makes the piece.

[IBDOC]

Originally Posted by BNABOD

Hard to disagree with this ....
Just because it is a PP or a Lange doesn’t excuse the brand from poor quality and / or QC. I would say quite the opposite , when you taut yourself as the pinacle of old school horology , then NO, you don’t get a pass on constructive criticism...

I don’t recall seeing either PP or Lange using finishing quality under loupe as a selling point. Constructive criticism is fine but this is someone doing a 20x magnification and then claiming that what he sees is objectively unacceptable. If that’s the case maybe provide some kind of rationale for why that should be the case? Expecting thus because it’s PP or because the thing retails for $19K seems arbitrary and doesn’t explain WHY something like it should be unacceptable and worthy of complaint. It’s a trinket made in the country with the highest labor and capital costs in the world. I don’t know what expectations OP had but yeah, $20K doesn’t buy a lot of Swiss made.

[GreenLantern]

Originally Posted by Russell996

In truth there will be a magnification level when even pieces by Greubel Forsey will no longer look perfect, the only real question is at what level of magnification should we still expect to see no imperfections.

I would suggest that absolutely anything that looks less than perfect to the naked eye is unacceptable, going beyond this level needs to be done sensibly. I believe the loupes used by watchmakers typically range from 3x to 10x but that using a loupe higher than this for working is virtually impossible due to the eye strain and extremely small field of vision - I myself use a 6x loupe. So if the piece is finished to the highest standard using a 6x loupe I wouldn’t expect a 50x magnifier to look perfect, no matter who makes the piece.

Yes, indeed!

Very well said.

[Kigan]

Originally Posted by yellowfinger

So I should expect Grand Seiko a watch which is 83% cheaper to have better finishing?

You can go to Grand Seiko, but you will lose at the finish level of the mechanism. The finish of the Patek Philippe movement is simply space, unlike the typical finish of the details of the GS movement. Sometimes terrible.

The arrows in the Patek Philippe Aquanaut are truly stamped. From a gold plate, unlike brass (or nickel) in GS. If you want something better, then choose a watch from Gronefeld, Akrivia, Roger Smith ...

[tom2517]

Originally Posted by Kigan

You can go to Grand Seiko, but you will lose at the finish level of the mechanism. The finish of the Patek Philippe movement is simply space, unlike the typical finish of the details of the GS movement. Sometimes terrible.

The arrows in the Patek Philippe Aquanaut are truly stamped. From a gold plate, unlike brass (or nickel) in GS. If you want something better, then choose a watch from Gronefeld, Akrivia, Roger Smith ...

Reminds of this post:

https://www.watchprosite.com/patek-p...0336.10258681/

The infamous “chattering mark” on the anglage. There are actually more than one post about this.

Anyways, it’s not something you can see with naked eye, even with a 6X loupe it is hard to spot, but it is there, I see it on my 240 as well. SJX said it is less obvious on the new Patek 6007A, perhaps the new factory has newer and better equipment.

[Kigan]

Caliber PP 240, 324... these are semi-industrial mechanisms. And the finishing of these calibers is made using machines (Cote de Geneve, anglage). These calibers are not ideal in terms of finish and will not compete with calibers from Philippe Dufour, Gronefeld, Akrivia, Bexei.
I have visited factories of leading brands: Audemars Piguet, Piguet, Blancpain, and they all work almost the same way. There are semi-industrial calibers, they have their own technical task. There are calibers of haute horlogerie, where the proportion of manual finishing is higher (for example, anglage is not machine-made, but hand-made). Making arrows in mass is cutting out of a sheet of a certain metal (gold, brass, nickel) with subsequent finishing on the front side. Who polishes, who makes chamfers, and so on. But behind the arrow, almost no one is touched. And the back of the arrow doesn't match the view from the face, even in Grand Seiko.

More or less perfect serial arrows are honest blued arrows. Look at the arrows of Glashutte Original Senator & UN Marine. Or the more mass-produced Cartier arrows. Or even the blue hands in the inexpensive Longines Heritage Classic (sector dial). No hint of smudges (hello Rolex Explorer 2, black arrows), no defects on the surface of the front or back panel (or not particularly visible).

I am not a fan of sprinkling ash on my head if I see an untreated surface with a strong magnifying glass or macrophoto. If the brand doesn't claim that the arrows have a manual finish, there's no problem. If it is stated, but in fact it is a hack, then this is a different question.

[BNABOD]

Originally Posted by IBDOC

I don’t recall seeing either PP or Lange using finishing quality under loupe as a selling point. Constructive criticism is fine but this is someone doing a 20x magnification and then claiming that what he sees is objectively unacceptable. If that’s the case maybe provide some kind of rationale for why that should be the case? Expecting thus because it’s PP or because the thing retails for $19K seems arbitrary and doesn’t explain WHY something like it should be unacceptable and worthy of complaint. It’s a trinket made in the country with the highest labor and capital costs in the world. I don’t know what expectations OP had but yeah, $20K doesn’t buy a lot of Swiss made.

I could easily see the poor finish staring at it w a 6X loupe and possibly w the naked eye . To say that 20k doesn’t buy you a whole lot of Swiss and therefore excuses this because of labor cost when the company just put up a 600 million headquarters is laughable . Are you serious ? Sure japan labor cost is lower but then what , you can’t make a decent hand set because your hourly labor rate is high , gimme a break . The reason is they don’t care , they sell the trinkets in advance people get on some silly lists for them and PP doesn’t have to provide anything better finish . Win win for PP but it seems fair to me as horology enthusiast to contrast and compare brands . Sure a GS movement is nowhere near finished like PP even though I doubt the movement in the OPs watch has a lot of hand finishing so the cost of making that PP I would guess isn’t too far off from a GS that are made in low numbers .

[IBDOC]

Originally Posted by BNABOD

I could easily see the poor finish staring at it w a 6X loupe and possibly w the naked eye . To say that 20k doesn’t buy you a whole lot of Swiss and therefore excuses this because of labor cost when the company just put up a 600 million headquarters is laughable . Are you serious ? Sure japan labor cost is lower but then what , you can’t make a decent hand set because your hourly labor rate is high , gimme a break . The reason is they don’t care , they sell the trinkets in advance people get on some silly lists for them and PP doesn’t have to provide anything better finish . Win win for PP but it seems fair to me as horology enthusiast to contrast and compare brands . Sure a GS movement is nowhere near finished like PP even though I doubt the movement in the OPs watch has a lot of hand finishing so the cost of making that PP I would guess isn’t too far off from a GS that are made in low numbers .

I don’t excuse anything. I’m stating facts. If the resulting price-quality ratio doesn’t work for you then don’t buy Patek. I’m sure PP will be devastated over crates full of Aquanaut that go unsold because of unfinished side surface-gate.

[BNABOD]

Originally Posted by IBDOC

I don’t excuse anything. I’m stating facts. If the resulting price-quality ratio doesn’t work for you then don’t buy Patek. I’m sure PP will be devastated over crates full of Aquanaut that go unsold because of unfinished side surface-gate.

Sure , vote w your wallet which I mentioned many posts ago ...

[mongrelnomoad]

Originally Posted by IBDOC

I don’t excuse anything. I’m stating facts. If the resulting price-quality ratio doesn’t work for you then don’t buy Patek. I’m sure PP will be devastated over crates full of Aquanaut that go unsold because of unfinished side surface-gate.

Wow. You're aggressive. And your assertions about cost are plain rubbish. There are a myriad of other Swiss brands who don't demonstrate this - and their costs would be identical to PP.

[IBDOC]

Originally Posted by mongrelnomoad

Wow. You're aggressive. And your assertions about cost are plain rubbish. There are a myriad of other Swiss brands who don't demonstrate this - and their costs would be identical to PP.

This thread is akin to someone buying a Porsche Boxster and then being ”very disappointed” that he can’t blow past a trimmed Subaru on the road. And then whining about it on an online enthusiast discussion forum and complaining about it to the dealer. Is it his right to do so? Absolutely. Can it be seen as cringey? Yeah. Is there any objectively correct assessment in this whole debacle? Hell no. If you don’t like the product quality at the posted price then don’t buy it. Patek didn’t market the watch as being of superlative finishing quality, ever. Expecting something else and then thinking that PP is at fault is pretty darn entitled. Caveat emptor.

[enjoythemusic]

Originally Posted by IBDOC

If you don’t like the product quality at the posted price then don’t buy it. Patek didn’t market the watch as being of superlative finishing quality, ever. Expecting something else and then thinking that PP is at fault is pretty darn entitled. Caveat emptor.

Agreed.

Imho ever since PP went from Geneva Seal to their proprietary PP hallmark things have not gone so well it seems. Quality questions, longer service times, and a very lackluster warranty speaks volumes to the direction of the company.

It appears quite a few timepiece enthusiasts did as you say, we don't purchase modern Patek Philippe products, and instead went elsewhere where we enthusiasts find true craftsmanship / quality and more appropriate customer support. Thank goodness for independent manufacturers, as they are truly a blessing in this world of mass-produced mechanical timepieces.

Then we have true innovation in materials, mechanical movements, etc including FPJ, MB&F... and Panerai(!). It brings my heart joy to see so many incredible innovations within today's marketplace. We can all agree the art of wrist instruments has grown to a wonderful degree during the past decade or two.

It is up to the enthusiast to choose the quality, design, and all-important customer service they feel meets (dare we ask exceeds) their needs.

[Calatrava r]

I have to take issue with the comments that this is an entry level watch, which it obviously is price point wise, but therefore it need not be finished as well as a more expensive watch in the line. I believe the fit and finish on the entire line should meet same high standard of finish at the Patek price point, entry level or otherwise. I understand there is no difference in finish on Lange watches, no matter the price point. I suspect that is true with Gronefeld or Grubel. In my view, that is how it should be with all the manufacturers. That is why people buy the watches in the first place. They spend 20K on an Aquanaut because it is a Patek and finished to the highest Patek standards.

[yoniman]

Originally Posted by IBDOC

To avoid disappointment; yes.

By all accounts, YES it is generally true.

[V25V]

This thread is why nobody should ever take a high magnification loupe to any watch.

[IBDOC]

Originally Posted by Calatrava r

I have to take issue with the comments that this is an entry level watch, which it obviously is price point wise, but therefore it need not be finished as well as a more expensive watch in the line. I believe the fit and finish on the entire line should meet same high standard of finish at the Patek price point, entry level or otherwise. I understand there is no difference in finish on Lange watches, no matter the price point. I suspect that is true with Gronefeld or Grubel. In my view, that is how it should be with all the manufacturers. That is why people buy the watches in the first place. They spend 20K on an Aquanaut because it is a Patek and finished to the highest Patek standards.

Mhm. Take the median internet expectation of what Patek should be and you’ll have an unlimited supply of Philippe Dufour-level finished Nautilus sold at $8000 with no waiting lists at ADs. A read through the criteria for both the Geneva seal and the PP seal says that neither mentions finishing of the vertical sides watch hands or indices. Considering that the finishing of movement side components is laid out in a fairly detailed way, I don’t think it’s an accidental omission.

The idea that Lange finishes all of its watches to the same standard is not likely to be true. Haven’t compared them side by side but I am certain that my Saxonia Moonphase is not as well finished as a friend’s Datograph.

[tom2517]

Originally Posted by V25V

This thread is why nobody should ever take a high magnification loupe to any watch.

That is not exactly true, some watches held up well. It just people have high expectations for Patek but as Kigan have pointed out, they are mostly industrialized movements.

[pam66]

sadly my Tudor GMT is a step up from those macro shots of the aquanaut - of which i do not know whether they are representative or whether the OP just got unlucky.
te AD blocking him s just another example of arrogance by the PP economic universe.

[Russell996]

Originally Posted by pam66

sadly my Tudor GMT is a step up from those macro shots of the aquanaut - of which i do not know whether they are representative or whether the OP just got unlucky.
te AD blocking him s just another example of arrogance by the PP economic universe.

Wow - You also have macro shots at 20x size.

[Kigan]

Originally Posted by pam66

sadly my Tudor GMT is a step up from those macro shots of the aquanaut - ...

The hands of a Tudor watch are stamping. Only not of 18K gold , but of brass. No pride.

[IBDOC]

Originally Posted by pam66

sadly my Tudor GMT is a step up from those macro shots of the aquanaut - of which i do not know whether they are representative or whether the OP just got unlucky.
te AD blocking him s just another example of arrogance by the PP economic universe.

As they say... pics or it didn’t happen.

Or is this an unfortunate lemon of a Tudor GMT? Because that finishing most certainly isn’t a step up from anything. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=F8xLmOjdgBk

[8bc8]

Does anyone have a 5650g advanced research? Maybe this could support/refute the "higher end" pieces hypothesis

[Dr Process]

Originally Posted by Calatrava r

I have to take issue with the comments that this is an entry level watch, which it obviously is price point wise, but therefore it need not be finished as well as a more expensive watch in the line. I believe the fit and finish on the entire line should meet same high standard of finish at the Patek price point, entry level or otherwise. I understand there is no difference in finish on Lange watches, no matter the price point. I suspect that is true with Gronefeld or Grubel. In my view, that is how it should be with all the manufacturers. That is why people buy the watches in the first place. They spend 20K on an Aquanaut because it is a Patek and finished to the highest Patek standards.

Agree.