Is there a brand that you think is superior to Patek Philippe?

[Daycruiser]

Originally Posted by capote

Very interesting. This is actually the first time I see a finish comparison instead of the knee-jerk "Patek's finishing is superior". It would be interesting to see a comparison between the Lemania movements used by both PP and VC.



On another note they seems to rely heavily on the 240 movement - from the 70's. Golden Ellipse, world timer, perpetual calendar and even the celestial.

Dufour has to be my favourite, great family, small and independent. Each individual parts are pretty much hand polished by the man himself. If one has deep enough pockets and enough connection to get on his waiting list, I would most likely get one. I heard he is passing the reins to his daughter, not sure if they will retain the same quality. So it's probably a really good time to get one now.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Tony64]

So how many angels can dance on the head of a pin?

I'm just going to go ahead and state what's probably obvious to many, but with all respect to the level of finishing posted in these photos, is it really that important if it requires such a macro view?

I've read this thread with interest, and respect the varied views expressed, even some which I vehemently disagree or barely understand. I think if we are going to examine these watches on a microscopic level though, somehow the overall aesthetic gets lost. My vision's not perfect, but I would propose that if the differences can't be appreciated with corrected 20/20 acuity, perhaps it's not really all that important. I'm not sure that even with the benefit of a loupe would I be able to discern some of these differences.

[subtona]

Originally Posted by PJ S

Gus, ...
My position is well documented in various threads, so no need to go over old ground again.

Out of the 157,319 members, perhaps everyone else has noted your position in previous posts, it does not stand out with me and as the OP has only been a member since last December with ~200 posts maybe you could share it with him in the interest of the discussion?

[subtona]

Originally Posted by Tony64

So how many angels can dance on the head of a pin?

I'm just going to go ahead and state what's probably obvious to many, but with all respect to the level of finishing posted in these photos, is it really that important if it requires such a macro view?

.

Agree the level of magnification is quite high, I do not find it to be at the top of my list.

[KarlS]

Sadly whilst I am sure Dufour and GB are the pinnacle. On an emotional level I don't lust after either, so no need to sell the house or press my nose wistfully against the AD window

[lapince]

Originally Posted by Tony64

So how many angels can dance on the head of a pin?

I'm just going to go ahead and state what's probably obvious to many, but with all respect to the level of finishing posted in these photos, is it really that important if it requires such a macro view?

I've read this thread with interest, and respect the varied views expressed, even some which I vehemently disagree or barely understand. I think if we are going to examine these watches on a microscopic level though, somehow the overall aesthetic gets lost. My vision's not perfect, but I would propose that if the differences can't be appreciated with corrected 20/20 acuity, perhaps it's not really all that important. I'm not sure that even with the benefit of a loupe would I be able to discern some of these differences.

I did post an article showing different movement pics with this macro pic level, and it was, as far as I can tell, the same pics or at least the same movements as is shown on this one, at the time I must say I was quite disappointed, as in 2 months I have a Patek coming in, but after thinking it over I realized, having already had one, that without magnification, the movement looks great, and that I had no intention of looking at my movements, wether my incoming Patek or my AP, with any kind of enlarging device, even with a loupe, of course if I had a Simplicity, or any other incredibly fine finished movement of their level, yes I would look with a loupe from time to time, but it is not something which is of the biggest importance for me, as long as the movement looks beautiful using only my eyes well it's all good for me, and every time I looked at my 240, probably 2-5 times per day, it looked great, so sure having a finely hand finished movement is the cherry on the cake, but if I needed to pay 10k more for the same Patek to have something that my eyes can't see, I would prefer to get like it is now, though maybe they could give it a little extra effort, not saying to make it like Dufour or even the datograph, which we are forgetting is much more expensive than many Patek pieces with the 240 movement, but as far as movements go, the Datograph is the most incredible one I have seen in real life

[nilfire77]

Originally Posted by lapince

I did post an article showing different movement pics with this macro pic level, and it was, as far as I can tell, the same pics or at least the same movements as is shown on this one, at the time I must say I was quite disappointed, as in 2 months I have a Patek coming in, but after thinking it over I realized, having already had one, that without magnification, the movement looks great, and that I had no intention of looking at my movements, wether my incoming Patek or my AP, with any kind of enlarging device, even with a loupe, of course if I had a Simplicity, or any other incredibly fine finished movement of their level, yes I would look with a loupe from time to time, but it is not something which is of the biggest importance for me, as long as the movement looks beautiful using only my eyes well it's all good for me, and every time I looked at my 240, probably 2-5 times per day, it looked great, so sure having a finely hand finished movement is the cherry on the cake, but if I needed to pay 10k more for the same Patek to have something that my eyes can't see, I would prefer to get like it is now, though maybe they could give it a little extra effort, not saying to make it like Dufour or even the datograph, which we are forgetting is much more expensive than many Patek pieces with the 240 movement, but as far as movements go, the Datograph is the most incredible one I have seen in real life

PP will love you for this post!

Meanwhile in the PP boardroom..
Thierry Stern: *Wipes off his sweat* *Heaves a huge sigh of relief* Alright guys, calm down! Business as usual!

[lapince]

Originally Posted by nilfire77

PP will love you for this post!

Meanwhile in the PP boardroom..
Thierry Stern: *Wipes off his sweat* *Heaves a huge sigh of relief* Alright guys, calm down! Business as usual!

Hilarious post dude. Do you think I can ask Thierry to put me in first place for the first anniversary limited edition Nautilus? Probably not this year but I would imagine them making one in 10 years, I mean I just literally saved his family business with my post after all giving me the No 1 of the first LE at of course a huge discount is the least he can do, hell he should even give it to me, that would be normal right?

Seriously sure having a perfectly finished movement is great, but the most important is what your eyes can see, if you see a beautiful girl with beautiful skin, but then take a microscope to look at her skin it will be a horror movie, better not to, and the same goes for the watches, if it looks great using only your eyes then it's fine, and the 240 I had did look great IMO

[Hollister]

Originally Posted by Tony64

So how many angels can dance on the head of a pin?

I'm just going to go ahead and state what's probably obvious to many, but with all respect to the level of finishing posted in these photos, is it really that important if it requires such a macro view?

I've read this thread with interest, and respect the varied views expressed, even some which I vehemently disagree or barely understand. I think if we are going to examine these watches on a microscopic level though, somehow the overall aesthetic gets lost. My vision's not perfect, but I would propose that if the differences can't be appreciated with corrected 20/20 acuity, perhaps it's not really all that important. I'm not sure that even with the benefit of a loupe would I be able to discern some of these differences.

If the quality of finishing and polishing on a PP movement isn't important, then what is important? Why buy (say) a Nautilus, when Rolex make the Submariner? Why do a large number of Pateks come with exhibition casebacks?

I think these things are extremely important, and they are a large part of the whole appeal of Haute Horology. I have a couple of Pateks, but I can recognise and concede that they are not at the very pinnacle of modern watchmaking as regards the finish.

[Tony64]

Originally Posted by Hollister

If the quality of finishing and polishing on a PP movement isn't important, then what is important? Why buy (say) a Nautilus, when Rolex make the Submariner? Why do a large number of Pateks come with exhibition casebacks?

I think these things are extremely important, and they are a large part of the whole appeal of Haute Horology. I have a couple of Pateks, but I can recognise and concede that they are not at the very pinnacle of modern watchmaking as regards the finish.

First let me congratulate you on your appreciation of Haute Horology, and for sharing such insightful commentary. I'd like to apologize for the inarticulate way that I expressed my own views on the subject, as they were clearly misinterpreted in your response.

While I share your appreciation for quality of finish, there are limits of resolution to which I subscribe. Viewed in proper lighting and acuity, I would expect perfection from my timepiece, front, back, and side, discounting of course the inevitable marks incurred though my years of enjoyment.

What isn't important to me however, are imperfections observed under extreme magnification that I will never see or appreciate.
So as to avoid further confusion, please allow me to illustrate my point over the next 3 posts.

Imagine a day a the beach with your supermodel girlfriend...

[Tony64]

... And she playfully sticks out her tongue...

[Tony64]

Let's take a closer look, shall we...

[Tony64]

What's that? You still want closer? Okaaay....

[Tony64]

No way she's coming anywhere near me with that thing!

Oh, wait.... Never mind



Maybe you understand better now? Sorry, Hollister, for the confusion that my initial post created. I'll try to express myself more clearly going forward.

[el1125]

Originally Posted by Tony64

No way she's coming anywhere near me with that thing!

Oh, wait.... Never mind



Maybe you understand better now? Sorry, Hollister, for the confusion that my initial post created. I'll try to express myself more clearly going forward.

lol. great explanation!!! I could not have done any better myself!! Even though just posting a pic of that chick would have been enough for me.

[Hollister]

Originally Posted by Tony64

No way she's coming anywhere near me with that thing!

Oh, wait.... Never mind



Maybe you understand better now? Sorry, Hollister, for the confusion that my initial post created. I'll try to express myself more clearly going forward.

Hi, thanks for all the good thoughts Tony, but that's an absurd argument. No-one has posted an electron micrograph, they are just camera macros, and all of them are at the same magnification. A totally fair comparison of workmanship.

One thing I've learned in my short time here is that there are certain brand owners who won't tolerate any criticism of "their" brand. Oh well.

[RussW]

Originally Posted by Tony64

First let me congratulate you on your appreciation of Haute Horology, and for sharing such insightful commentary. I'd like to apologize for the inarticulate way that I expressed my own views on the subject, as they were clearly misinterpreted in your response.

While I share your appreciation for quality of finish, there are limits of resolution to which I subscribe. Viewed in proper lighting and acuity, I would expect perfection from my timepiece, front, back, and side, discounting of course the inevitable marks incurred though my years of enjoyment.

What isn't important to me however, are imperfections observed under extreme magnification that I will never see or appreciate.
So as to avoid further confusion, please allow me to illustrate my point over the next 3 posts.

Imagine a day a the beach with your supermodel girlfriend...

But is she the Lange, Dufour or Patek of supermodel girlfriends??

Definitely not Chopard

[capote]

Originally Posted by Hollister

One thing I've learned in my short time here is that there are certain brand owners who won't tolerate any criticism of "their" brand. Oh well.

That attitude is pretty new around here and I hope it will go away again.

[subtona]

Originally Posted by Hollister

If the quality of finishing and polishing on a PP movement isn't important, then what is important? Why buy (say) a Nautilus, when Rolex make the Submariner? Why do a large number of Pateks come with exhibition casebacks?

I think these things are extremely important, and they are a large part of the whole appeal of Haute Horology. I have a couple of Pateks, but I can recognise and concede that they are not at the very pinnacle of modern watchmaking as regards the finish.

Agree here, after owning the nautilus 5711 and my submariner 14060 together, I had these observations:
*they are both amazing looking timepieces (the submariner suffers a bit because it is By comparison, commonly available.)
*they can both be confidently worn in a variety similar circumstances and perform as expected. (The nautilus is somewhat limited due to the rigidity of its bracelet, I had a Japanese guy walking on my back and suddenly maneuvered to my wrist with disregard for my watch, as it was my sub, no harm done...the 5711 most definitely would have been damaged) (I don't take off my watch unless it happens to have a leather strap and would never wear that option out if I expected I might need to remove it)
*in the end I decided to choose one, the submariner it is different but just as nice imho, it is 1/4 the price, a bit more capable and has a no date option.

to much of the point in this thread, I Would prefer the nautilus without a see through case back, the 324 movement is not that impressive

Originally Posted by Tony64

First let me congratulate you on your appreciation of Haute Horology, and for sharing such insightful commentary. I'd like to apologize for the inarticulate way that I expressed my own views on the subject, as they were clearly misinterpreted in your response.

While I share your appreciation for quality of finish, there are limits of resolution to which I subscribe. Viewed in proper lighting and acuity, I would expect perfection from my timepiece, front, back, and side, discounting of course the inevitable marks incurred though my years of enjoyment.

What isn't important to me however, are imperfections observed under extreme magnification that I will never see or appreciate.
So as to avoid further confusion, please allow me to illustrate my point over the next 3 posts.

Imagine a day a the beach with your supermodel girlfriend...

Also agree here, This is a brilliant explanation.

[Tony64]

Originally Posted by Hollister

Hi, thanks for all the good thoughts Tony, but that's an absurd argument. No-one has posted an electron micrograph, they are just camera macros, and all of them are at the same magnification. A totally fair comparison of workmanship.

One thing I've learned in my short time here is that there are certain brand owners who won't tolerate any criticism of "their" brand. Oh well.

So sorry to hear that your experience on TRF has been less than stellar so far. Hopefully it will improve! It's really a great forum with passionate collectors and novices alike that share their views and experiences. Unfortunatley like all things on the internet there will always be those few that would rather insight than provide insight! I sincerely hope that you will not prevent you from continuing to share your insightful commentary.

To address your most recent comments specifically, I apologize for what you have described as an absurd argument. It was neither my intent to argue nor to be absurd. Hopefully you and the other forum members can forgive me this once. My message, apparently extremely obtuse and poorly demonstrated, was simply to point out that micro analysis is not always such a good thing when it comes to matters of beauty. Unless you're suggesting that these micro enhanced images covey any sense of functional significance, then I assume our discussion regards our own personal aesthetic view of perfection.

As I am no more likely to view the back of my watch thru these micro lens images than I am to view the SEM images of the supermodel's tongue, I will stand by my analogy - poor as it may be.

I sincerely hope that your experiences on this forum improve, as I'm sure that there is much that you can contribute!

[Hollister]

Originally Posted by Tony64

So sorry to hear that your experience on TRF has been less than stellar so far. Hopefully it will improve! It's really a great forum with passionate collectors and novices alike that share their views and experiences. Unfortunatley like all things on the internet there will always be those few that would rather insight than provide insight! I sincerely hope that you will not prevent you from continuing to share your insightful commentary.

To address your most recent comments specifically, I apologize for what you have described as an absurd argument. It was neither my intent to argue nor to be absurd. Hopefully you and the other forum members can forgive me this once. My message, apparently extremely obtuse and poorly demonstrated, was simply to point out that micro analysis is not always a such a good thing when it comes to matters of beauty. Unless you're suggesting that these micro enhanced images covey any sense of functional significance, then I assume our discussion regards our own personal aesthetic view of perfection.

As I am no more likely to view the back of my watch thru these micro lens images than I am to view the SEM images of the supermodel's tongue, I will stand by my analogy - poor as it may be.

I sincerely hope that your experiences on this forum improve, as I'm sure that there is much that you can contribute!

I feel like I'm being patronised.

No, the macros do not show "functional significance", what they show is the quality of finishing, care and workmanship.

Again, what's the point of a PP vs a Rolex? Functionally, the Rolex is on a par with PP, so it's not that...

[Hollister]

Originally Posted by capote

That attitude is pretty new around here and I hope it will go away again.

Me too. It renders any sort of discussion redundant. The perfect watch hasn't been made.

[Tony64]

Well, I tried.

[Hollister]

Tried to do what? How about answering the PP vs Rolex question.

BTW, I've been collecting watches for many years, and have done a lot of research as a result. I may be a "newbie" on this forum, but I'm not wet behind the ears.

[texex91]

Originally Posted by RussW

But is she the Lange, Dufour or Patek of supermodel girlfriends??

Definitely not Chopard

She can wear whatever she wants (or rather as little)

[el1125]

Originally Posted by Hollister

Tried to do what? How about answering the PP vs Rolex question.

BTW, I've been collecting watches for many years, and have done a lot of research as a result. I may be a "newbie" on this forum, but I'm not wet behind the ears.

Just like in your other posts, you are spewing negative comments to everybody on everything...

[Tony64]

Originally Posted by Hollister

Tried to do what? How about answering the PP vs Rolex question.

BTW, I've been collecting watches for many years, and have done a lot of research as a result. I may be a "newbie" on this forum, but I'm not wet behind the ears.

Actually Hollister, when I replied "Well, I tried", I was actually addressing the other forum members reading this thread. I'm sure they got my meaning.

Sorry for the confusion.

[Hollister]

Originally Posted by el1125

Just like in your other posts, you are spewing negative comments to everybody on everything...

No I am not. Fanboys may take them as negative, but that's not the reality.

[Hollister]

Originally Posted by Tony64

Actually Hollister, when I replied "Well, I tried", I was actually addressing the other forum members reading this thread. I'm sure they got my meaning.

Sorry for the confusion.

What is your meaning? What does haute horology mean to you? Explain why PP is the best brand. I strongly suspect it's a just brand thing for you, refute this.

[enjoythemusic]

As an interesting point of reference, here is a close-up shot of the Rolex Daytona movement. Ok, not total eye candy yet nicer in some ways than the recent Pateks. BTW, the ceramic Everose Daytona here is +/-1 second every week or so. Far and away more accurate than any Patek I've had here, and have had over 10.




And since this thread seems to be degrading to....