mdg
10916
Yes...if some of the tech trickles down...
...and enables other watches to be thinner. For instance, if a 'thick' chronograph at 14mm can be reduced to 11 or 12mm, that's good with me...
Yes ... but
Do we really care ?? It's like they want to prove something that nobody asks for, nobody needs , and nobody buys Like Bugatti makes a car with a top speed limit at 440 km/h ... Well if they produce one next year that goes 450 ... anybody cares ? Love my O...
I find it a “novelty” and that is fine. I think that the point is to prove that they can and I appreciate these pushes.
It makes it better to have some technical improvements than just design aesthetics improvements. Moreover, from an R&D standpoint, maybe they develop things along the way that could change watchmaking for others that could permeate the industry as a whole...
Yes...if some of the tech trickles down...
...and enables other watches to be thinner. For instance, if a 'thick' chronograph at 14mm can be reduced to 11 or 12mm, that's good with me...
Or you must like thick beasts
Imagine a watch as thin as a leaf of paper. Bulgari shows off where they capable of, and if you see a lot of complications make watches thicker, it is good to know Bulgari do not want thick unpleasant watches. But if you look at Moser, they have that amaz...
I see what you mean...
But you also have to realize that this watch has other technology that may trickle down to other watches. Bugatti was a technical exercise, but some of its technologies actually did transfer down to normal cars. Especially some of its cooling map technolo...
It is impossibly thin.
I think everyone can appreciate the skill required to produce a watch like this and of course from Bulgari's point of view it is bragging rights over Piaget who were the original thin movement manufacturer and king. I think if you had this watch a really ...
Technically impressive, but the aesthetic is lost on me....
Just like that hyper-thin RM for Ferrari....
