I actually have an explanation
that I by no means claim to correct or even supported by facts. Just some ramblings of a collector who has been watching the watch word for a decade or so.
Mr Scheufele is extremely keen on haute horlogerie. So he has this idea of making Chopard one for the high-end brands with truly spectacular movements and no less spectacular dials. The L.U.C. family of watches is born in 1996. The new movement, 1.96, received the highest praise from the collectors and connoisseurs but is very expensive to produce and perhaps not easy to sell because Chopard is not associated with high horology. It is still early ‘00 - the independents are struggling. The watch market is nothing like today. So the great movement is downgraded to cal 4.96 and we no longer see the high-class 1.96 produced, let alone more movements in the same vein. However, a few years later Mr Scheufele pursues his dream of making the watches of the highest possible class by acquiring the name of Ferdinand Berthoud and opening the manufacture under they name in 2015. Just one glimpse on their timepiece makes me want to sell my whole set and buy one. So, to answer your question why Chopard isn’t more popular among collectors: what was started with the LUC 1860 and the cal 1.96 did not lead anywhere in terms of simple watches in the top notch range. So the short period of glory was not enough to change the perception of Chopard as the House of Happy Diamonds.
Comments: view entire thread
The Chopard LUC
It doesn't get any better than this if you ask me. Not even when you change a date window for a tourbillon one. ...
Calibre developed by mr Dufour ..... Ultimate PP-killer. Congrats. Grtz Dom
but if you mean the 1.96 calibre in the watch I posted, the movement was developed my Michel Parmigiani and not Dufour.
Mr Scheufele commissioned both to team up to shape the mouvement, hence the resemblence to the "simplicity". No costs were spared to develope these LUC. Grtz,Dom
This is the first time I hear about Dufour being involved in this piece. Great info! But may I ask you about the source of this info? So strange that I have missed this. Also, there is no resemblance to any of the Dufour movements or am I missing a micro ...
I red it in a german magazine, from '96 or 97: "Chronos", i have it somerwhere around the house. Grtz,Dom
Very, very intriguing.
I will ask Juan García, the curator of Chopard Museum! LUC was released before the Simplicity so the dial design is actually original to Chopard. But this may be the “missing link” explaining the obvious similarity of the two watches.
Dials in 18k solid gold serve a practical purpose as well. They gold doesn't oxidise as does silver (the cheaper alternative usually used for guilooche dials). I own a few pieces with solid silver dials and there should the coating be damaged even a littl...
You wear a watch that is so perfect, that many of us shall think, why i do not know it Chopard have such a marvel? This one comes up in my brains, very under the radar. Chopard needs more recognition by us all. I seen such a great models what they made, a...
Very good news
An AD with a good name and be a family business for decades, is not far away. So, how easy to see some Chopards? Not difficult.
I agree. This piece is truly a wonderful piece to own!
Not in the brand's current offer apparently!
This is an amzing picture on a beautiful watch
Seriously, I don't understand how Copard doesn't get more kudos and exposure when they produce watches like this. I'd very happily wear this. It's an outstanding dress watch. And the date doesn't bother me one bit on this model.
I actually have an explanation
that I by no means claim to correct or even supported by facts. Just some ramblings of a collector who has been watching the watch word for a decade or so. Mr Scheufele is extremely keen on haute horlogerie. So he has this idea of making Chopard one for t...