A. Lange & Söhne Datograph vs. Double Split

amanico · 2009-04-27T23:23:17Z

Explore the A. Lange & Söhne Datograph vs. Double Split. This in-depth comparison covers movement, case, and dial, offering collector insights.

amanico

WPS member · A. Lange & Söhne forum

63 replies32081 views17 photos

Amanico's comprehensive comparison of the A. Lange & Söhne Datograph and Double Split remains a foundational discussion for collectors evaluating these two iconic chronographs. His detailed analysis, supported by excellent photography, delves into the nuances of movement sophistication, case dimensions, and dial aesthetics. This article continues to be highly relevant for understanding the design philosophy and technical prowess behind Lange's most celebrated chronographs.

63 collectors discussing this on the WatchProSite forumJoin the Conversation →

It has been already debated, I believe, but let's come back to this topic.

I was ( and still am ) in the search of the perfect Rattrapante Chrono, and began to think about what would be the best.

The RM 004 is a bit Out Of Reach, so are the PP 5004 and the 5959.

Some are based on the 7750 with a module for the Rattrapante, like the IWC Portugaise, or the very nice cushion shaped GP, but these are Automatic movements, and the origin of the Movement is not that exciting, nor the finish ( it is maybe for that reason that these all have a solid case back? )...

So I started to lurk at the Double Split, hoping to find with this watch THE perfect Rattrapante Chrono, and also thinking to sell my Datograph to fund it.

So a Match between these 2 monsters was unavoidable.

The strong point of the Double Split is the movement.

You may spend hours looking, admiring this gorgeous movement!

The finish is outstanding, to reach an Artisitic level.

Compared to the Datograph, this movement is even more sophisticated in its complications, with a Double Split function ( seconds...but also minutes ), while the Dato is " only " a Flyback.

The Datograph movement:

The Datograph movement beats at 18 000 Vibrations per Hour, when the Double Split beats at 21 600, which is not, IMO, significative.

So, in terms of mechanical sophistications, the Double Split is on the top of the Datograph.

A bit like if it was a Super Datograph, without Date.

But a Watch is not only a movement, but also a Case and a Dial...

And here, the things are more complicated.

About the Case, the dimensions say all:

43 mm big, and 15, 3 mm Thick for the Double Split.

39mm big, and 12,8 mm thick for the Datograph.

So, a difference of 4 mm and 2,5mm for the case of the Double split!

And it is obvious.

The Datograph has, IMO, more homogeneity than the Double Split.

Its case, and the lugs are perfectly dimensionned, even if the bezel is a bit, but just a bit too thick.

With the Double Split, the things are very different.

I personnaly find the case too big, and too thick, like if it was a body builded Datograph, with an exageration of all the defaults.

I mean that by this enhanced size, the watch looses its natural balance, its harmony.

The lugs are much bigger in live than a few mm more in theory, and their draw is not as appealing it is for the lugs of the Datograph..

Same problem with the bezel...

Here are 2 pics which speak better than words:

So, the Datograph wins if we compare both cases.

As for the dial, now :

The design of the Datograph dial is reaching the perfection, in terms of balance, symmetry and strengh.

The 2 round silver dials at 4 and 8 make a perfect triangle with the big date located just under 12.

Even the writings " Datograph Flyback " seem to be at their right place.

The layout of the dial is an exemple of harmony indeed.

With the Double Split, when having in mind the dial of the Datograph, it is a bit more complicated.

The finish of the dial is as stunning as bthe one of the Datograph, but the layout seems less nice, less harmonious and balanced.

Take off the Big Date, put a Power Reserve indicator and an Applied XII instead, and you won't get the same outcome!

The loss of the big date comes with the loss of the balance and symmetry, IMO.

Even the writings seem to be located too low!

A pity, because the ballet of the double split seconds and minute hads is really magic!

On the wrist, the confirmation is here.

While the Datograph is pure joy and happyness, the Double Split is too big, at least for my normally sized wrist.

I think that to enjoy wearing this watch , you need a quite big wrist!

So, the outcome of this horological match?

No surprises, my friends.

I stay with my Datograph, in fact, this is maybe due to the fact that I dreamt of a Double Split Datograph, maybe a bit bigger, but with the same thickness, and the big date to not loose the symmetry of the dial.

Best, hoping that you'll enjoy this small comparative view, and that you will share with us all your thoughts about it!

Nicolas This message has been edited by amanico on 2009-04-27 23:24:18 This message has been edited by Dje on 2009-05-04 06:38:09

About the Richard Mille Split-Seconds Chronograph Ref. RM004

Richard Mille RM004 Split-Seconds Chronograph

The RM004 represents Richard Mille's split-seconds chronograph offering, distinguished by its manual-winding movement and skeletonized dial construction. Produced from 2003 to 2010, this reference demonstrates the brand's approach to high-complication timepieces within a compact case format.

The 38mm titanium case houses the manual-winding RM004 caliber, providing a 55-hour power reserve. The skeletonized dial reveals the movement architecture beneath a sapphire crystal. Water resistance extends to 50 meters, and the watch is fitted with a rubber strap. The fixed bezel maintains the case's streamlined profile.

This reference appeals to collectors seeking Richard Mille's take on the split-seconds complication in a relatively understated package. The titanium construction and skeletonized dial execution align with contemporary preferences for technical displays and lightweight materials. The seven-year production run establishes the RM004 as a core reference within the brand's chronograph offerings.

Specifications

Caliber: RM004

Case: Titanium

Diameter: 38 mm

Dial: Skeletonized

Water Resist.: 50m

Crystal: Sapphire

Key Points from the Discussion

The Double Split's movement is technically awesome, but its large, heavy platinum case and dial without the big date are points of contention. The absence of the big date allows for a purer focus on the rattrapante complication.
While admiring the Double Split's technical marvel, some prefer the Datograph's movement aesthetics, finding two column wheels to be 'enough' and appreciating the traditional balance wheel with poising screws.
The Double Split, despite its in-house spiral and complex escapement, is noted for being less pleasant to wear due to its size. The Girard-Perregaux with a Venus movement is mentioned as an alternative limited edition rattrapante.
Symmetry is not always a deciding factor; the Double Split's bold subdials create a sense of strength that complements its complex movement. The Datograph's big date can appear asymmetrical during the first nine days of the month.
The Patek Philippe 5004, despite its thickness relative to its size, is highly regarded and wears well on the wrist, while the 5959 is considered a technical and aesthetic masterpiece.
The Datograph is seen as a more wearable and better-proportioned watch than the Double Split, despite potential improvements like the single-digit date display. The Double Split's movement can appear too busy, obscuring the balance wheel.

The Discussion

ArthurSG

Apr 27, 2009

Very nice comparative write-up. If you still want a Rattrapante, perhaps

the GO Rattrapante in PT? Its definitely smaller than the double split and while not in the same league as the ALS, perhaps at the price point, it is a good alternative? And still German

amanico

Apr 29, 2009

THe GO Rattrapante is definitely in my book

You're absolutely right, the GO is defintely to consider: The only small thing is the la&yout of the dial. I really have to think about it, and to see it again and again, in the flesh and on the wrist. But when it comes to the movement, the G.O rattrapante is awesome. Best, Nicolas

BluNotte

Apr 29, 2009

I am considering this too mon ami!

I have been offered it time and again, in fact the only piece that is bound for Japan. I still am uncertain as to pull the trigger or not. I love the way this GO does a flyback, i'm sure you have seen it too , the "springing" at the end! Love it! Hope you get yours ! Cheers Stephen

amanico

Apr 29, 2009

Why do we doubt, Stephen?

I'm really wondering, my friend. Are we completely Lange Biased? I mean, do we have to consider this G.O as a Lange, and then do we have to have the same exigences? THe main problem for me is the dial, on this G.O. I would have been pleased to see a more classical layout of the dial. Ala Lange? That's all my problem... Best, Nicolas

BluNotte

Apr 30, 2009

For me it's the finish....

A GO is way behind Lange, especially in their engravings. I will be honest, but I definitely am Lange biased! LoL Well, one cannot have everything in life, and until the day that Lange releases a 12 hour counter chrono, i don't forsee myself getting any. ( For chronos, my criteria is that it MUST have a 12 hour counter) A beintot mon ami Stephen

MiniCooper

May 1, 2009

I disagree...

GO is pretty close to Lange cheers

Continue the conversation

This thread is active on the A. Lange & Söhne forum with 63 replies. Share your knowledge with fellow collectors.

Join the Discussion →

A. Lange & Söhne Datograph vs. Double Split

About the Richard Mille Split-Seconds Chronograph Ref. RM004

Specifications

Key Points from the Discussion

Continue the conversation

Related Articles