Reference Guide
Iceman initiates a critical comparison between two significant Patek Philippe split-seconds perpetual chronographs, the Ref. 5204P and Ref. 5004P. This discussion delves into the nuances of their design, movements, and proportions, offering collectors a detailed look at how Patek Philippe evolved its grand complications from a Lemania-based caliber to an in-house movement.
The Patek Philippe reference 5004 is a highly regarded grand complication, combining a split-seconds chronograph with a perpetual calendar. This reference was a significant offering in Patek Philippe's catalog, representing a sophisticated blend of technical mastery and traditional watchmaking. It was produced in limited numbers, making it a sought-after piece among collectors of complex horology.
The watch features a 36mm platinum case with a thickness of 15mm, housing the manual-winding caliber CHR 27-70 Q. This movement provides a power reserve of 60 hours and is protected by a sapphire crystal. The dial is presented in silver opaline, offering clear legibility for its numerous indications. The case is water-resistant to 30 meters.
As a split-seconds perpetual calendar, the reference 5004 appeals to collectors who value both intricate mechanical solutions and classical design. Its production run from 1996 to 2012 saw various dial and case material iterations, though platinum was a prominent offering. The integration of two major complications in a relatively compact case underscores its appeal within the realm of high-end watch collecting.
I don't like the large Patek Philippe font on the 5204 nor am I thrilled with the hands which seem more apropos for a sport watch. And, why is the moon upside down on the 5204? Last time I looked at the moon is was up high in the sky!
I still prefer the 5004 in any metal over the 5204P; however, I do actually like the fact that the 5204p has lume and is 40mm...though some would argue lume should not be on a piece like this. I think the 5204P could replace the 5004 as the ultimate daily piece for me.
... that the hands are Wg compared to the proto that was oxidized hands( your last pics). So your 1st pics is exactly how the watch will look like. What to say, huge improvement from the 5004 IMO. Too bulky, while 5204P got it all right. Gorgeous dial and the movement is now in-house, designed from scratch. Rattrappante system is a very ingenious invention too. The triggering from the crown puts it in a league of its own, if we compare to Lange for example... Also it is much more readable, with
Both watches are excellent on the outlook. 5204 has a bigger dial while 5004 is slightly smaller. I am not sure if I am accurate here but i have read somewhere that 5204 is the replacement reference of the 5004, or something along those lines. While 5004 is smaller, It actually has a busier face. Both the dial at the 9 o'clock and 3 o'clock is "double mapped" The 5204 however does not "double map" its dial at the 9 o'clock and 3 o'clock position. Together with it's slightly bigger dial, it looks
All are wonderful and valid points , especially to akitaishi for the detailed comparison. Would like to ask how you guys feel about the width/ height porportion and the case size / pusher button porportion on both watch. Remember 5004 is 36.7mm snd 5204 is 40mm, both height are +14mm. To me this is the biggest weakness of the 5004 , it looks like a hamburger, the case is too small. The same problem with the chrono pusher, its just too big for the 5004. The case/ chrono pusher porportion. The 500
The 5204 with the hands and baton hour markers like 5004/A or polished white gold...perfect! 5004/A is the best of the best, but in 40 mm it would be to die for :-)
This thread is active on the Patek Philippe forum with 23 replies. Share your knowledge with fellow collectors.
Join the Discussion →
