Jaeger-LeCoultre

The strength of MCM is imo that it’s so the pure and simple.

No hassle, no fuss, but still with some complications; date, alarm and rotating inner bezel.

Big, thick and with a good weight you are really aware of her presence.  

A so-called "tool watch" which also lives up to name.

Built like a tank, with the enhanced compressor crowns and cambered crystal she can take the heat in any situations.

In one of the workshops at La Grande Maison I once saw how they shock tested an MCM.

The guy used something similar to a golf club hanging in a pendulum and just wacked the watch with it!

BANG! The watch flew and I thought “that one is gone”!

Tests afterwards showed that the watch were little faster than before but otherwise not a scratch! Amazing! 

Two big differences between the two are that;

The crown for the inner bezel is located at ten o’clock on the MCM and at three o’clock on the AMI. Big deal?

Yes, actually it is. On the MCM it is more difficult to operate the bezel because of the location of the crown,

but on the same time the location at ten o’clock gives the watch a more balanced look.

The AMI with the classic Polaris look with three crowns on the same side looks also great, also well balanced because of the smaller crowns.

The problem here is that it’s too easy to touch the centre crown, so the bezel will move.

I haven’t experienced this problem with the Polaris. Which one is worse? I don’t know.

Second; The MCM doesn’t have the normal Memovox alarm disk. Instead the alarm mark is fixed at ten o’clock and the disk that rotating has the alarm-time indication.

The AMI has the classic Memovox alarm disk, where the alarm mark rotates.

Even if the AMI is slightly bigger then the MCM, it looks more elegant and classic imo.

It’s a sports watch with a lot of “suit” feeling about it. It’s a sport, but not a tool watch.

The AMI doesn’t have the compact feeling like the MCM.

It’s a bit lighter and with the crystal on the outside of the case it doesn’t give the same assuring feeling as the MCM.

But it’s not fragile!

The dome is stunning! I love the silhouette of the AMI.

Some times I actually which that JLC would have put this kind of crystal on the Tribute to Polaris instead of the plexi.

The plexi is so easy to scratch…

Even if the MCM’s bezel and hour marks are much closer to the Polaris, the AMI in whole feels closer to the icon!

Probably because of the crowns and the alarm disk.

On the back of the MCM there is the beautiful rg medallion with the sphere from the Geophysic! 

The shape makes it very comfortable to wear; only the medallion is on your skin.

On the AMI in addition to the AM logo you have the typical Polaris “holes”, not sixteen as on the original, but still very typical! 

The diameter of the part that lies on to your skin is 4 mm bigger on the AMI and much more flat than on the MCM, which makes is stick to your skin on a warm summers day.

No biggi, but a little bit annoying.

Well, in my book the final score will be;

The MCM gets 9 out of 10 stars, and the AMI, 7 out of 10 stars!

If the MCM would have the Cal 956 with the quick date set function I think it would be close to a perfect ten!

Maybe because I am not much of a racer or maybe because I think a sport watch has to be able to take a good beating, I don’t know.

But if the AMI had the same quick date set and a little more firm feeling to it. It would be almost perfect! 

There are a lot more to say about these two brilliant and wonderful watches.

But I save it for later, so I have an excuse to come back to dwell on them again.

Best

Blomman