Montblanc

And here is a comparison side by side with the Nivrel. I don't see any difference. Please tell me what is "incorrect" or "misleading" in what I said? It is not about liking it or not but about technical facts. 

This message has been edited by Goldenlutin on 2014-09-03 15:54:25

Let me start by combining the image side by side and let everyone review

The left is the Nivrel, and on the right the MB.

They are very similar BUT they are not the same. Besides the different finishing, the most obvious change is the leap year function.

And here is another for everyone to consider

The left is the MB, the right is a Chronoswiss Perpetual Calendar DD module.

They are even more similar to one another BUT, again, not the same at the leap year function and the moonphase display

These two photos highlight exactly why we are "splitting hairs".

The math and engineering behind the gearing for all perpetuals are well known.  Given similar layouts, there will only be minute changes possible.  Especially at DD where this is one of their specialties, it would only make sense from a cost and future servicing perspective, to make minimal changes. 

I believe, Goldenlutin, this is where we are "splitting hairs".

Yes, the DD perpetual modules are mass produced.  Yes the DD modules all have the same functions.  And yes they are very similar. And of course since these complications are modular in construction, all the "display back photos" will the be same depending on which base movement is chosen to power it.

BUT the modules themselves are NOT THE SAME.  The Nivrel and Chronoswiss are different from each other and both are different from Montblanc. 

Now Montblanc and DD can claim exclusivity based on these small changes but nowhere does Montblanc claim that the Heritage Perpetual is technically superior than other perpetuals out there based on the slight variation.

That's the point I was trying to make. The only aspect of your comments that I'm disagreeing with is your assertion that all DD modules are the same and it is obvious they are not.

Please don't take offense.  Trust me when I tell you that the first thing I did when I read Montblanc's press release was to pull out the three under-the-dial photos of the DD perpetual calendar modules that I had in my personal archives to make the comparisons.  These three photos are the ones I've shown in this thread.  Yes, the modules are very similar but the claims made on the press release are technically correct. 

And also I've reached out to Montblanc to ask specifically if anything else was changed besides what we can see in these photos.  I will post their response, if different than what I've pointed out, here for you and all PuristS to reference when they respond. 

Cheers, Mike

  This message has been edited by mkt33 on 2014-09-03 18:56:43

Because with your argumentation any ETA 2892 or 7750 would become exclusive/reserved as soon as, for instance, the oscillating weight is personalized (by an engraving or gets another shape) for the brand. This makes just no sense... If 0.0001 % of variation is enough to call something technically "different", then all watches on the market are unique pieces

Thank you Oliver for the hands-on review of the Montblanc Meisterstück Heritage Perpetual Calendar.

it is always great to have options, even when it means a hard time to choose (for some) 

If you ask for something special and further for even more, it gets difficult/pricey all the time. I know that quite well ... Just saved a few gramm´s on my tires for one of my bicycle´s and once more I was charged  a huge premium ... A 50mm lens with 2.0, 1.4, 1.0, 0.95 or the lattest one (almost the most expensive one) with "only" 2.0 but different features ...

Life is about options and that is great!

Best,
Oliver

I know; the Law of Diminishing Returns with increase in cost.

Not sure about carbon, but I am thinking about something like this at the moment ...

PuristS are PuristS, all the time. Good or bad

Cordially,
Oliver

Well written and great shots!

Best,
Oliver

"the time only and moonphase timepieces are also important in this new collection". For sure they are, because not everybody is asking for "more" and it is very nice to have more options in the "classical" department.

Thanks for your kind reply!

Oliver

Great review Oliver!  Very enjoyable review of the Montblanc Mesterstruck Heritage Perpetual Calendar.  And good job to MB for producing a relatively affordable perpetual calendar.  I have to admit that I agree with some of the comments here about the subdial layout being too close to the center.  But I would still like to see this one in person to get a better view and make more precise opinions.

Regards,

ED-209

This is a great idea and I am looking forward to your impressions.

Thanks a lot, Ed!

Oliver

it probably intrigued you from a watch/value perspective.

i appreciate very much what MTF said about that billion dollar business model.

what will sell may not necessarily be what purists will collect.  i guess we've been down that path of discussion several times but always fail to appreciate the watch from a business perspective.

having said that, i agree with Ken about those subdials being too near each other.  And what makes it more pronounced is the length of the indices which only serve to emphasize it.  the watch also appears to be too flat for me and lacks a certain dimensionality. 

also, the 500 hours testing caught my interest.  i'm not sure why they went with 500 when a "near" competitor like JLC has their testing at 1000.  i wonder if that was better left unsaid.

I enjoyed the review a lot and the comments that went with such a fantastic post.

Thank you.

Best,

Echi

 

I want to love this watch but... It reminds me soooo much of the GP perpetual, which I don't love... Everything too far in th center of the dial feels 'wrong'. The movement is just... Shockingly plain looking for this type of watch.  I use the word shocking because I am genuinely shocked that MB would not do something more with it. This message has been edited by Mostel on 2014-08-26 21:46:43 This message has been edited by Mostel on 2014-08-26 21:48:09