Patek Philippe

And I think that a manual winding Chrono & Perpetual Patek is the epitome of high watchmaking.

Best!

Marcelo

With a high-end manual wind chronograph, you have none of that blocking the view. You are able to clearly see all the components individually and how they even function through the caseback, as you activate the chronograph. All these components have to be visually elegant in design and finished to a high degree to give the appeal, so they are usually expensive to produce. Typically you'd see lots of anglage, straight grained steel surfaces, some black polished parts like the column wheel, and some elegant curved detent springs.

On a related note, bear in mind there are also two general categories of chronographs. Horizontal clutch, and vertical clutch. To put it simply, high-end manual winds chronos are typically of the horizontal clutch variety - the parts are laid spread out across the movement which gives it more visual impact. The Lange Datograph, Patek 5170/5070/5370/5204/..., Speedmaster Moonwatch with 1861/1863 movements etc. are all horizontal clutch. Meanwhile, a vertical clutch has most components stacked - you guessed it, vertically. This has less parts visible through the caseback. Examples are the Omega 9300, current production Rolex Daytonas, Grand Seiko chronograph, Patek 5960. Usually, since these movements already don't have much mechanisms visible, these are equipped with automatic rotors to make them more practical to use (couple that with the technical advantages of a vertical clutch vs horizontal - but I digress). 

2. Both honestly. A quick history off the top of my head recalls that split seconds/rattrapantes used to be categorised as a "Grand Complication" - they are not easy to manufacture due to the finer than normal tolerances involved than what was already complex a standard chronograph (which were mostly horizontal clutch back then. I only recall Seiko or Frederic Piguet movement that did vert clutch during those days). It was only until Habring came about when he designed a simplified rattrapante while at IWC that they became much more accessible to the general public.

However, to construct a traditionally designed split seconds chronograph today is still not much simpler, and still a technical marvel. At this point since its more of a matter of prestige, they are constructed usually over horizontal clutch chronographs because there is so much mechanical visual appeal. Also, since the layout of the components of a horizontal clutch chrono are spread over the movement flat, it is easier to simply construct the rattrapante module on top of existing chronograph like a tower (see 5370 or Lange Double Split versus 5170 or Datograph). Here is an example gif animation that shows how similar a rattrapante is basically built upon a standard chronograph as a base https://i.imgur.com/4od8Rkq.gif

I'm no watchmaker, but if I had to guess why its so much more difficult to do is that first, you know have to deal with an extra shaft going through the centre of the watch, so there are four hands on the centre of the watch (hour, minute, chrono seconds, rattrapante seconds). The thinnest shaft running through the centre, the rattrapante seconds, I heard are as thin as a human hair. The extra module of a rattrapante when activated, imposes extra load onto the mainspring which means the base movement requires enough torque to power it (otherwise, the usable power reserve I imagine is significantly shortened). All this requires quite abit of adjustment to make them work right I reckon. Also, usually a rattrapante would also be activated by a column wheel - that means two total in a typical high-end rattrapante.

3. Probably an hour subdial is not included to prevent too much clutter on the dial. Most people usually would not use the chronograph to time things beyond an hour in practice...However, of course there are some popular chronographs that have hour subdials such as the Speedmasters (both the 1861/1863, and the newer 9300 models)

Technically for most chronographs, the chronograph seconds has a little finger on it that "flips" the chronograph minute counter by one space forward when it finish revolving across 60 seconds. To have the chronograph minutes having a finger to do the same to a chronograph hours counter would impose quite alot of load onto the mainspring. So instead, most chronographs with hour counters just directly couple the chronograph hour counter to the mainspring barrel. It constantly slips - since the mainspring barrel turns so slowly - but when the chronograph is not in use there is a lever which holds down the chronograph counter stationary so it points to 0 hours. When you activate the chronograph, the lever releases and the hour counter starts rotating slowly together with the mainspring barrel.

Regards,

skyeriding

Regards,

skyeriding

To answer the questions fully in depth would need a perpetual calendar to measure the time for it.

Therefore some quick answers:

- a manual chrono is traditional as it started as a manual pocket watches long, long time ago, 1816.

- an auto chrono was very difficult to build and Zenith was the first in the 1969 to make one, hence El Primo name,

- a split second is even more difficult to realise and a speciality of a manufacturer. 

- a chronograph runs for the whole pr time. The display can be 1 minute - 7 days (Omega).

- prices? That is something that is not connected to the pieces that we discuss here.

Hope the answers are not too harsh, but detailed answers are in books, articles, here in the forum ...

Best

Moritz

There is much more complexity than we think in mechanical watches.

Putting more complications in smaller volumes is an achievement, the more you include parts, the more they have to work together and thinner they are. Hence, watchmakers have to develop parts in order to remain reliable while keeping the movement accurate.

Hence, a Split-Second chronograph is much more than adding another number of parts and hands. Furthermore, this complication has to work while creating as less frictions as possible to preserve timekeeping. That's why the 5959 Split-Second is even more expensive (the diameter of the watch is 33mm).  www.watchprosite.com

It is not only about crafting some pieces but also the ability and experience of a watchmaker to tune and finish the parts in order to craft the movement the right way. There are not so many watchmakers able to care of such complications as there are not many watchmakers able to create a movement from a blank paper.

Finding the right people and having the right experience to ensure the movement works well (timekeeping, reliability) is not something found everywhere.

Of course, there is a part of the price increase that is explained by the volumes sold and by the place it has in the brand's collection. But that's depending on the market and the field we are talking about (especially when luxury is concerned).

About the Manual Chronograph. A movement has to be rigid to resist the barrel's torque or to preserve the small space between the parts (shocks etc...). The easiest way to achieve that goal is to have a single plate on both sides. The more you add different bridges, the more you have space, the more it is a challenge to make the caliber able to achieve this goal.

The more it is open, higher is the number of parts you can see. Hence, the number of parts you have to decorate and finish. Furthermore, you can see the activation of the mechanism when pushing the pushers which is something very nice too.

This is not the kind of decoration you have in Automatic wound movement and it wouldn't be as nice as the rotor hides a part of the movement. However, there are very interesting automatic chronograph movements like the 28-520, in very beautiful watches (like the 5960 for instance), more practical and they surely deserve attention.

This is why it is important to discover and understand watches but also determine what we really like.

About the 30-minute, it is indeed more a traditional standard today. As brands like Patek Philippe also have a long history and that we are talking about traditional and classical watches (and art) the choices of decoration are different than just considering the practical side.

The 5204 is a gorgeous watch indeed (I reviewed the R version here  www.watchprosite.com ).

You can use our Search function and you'll be able to find many articles about the questions you may have.

Enjoy it!

Best, Mark

I made a sort of comparison between the 5070 and the 5170, there is a little part on the two calibers:  www.watchprosite.com

In fact, my opinion would be there is no 1st and 2nd as they appeal for different reasons.

On the finishing level, they are around the same. The 29-535's finishing is excellent, at the level of the 27-70. The latter has a few finished inner angles while the 29-535 doesn't but this is not the main element to consider and many high-end calibers don't have inner angles either. For instance, I prefer the design of the 29-535's bridges better, but that's a matter of taste.

On the technical level, the new 29-535 is better. It has been designed by the brand's watchmakers from a blank paper (not many brands are able to do this, especially the way Patek Philipe did), taking into account many clever and often simple improvements. It is a fantastic movement.

The 27-70 has this little old charm and historical origin that makes it an important caliber from for the brand and in watch making in general. It is specific to a certain era of the brand (1986 in the 3970 to 2010 for the 5970).

I would say, if you consider getting such complication, that both choices are excellent.

Best, Mark