Comments:
For the pleasure of the eyes: Patek Philippe Perpetual Calendar Chronograph 5970G.
Here is a picture from Christies:
I reworked the picture to get this close up.
The 5970 is for me one of the best perpetual calendar ever made by Patek. Even nicer for me than the elusive and legendary 5004 ( adding a Rattrapante ), if we consider the proportions.
I reworked the picture to get this close up.
The 5970 is for me one of the best perpetual calendar ever made by Patek. Even nicer for me than the elusive and legendary 5004 ( adding a Rattrapante ), if we consider the proportions.
Now, if I had to choose, I would love to get the salmon dial, or this black beauty ( 5970P ).
The case and the dial, without forgetting the Lemania movement, are more my taste than the current one.
Best,
Nicolas
It’s a problem I don’t expect to encounter first hand - but I dislike the serif fonts that have been on patek pcc since the 3970 [nt]
No message body
It is essentially 'American Typewriter...'
and it does seem a bit inappropriate for such a luxury timepiece. Also, it appears that the 'R' in APR is showing in the upper right side of the month window? If so, that is poor planning. I don't expect absolute perfection in all things, but at this price, somebody should have caught this error in the prototype stage...
Here the font of the 2499. I don't see a huge difference with the font of the 5970....
Gosh....Can you imagine
5970 to be the same size as 2499??? That will drive me crazy and it will become a must buy piece. To be down right honest... I really love the look and feel of 5970G, even at 40mm, it wears small. What I find fault with is the image of the watch projected to the wearer. It projects a kind of gutsiness and boldness which don't quite fit me.
If only it is that simple...
3970 does not have the 'gray' dial feel like the 5970 or a desired look of the early 2499. It can somehow feel blah easily. 3970 with 5004 dial is awesome though but dealer is asking for ridiculous price.
5004 is absolutely beautiful and technically briiliant. It is however very thick but I think if I am okay with 1518, I should be okay with 5004.
5004 is pure magic. It is thick, indeed, but it would not be a deal breaker for me. [nt]
No message body
I had owned this watch 3 times...
Love it each time but part it each time too.... It is a very beautiful and lustful watch but leaves me cold intellectually or emotionally. I don't know why. I still lust for it but I know I will have the same feeling all over again after having the watch for a few months. 5004... on the other hand is one piece that needs to be tried in metal. It has plenty of souls and charm. I am more star struck by one who wears a plain 5004 than one who wears a 5970, even if it is a salmon dial.
✅
To all. Be careful if you buy a winder for manual watches. My AD talked me into buying one, and my 5270 was overwound. Now needs service. I’m mad as hell. Hopefully he will cover the service bill. Escapement locked.
Well, I am not a fan of winders. The only winder which I like is my wrist. ;) [nt]
No message body
A winder for a manual watch? Please explain. I don’t get it. Thanks [nt]
No message body
there is now a winder for mechanical watches.
there is a video here somewhere posted let me find it.
www.watchprosite.com
www.watchprosite.com
Very interesting. Bought 3 times, but leaves you cold. Maybe try the R version next time? [nt]
No message body
I did enjoy wearing them for the few years...
Maybe I wore them too often and starts to find fault with them. It is indeed a very handsome watch. The G dial is my most favourite, i was given a chance to buy the P in retail price but I'm not drawn to it at all. The G dial has everything I love and if it is 38mm in size, I am very certain I will buy it one more time :P
I keep reminding myself that...
when I want to buy again...haha. Truth to be said, it is 40mm but it wears the same as Datograph because of the small dial.
The 5004 is pure magic. Even with its proportions. But I would rather go on a 5970, as I find the size / thickness ratio better, for me. [nt]
No message body