Patek Philippe

See my prior post:

patek.watchprosite.com =

Can anyone tell me how the 5711 size feels like compared to the 5167?
- Also hence to the weight and and 'wrist feeling`?

I'm first and foremost interested in a comparison with the 5711G, the white gold model, but I guess the 5711R feels exactly the same. It would also be interesting to see the 5711 (or a 5712) next to the 5167 - to compare the sizes, and also thickness/weight. For a picture purpose the 5711/1A would do the job as well.

As you understand: I'm living in one of the world's outposts, so not easy to obtain a Nautilus around.

Hope you might be able to help! Thanks, guys!

{Samuel}

nt

Thanks for your reply!

My problem is a kind of the opposite: I am used to heavy and large watches on my thin wrist - and I hardly feel that I'm wearing my 5167 . I love the heavy - but comfortable - feeling of watch material on my arm. When writing this I'm for instance wearing my Glashütte Evo Sport on a bracelet: I know it's there!

I love the looks and the handcraft of Patek. I'm trying to figure out if the 5711 is more for me than the 5167. I thought the 5167 should be 'big', or almost like another 40mm watch, but it really is not. My daily wear is a 45mm Radiomir Panerai and my 42mm Glashütte. AP ROO's and 47mm Panerais are too big IMHO, though.

I cannot imagine that the 5711G on the leather band would be uncomfortable?

{Samuel}

I find the 5711R to be a lighter watch than the Panerai 45mm black seal, and a very different weight to a rolex daytona or a 5960P. If you like weightier watches , the stainless 5711/1A with metal bracelet is probably more your taste. I found it too heavy and prefer the 5711R.

It's not so much about weight, though. I'd love to see the size differences between the 5711 and the 5167 photo documented.

Thanks again!

{Samuel}

 

I have a 5711J.  I have not owned a 5167.  I did try on a 5167.  I thought from the few minutes of comparison I had that the 5167 felt a lot lighter.  And I imagine the 5711/1A  would be even heavier than a 5711J because of  the metal band.  As to size, although the 5711 measures 43mm side to side, it visually "wears" to my eye more like 40mm. 

Glenn

  

Thank you so much for your kind response, Glenn.

This was usefull. I am really hoping that the 5711(G) will give a bit heavier feeling. But if 5711 'wears' like a 40mm, what would you say the Aquanaut 5167 wears like? I'd say under 40mm, amd the case is also very thin accordingly. What's your impression?

Again: thanks a lot for your help!

{Samuel} 

In my opinion there is no comparing the 5167 or 5711 with other sports watches on the market.

If anything, I believe these pieces stand alone as Patek's definition of sports watches. The thinness of the cases are in line with Patek's general design DNA, and the lightweight is a clear example of paring off unnecessary weight and bulk to make a watch part of you, meaning YOU wear the watch, not the other way around.

Paperweights like Panerain and ROO are good for their intended purpose which I believe primarily to be visibility on your wrist, but a 5167/5165 is more about it being there for you in a more intimate way than say letting everyone else know what's on your wrist.

I like heavy watches too, and lug around a Rolex Submariner or Explorer II day to day, but in the evenings, on goes the 5165 or 5296 or FP Journe.

Wisefull thoughts; thanks!

Nevertheless, I am looking for a comparison between the 5167 and the 5711, not other brands. As you see: I am wondering if I shall switch my 5167 with a 5711G - or perhaps a 5711/1A. I am of course considering other brands on other fields. (My City of sails

I have the 'blings'.    I am looking for a discrete companion, yes. But the 5167 is even more discrete than I could imagine...

Thanks again!

{Samuel}

 

Yes, I agree that the 5167 does look  to my eye as "wearing" a bit smaller than a 5711 because of the absence of the side "wings."   And I think that part of the reason why both the 5167 and 5711 "wear" smaller than their=actual size is design... the fact they have dial dimentions considerably smaller than there case dimentions greatly aids the illusion of a smaller watch.

Glenn