Audemars Piguet

Watch companies that I am aware of that have used it and continue to use it are AP, Vacheron Constantin, Breguet, Blancpain, and Cartier has used it in their Pasha Chronographs.  I am not aware of Omega using it in their Speedmaster.  I believe the Speedmaster Professional used a Lemania movement...and it should be noted that many famous Patek's used a Lemania movement for a base in their chronographs. Granted it was a different caliber of Lemania than Omega used in the Speedy Pro, but I would not let the fact that Omega also used a brand or caliber of movement as a reason not to buy one. 

Each company finishes the movement to its own standard.  For instance, if you buy an AP RO chronograph or VC Overseas in all steel it uses a gold rotor.  If you buy the Cartier Pasha Chronograph in SS the rotor is NOT gold.

The 1185 has been around a long time and is one of the thinnest automatic chronograph movements made.  I would not hesitate to buy a watch that used an F.Piguet movement, particularly the 1185.  Just my 2 cents.

Best regards,

Dino

Hi Thurgood,

I have looked at the AP Royal Oaks for several years without pulling the trigger.  While they are pricier than most of the watches I've purchased in the past which has slowed me down a bit, I personally had a difficult time choosing what I truly wanted from the RO collection.  Although they are nice, I knew did not want an Offshore, I wanted something based on the original Royal Oak design.

What to focus on took me a while.  I considered the Royal Oak Dual Time, the Royal Oak Chronograph, and the Jumbo.  I did look at the 15300 and the 15400 and although nice, they are not for me.  I personally do not get all hung up on the inhouse movement idea.  Its something that I think as collectors in recent years many of us have become "Movement Snobs" myself included.  However, some great, collectible and rather valuable watches use movements from other makers.  All of the "Big Three" have used base movements/ebouches from outside sources, and IMHO that's not anything to be ashamed of as long as its a very high quality movement. 

To be honest for years one of my grail watches was a Rolex Daytona.  I obtained one with the Zenith base movement.  I think its not only prettier than the Rolex movement Daytonas, its rarer, maybe more collectible and certainly worth more.  I have a Rolex movement Daytona and its a great watch, simpler to service, longer power reserve, a bit easier to read the time in low light, but of the two, I still prefer the one with the Zenith base movement. 

I think the brand that I often had trouble seeing the value of is Panerai.  They are popular and good watches, but the base model used a Unitas movement found in a roughly $750 watch my friend had.  It just made the base model Panerais seem grossly overpriced watches that one bought just for a look.  I don't think that is true of any AP, VC, Breguet, Patek, etc.

Back to my Royal Oak sorting process.  My Wife hated the look of the dual time.  I thought it was quite functional and would give me a 2 timezone watch that would be dressier than my Explorer 2, but she nixed the idea.  Also I heard that without a quickset (which the VC Overseas version has, the RO Dual Time is a pain to set).  I kind of felt myself leaning toward the chronograph feeling its almost the same price as the Jumbo, and it does more than the Jumbo.  For me it took a while for the idea to set in that not every great watch has to have "toys" as my wife calls them.  So I started looking at the Jumbos.  I did look at the 15300 and its movement is lovely and a bargain, but for some reason I just was not in love with it even with an inhouse movement.  So back to the chronograph.  Great looking, but the screw down pushers are not as easy to unscrew and use as they are on  VC Overseas or Rolex Daytona.  I did go and look at the 15400 and it was nice, and I like its size and dial more than that of the 15300.  However, I prefer looking at the movement through the back of the 15300.  To me, the 15400 its quite evident that the movement was once in a smaller watch as the saphire glass on the back is about the same size as on the 15300 yet the metal trim surrounding it is wider.  It just bothered me.  I think I'd have preferred a solid back on the 15400.  On the chrono with the increase in case size and the fact that the movement fit in a 38mm Cartier and the 39mm RO chrono, perhaps it was best that AP gave it a solid back. 

For me if given the choice of the Chronograph or the 15400, I would choose the chronograph.  I just prefer its overall appearance and the fact that they closed the back so its not quite as evident that the movement just moved into a larger case.  In the end you have to choose whatever makes you smile. 

I finally, came to a conclusion about which RO is the one I truly want to own and I recently contacted my AD to ask him to put me on his list for a Jumbo.  Now I'll have to patiently wait.

Good luck on whatever model you choose.  There is no wrong answer, just one that will make you smile more.

Best regards,

Dino

Thurgood,

I predict that once you've owned a Royal Oak Chronograph, you will have only a dim recollection of how you could once have thought it had some resemblance to a Daytona.

Park

Hi Thurgood,

thank you for your very kind words about my journey and decision making process regarding ROs.  I'm really glad that you found it helpful.

As for is being similar to a Daytona it truly is not similar.  In fact when I was leaning toward getting the RO chronograph, I never felt it was duplicative of my Daytonas (and I have 3, a SS Zenith Based Daytona, an all gold Zenith based Daytona from my Dad, and a SS Rolex movement Daytona).  I did not consider selling any of my Daytonas to help fund the purchase of a RO chronograph. 

I really believe one can own a Rolex Daytona and a Royal Oak Chronograph and wear them and enjoy them for what they are and also enjoy their differences.  While I generally dislike car analogies because they are so different from watches, I will use one anyway.  To me the Rolex Daytona and RO chronograph can be looked upon in much the same way I would look at a late 1980s Porsche 911 Carrera 3.2 and a Ferrari 328.  They are what each of these great brands believed a fine sports car should be in the 1980s.  The 911 is an iconic shape, the 328 is more flamboyant but reconizeable to a generation that grew up with Magnum PI (although he had a 308).  The 911 has that classic air cooled whumping sound, while the 328's flat plane crank V8 sings a wonderfully distinctive song that is unlike any German sports cars.  You sit more upright in a 911, you almost lay down in the 328.  Both are sports cars, but each provides a different experience and a person could own each without feeling they are duplicative.  Sorry to use such old cars in my analogy, but I grew up in the 80s.

I would definitely get the RO chronograph and have no fears or concerns that its too similar to a Daytona.  Its actually very different.  Each company incorporated DNA from their distinctive brand and created a chronograph that properly represents the brands' heritage, design and philosophy.  With the RO chrono, you have a modern version of the classic RO bracelet, the iconic octagonal bezel with white gold bolts, the Clou de Paris dial, and a chronograph with a date.  To me its a very artistic and handsome chronograph.  The Daytona is a slightly more traditional looking but a beautiful chronograph...with a tachymeter on the bezel to measure units of production, a classic Oyster Case, classic Oyster Bracelet, an updated version of the previous generation Daytona dial, and Oyster Lock Clasp...and you can see the heritage of past Daytonas in the current series of watches.

I have other time only watches, and watches with a see through display back, but I do not see any of them as being too similar to a RO Jumbo.  Similarly you should not worry that a RO chronograph is like a Daytona.  Their only real similarity is that they are both chronographs.  There are people that only collect chronographs, or diving watches, or dual time zone watches, and they don't worry that all of their watches are chronographs or dive watches etc.  My advice is to go for the ROC and enjoy it.

Best regards,

Dino

Hi Thurgood,

I'm glad that my discussion about the Daytona and Royal Oak Chronograph was helpful to you.  As for asking for advice before making decisions about watches, I don't think its a bad thing, especially if you are new to the hobby, or if its a large purchase.  I've been interested in watches since I was about 10 years old and I bought my first good watch (a Rolex) at the age of 14 in the mid 80s after convincing my parents to let me cash some bonds.  I have found that over time my tastes change and before I consider buying (or on rare occasion selling) a watch, I will often consult with some of my other watch collecting friends.  I also find that some of them will bounce purchase ideas off of me before they take the plunge.  I think that its fine to take the advice of others, as long as you use the advice for guidance, but make the ulitmate decision about buying/selling on your own.  I (or anyone else here) can give you advice but you know yourself better than we do.  You know your own sense of style, whether you dress up frequently, or whether you are more casual, and things of that nature that can help determine which watches will best fit your needs.

As for Rolex, I am very familiar with them.  I still own several of them.  I actually, just sold a Rolex Explorer that I purchased in 2002.  In 10 years I only wore it a few times and it had been sitting in a safe deposit box for years.  Its a good classic watch, but it was time for it to find a new home and get some wrist time.  With respect to your Datejust II / Day-Date II dilemma, Rolex does not make the Day-Date in all steel.  The Day-Date is only available in 18Kt yellow gold, white gold, rose gold, or platinum.  So if you have seen it in a white metal its either 18Kt white gold or platinum.  A Datejust II is available in all steel, steel and gold (yellow or rose), or all gold.  If you are no longer interested in your Datejust, maybe it is time to consider finding it a new home.  Give some thought to how often you wear it, and if you don't wear it how long its been sitting around.  If the idea of selling it has only recently come up, and you aren't certain if you want to go that route, take some time before deciding to sell it.

Regarding single metals vs. steel and gold watches, I prefer watches to be all one metal.  Steel and gold watches were extremely popular in the 1970s and 1980s.  Today I find steel and gold watches a bit dated and sort of 1980s on a man.  I think on a woman steel and gold might make more sense as sometimes they were rings, bracelets etc. of different metals and so it may work better for them.  Many companies including AP, VC, Patek, and GP have largely stopped offering steel and gold watches.  A few good companies that still do a rather solid business in steel and gold and continue to offer steel and gold watches are Rolex, Cartier, and maybe Omega.  If you find you are no longer interested in your Datejust II and that the two tone color combination is no longer your taste, then perhaps it is a piece that needs to find a new home, but that is a decision only you can make.

Best regards,

Dino

Hi Thurgood,

Again I am glad to help.  No need to thank me, we all come to this forum to learn and exchange ideas.  Actually, in answering some of your questions it helps me to think about my own collection and how it got to be as it is, and where changes could or should be made.

I personally find that the right gold watch can work on a person of nearly any age.  I'm 41 and I determined about 10 years ago, that as I did not have a gold watch, I really should have one.  I had owned a steel and gold Submariner many years ago, a steel and gold Daytona, and even a white gold Daytona on a strap.  Each of those watches is long gone (and was gone by the time I decided I needed an all gold watch).  To me, a steel and gold watch just is not a substitute for an all gold piece.  If you want something very subdued, you can go with white gold but for me, even though its heavier and more valuable, it just did not feel different enough from steel to justfiy its cost.  So at age 31 I determined I really should own an all gold watch in rose gold or yellow, preferably a dress watch as I did not own a dress watch on a strap. 

I think you need to determine what your needs are.  I have three true dress watches in gold on straps.  I also have an all gold Daytona on a gold bracelet.  Obviously, its not a true dress watch, but its a bit dressier than steel, and a lot blingier than steel or a gold watch on a strap.  There is just something loud and brash about a chunky gold watch on a heavy gold bracelet, but it is fun to wear at times.  However, I think a true dress watch in yellow or rose gold on a strap is something that every guy in their late twenties or older should have if they have the means to purchase one. 

This brings up the quesiton, what do you like for a gold color.  Yellow is quite traditional.  However, I generally favor pink or rose gold.  You should be aware there is a color scale for gold.  The color of gold varies with the metal that its alloyed with, and in an 18Kt gold watch 25% what the gold is alloy.  Perhaps the best way to discuss is that 18Kt gold is 75% pure gold, hence many companies mark 18KT gold with the number 750 (as its 750 parts per 1000 gold), 14kt gold is 58.5% pure gold, and most jewelry grade Platinum is 95% percent pure hence its marked 950 parts per 1000 pure.  As you know gold is soft and very and the alloys help make gold durable enough to wear on a regular basis.  Now back to color, white gold is generally alloyed with nickel, silver, or other white metals.  Pink or rose are generally alloyed with copper.  As mentioned earlier there is color scale.  3N is yellow gold, 4N is pink gold (has a hint of pink), 5N is rose gold (a slightly deeper pink), and I getting even redder in color you would have 6N which is called red gold.  Depending on the company there are different tones or shades of pink and rose.  Sometimes 4n is so lightly pink that it looks yellow unless placed next to a yellow gold watch.

I generally prefer pink or rose gold for a watch.  I find them a little less brassy and maybe better suited for people that might be younger.  My father likes yellow gold watches, so maybe thats why I tend to associate yellow gold with a slightly older generation.  However, yellow vs. pink/rose gold is all personal preference. 

As for brands or watches to consider, I think it depends on what you really like or want in a watch.  Do you want a round watch, square, rectangular, some other shape?  A manual wind watch or an automatic?  Do you have a favorite brand that is not represented in your collection?  What type of budget will you set (which may not depend so much on how much money you have, but more on how often you think you will wear it...and keep in mind dress watches are great for weddings etc, but if you buy one that is not too ornate, you can also dress it down and wear it during the week with more casual clothes)?.   

I know this is an AP forum, but I generally am not attracted to their dress watches (at least not their current models), but if you are then go check them out!  For dress watches, so far I have favored non-round shapes.  For me they feel much more different than my daily wears not just because they are gold and my daily pieces are steel, but also because my daily wearers are round, and my dress watches are square, rectangular and asymetric.  I think for now some of my favorite dress watches are as follows the Piaget Altiplano (manual wind with small seconds at 10 o'clock...it is probably my favorite round dress watch at the moment ...and it makes me seriously consider getting a round dress watch at some point).  For a rectangular watch, I am a huge fan of the Cartier Tank XL.  It just was released as an ultra thin manual wind in pink gold and its really a great piece.  Very thin, but not a small watch, the dimensions are overall quite nice if you have a medium to large wrist.  If you like unusual shapes, the Piaget Emperador is an interesting shape.  ITs available in different sizes and with different functions.  I also think Piaget is one of the nicest and largely under appreciated brands.  They make fantastic pieces,their movements are made in house and often their watches cost a fraction of what a similar piece by Patek would cost.  JLC also makes some beautful dress watches, be it from their Reverso collection or their Master series...personally if going with a JLC I would get something from the Reverso collection.  If you are interested in Pateks and don't have one you could look at the Calatravas.  There are many variations.  I find them a bit overpriced, and sometimes a bit too old looking for me, but they maintain their value very well and are always very popular. 

I hope this gives you some guidance and some food for thought about gold watches.  I have focused more on dress pieces, although as mentioned, a sports watch in all gold (with or without a gold bracelet can be a cool and fun piece to have).  Although, again I think if you don't have a good all gold dress watch you probably should make that your next objective after your AP chronograph.  I usually, like to get to know my watches so I don't tend to buy them within short periods of time.  I think sometimes if you buy a several watches per year you don' have the same bonding, appreciation, or fun with a watch as you do if you give yourself time to appreciate and get over the newness of a watch so that you come to see and understand its nuances.  But thats just my 2 cents.

I don't want to go too far off the AP subject since this is an AP forum, but if you wish to further discuss dress watches or other maybe non-AP related topics, please feel free to email or PM me.  I'm always happy to discuss both AP and non-AP related watch issues. 

Best regards,

Dino

Below are a few photos of my dress watches.  Hope you enjoy.

Hi Thurgood,

So it seems you are interested in a sort of sporty rose gold watch.  To be honest, I prefer ROs in stainless steel rather than gold.   Maybe its because the originals were in steel (although I know that AP also made them in gold in the 70s).  I will have to think as to whether I can come up with other rose gold watches for you to consider (besides those that you've already seen from VC,PP, and Piaget).  I personally find that since you already have the 15300ST a 15400 in rose is a bit duplicative (as its the same movement and basic appearance other than the metal used for case and bracelet) and might lead to you only wearing one and leaving the other one at home a lot.  Perhaps to create some diversity, you should consider the 41mm chronograph in rose gold?  Or sell the 15300.  The other watch I love in rose, you already own in SS, but I will throw it out there to consider... the rose gold Daytona with black dial...its stunning.  I had an opportunity to try one on and its really eye catching.   Oddly enough I found it far more attractive than a rose gold RO Jumbo I tried on a few weeks ago.  If you were to go for that, then maybe I'd suggest trading/selling your steel Daytona for it.  The rose Daytona is definitely a watch that looks so much nicer in person than in photos.  If you haven't seen it in person, then you owe it to yourself to see one and put it on your wrist before making a judgment on it. 

I will try to give some thought as to other rose gold watches on bracelets that you could or should consider.

Best regards,

Dino

I am not sure why are having difficulty emailing or getting a PM through to me.  I have never experienced that problem before. 

I certainly understand that the price of either AP in Rose Gold would be considerably more than in SS.  I love rose gold but I like the ROs in steel as it was the original metal that helped make the RO famous.

Of the watches you have considered my first choice would be the RO Chrono in SS, second would be the RO chrono in rose gold. 

To be honest, the 15400 is a nice watch, but it just doesn't do anything for me.  Its essentiually the same as your 15300.  Although you seem really captivated by the 3120 movement because its made in house, I do not find the fact that the movement is made in house to be anything very significant for the RO.  Historically, the RO has frequently been powered by movements developed by other companies such as JLC.   In terms of value or collectability, there are plenty of watches with outsourced movements that are as high in quality as watches with in house movements and watches with outsourced movements that are significantly more valuable than some watches with in house movements. Take into consideration, that although the 15300 and 15400 are both very nice, the movement of the 15202, which was developed by JLC (and used in the AP RO Jumbo, the original Nautilus Jumbo, and the VC 222) is still considered one of the finest movements available, and although the Jumbo is not powered by an inhouse movement the 15202 continues to carry a premium over the price of a 15300/15400.    I know today they call the Jumbo's movement an inhouse caliber as they own the rights to it, and they owned 40% of JLC for many years.  However, I still consider it a JLC base movement. 

If given a choice between the 15300 and the 15400, I prefer the 15300.  I don't like the 15400's open back showing that the movement was intended for a smaller watch but is now placed inside a larger case. Now it looks too small in that watch.

That being said.  As mentioned before, I'm happy to share my opinion, but in the end you need to see what appeals to you and looks and feels right to you.  If you follow the opinions of others you will buy the watch they want rather than the one you truly want. 

Do some thinking and try a few watches on before making your descision.

Best regards,

Dino

He is just speculating and to be honest anything is possible.  Sure they could come up with a new movement, but that could be 3 years from now, 5 years from now, or 10 years from now.  AP has used this movement in their chronograph since it was released around 1997/1998.  Its a great movement.  You might not like that its not an inhouse movement so maybe its not the right choice for you.  The cost and time required to develop a chronograph movement is substantial.  A company like Rolex will make enough units of a new watch to recover their R&D relatively quickly.  A smaller company like AP isn't likely to recover their costs quickly and you may be looking at a substantially more expensive watch.  Patek used to use a Lemania base in any watch they made that was a chronograph.  Now Patek makes there own chronograph movement and I believe the least expensive watch its used in is the Nautilus chronograph, a watch that has an MSRP that is substantially higher than that of an AP RO Chronograph. 

I'm not sure that AP would bring out a new movement for their chronograph at least for several years as they just recently revamped the ROC and created a 41mm case for it.  They could always create a movement to fit inside the new case, but I would think they might also make a few changes to distinguish the old from the new.  Again, thats just speculation.  Only AP knows for sure what their plans are.  I've seen some photos posted on a site by someone that just obtained a new 41mm RO Chronograph and its a beauty.  I'd choose it over a 15400, but thats just my personal preference.  Also, as for watches being out dated just because a new watch or movement comes out, in a sense that is true, but it can also lead to the values of the previous model increasing significantly.  Whether that could happen with a ROC...no one knows. 

Good luck with whatever you decide.

Best regards,

Dino

Hi Thurgood,

I don'tn think you will like my answer.  When discussing the rose gold Royal Oaks, I was under the mistaken impression that you meant a rose gold Royal Oak on the matching gold bracelet.  To be honest, I really dislike Royal Oaks on a strap.  There are others that may love the look, but I find its an incomplete design.  When I see photos of the original sketches, it shows a watch with an integrated bracelet.  I personally would never buy a RO (whether gold or not) on a strap.  I feel the same way about Patek's Nautilus on a strap, I would never consider one on a strap.  I realize that there is a huge price discrepancy between the RO in gold on bracelet or a strap, and a RO with a gold bracelet is beyond my budget so I sympathize with you regarding what the difference in price may be. 

Personally, I'd rather have something that is more of a dress watch than a RO, if I were getting something on a strap.   I would much rather have the ROC or a 15400 in SS on a matching bracelet. 

If you got the chrono in SS, its a very different watch from the 15300 so you could easily own both.  If you got the 15400 in SS, I'd say sell or trade the 15300 toward something else because they are too similar. 

Obviously, you have to go with what your heart tells you and the watch that really makes you smile.  I have shared my honest opinion on the various watches you have mentioned, but in the end I'm not the one that will wear these watches.  Therefore, the only opinion that matters is your own.

Good luck and best regards,

Dino

Hey Thurgood,

I hope that you will get many years of enjoyment from whichever watch you purchase.  I look forward to seeing pix soon.

Best regards,

Dino