Chopard

Could someone give me  opinions regarding L.U.C Quattro. How does it compare to L.U.C 1860?

The genesis of L.U.C  is the Cal. 1.96 ( 3-day power reserve), which is inside the 1860/2. 

3 years later, in 2000 which L.U.C leapfrogged with the Quattro  9-day power reserve  Cal. 1.98 having 4 barrels  into the same sleek casing maintaining the thickness to below 10mm.  The Quattro is more of a tech breakthrough piece in my opinion.

Both have their significance! 

Please feel free to ask more questions.

Kong

Thanks! I am interested in the model 16/1863. Could someone post  pictures of the movemnet of this model? I think it is a great wtach and priced quite reasonabe compare to watches like PP.(I own a patek 5028). However the caseback looks quite ordinary to me .

Here are the pictures of quattro and LUC 1860 side by side

">
">

The finish of both watches is pretty much identical: second to none. At 36mm LUC 1860 is small by modern standards. The Quatto is 38mm (and it wears larger) and could definitively fit the bill of the modern dress watch.

The only drawback of the Quatro in my mind is the pointer date. It is difficult to read and can be confused with the second hand.

I saw L.U.C later "Quattro Mark II", the date dial is modified and the date arrow is red for better contrast.


Are those pictures taken "hanging up"?  I think I see 2 pins on the 1860!

Kong

Kong, the pins are for the strap change. The strap is custom mage Camille Fournet with the quick change system.

Unfortunately Camille Fournet does not presence in Singapore. Their nearest agents are in Hong Kong.
Will drop by to pick up a few when over there.

I like the concept of the quick-change, smart, the whole trick is at the spring-loaded pin.

Thanks for sharing.

Kong
This message has been edited by Kong on 2007-10-22 11:48:24