Esharp
1618
Case construction
Kari,
I realized I don't know much about the real difference between the two-part and the three-part cases, so I did a little searching online just now and found an article which said:
"Rather than the normal caseback/band/bezel composition, the Nautilus case was originally ‘monocoque’ – milled from a block of solid steel – with a single bore for the winding stem, and a hinged, screwed-down bezel holding the crystal (its hinges affectionately known as ‘ears’ to fans). As manufacturing techniques have advanced, three-part cases have become as rugged as monocoques, so – save for the mediumsized model – the new Nautilus cases now have the traditional arrangement of caseback, band and bezel..." (QP Magazine, 2007).
Not to hijack this thread - perhaps I should post separately? - but do you think there's merit in this argument, which seems to be saying that the technical advantage of the original construction has now been negated? Or is it marketing sophistry? Does it bolster the argument that the design was intimately linked to the construction, and that therefore one could consider the 37xx series faithful to Louis Sullivan's idea that 'form ever follows function' while the 57xx series is - I don't know how to put this politely - a bit of an impostor?
best
E.