Patek Philippe

About 5 years ago when they introduced the chrono 5170 most people preferred the previous chrono ref. 5070 It's not uncommon that people tend to vote for the piece that they have in their collect, so in 2010 most preferred the 5070. Now several years late... 

but I guess most of you knew this LOL

Bruno my friend surprised? LOL Even as owner of 5170G I will say no comparison for me: 5070 in any metal. :))

After all, the 5170 replaced the 5070, the movement is manual in both cases, even the ref number suggests a close link between the two. All that commands a comparison! Best, Nicolas

Anybody can do the comparison he wants and if somebody wants to compare the 5070 vs 5170, he is of course free to do it. But it was more subtle than a pure story of reference numbers and of functions. The 5170 introduced the in-house movement in a men's w... 

No message body

And much more interesting to compare different watches.

... it is maybe a proof that Patek failed a bit... and so that some (many) regret the previous handwind chronograph? Fx

People clearly prefer the more collectable watch. I also prefer the bigger case of the 5070. If Patek want it to make them complementary I really can't see it.

I imagine you could handle the 5170 too : what do you think of the finishing of these 2 movements ? It seems to me it is nearly identical (except the angle rentrants). Can you tell me what is your feeling on that matter? Cheers.

which are missing, from what I can see, on the 5170 movement, are far from being a simple detail.... Which makes me think ( I wrote THINK ) that the 5170 is conceived for a " massive " production, at least a much bigger production than the Lemania used in... 

The daytona's made between 1988 and 2000 had an El Primero movement inside ( I'm sure everybody here knew this), After 2000 Rolex went for a 100% in-house movement. Why ? Probably the same reasons as why Patek went from the CH 27-70 (5070) to the CH 29-53... 

like the instantaneous jump of the minutes hand. It clearly shows that the expectations of the collectors are not purely based on the functionality of a watch. We all know this but sometimes I wonder if brands really understand this point. Fx

Nice question Bruno. It is always difficult to make a balanced opinion considering we are so much influenced by owner's point of view we've been reading. I prefer the 39.4mm over 42mm width but the style of the 5070 case+bezel+lugs is much more interestin... 

Although I like 5170, both J and G, I love 5070. Same for the perpetual chrono: I much prefer 5970 to 5270. 5070 and 5970 have sort of very special charm which can not be easily described. One really needs to see them in flesh to appreciate.

I just recently put my money where my mouth is after looking closely at both. So many subtle details on the 5070 that I like better than the 5170. One of my favorites: the feuille hands!

Of the 5170! Best, Nicolas

I would choose the 5070 without any hesitation

My only regret is passing up certain metals when they were available years ago.

and therefore I would go for the Ref. 5170 (J or G). Especially when you offer me one for the (former) price of the Ref. 5070 :-) Both are interesting watches, but maybe for slightly different target groups. Cheers, Oliver ...