Rollie
58
3970, 5004, & 5959
Dear Guys,
I must say I find the relationship between these 3 watches fascinating. Originally, i thought the 5004 was a "3970 on steroids." Yet when Isaw the two together, the relationship was not as clear as one would expect (see below). Again, the 5959 seems a total step up with its in-house mvoement etc.
My questions are:
1) What was the historical relationship between the 3970 and 5004? Was the split second "addition" made in- house and simply added to the Lemania ebauche? I assume the 3970 came first and then the 5004.
2) How different are the "octopus" and other split components on the 5959 from the 5004? My question is did they figure out the "split" component from the 5004 and simply replace the Lemania ebauch for the 5009, thus using the same "split component" for the 5004 & 5959? Thickeness wise I doubt they share many of the same components.
Despite looking at Huber & Banbery, I simply don't know enough to figure it out.
Thanks
Recently, I had a chance to compare the 3970 & 5004 in the metal and on my wrist. Here are my impressions of a side by side comparison.
Aesthetics – The 3970 seems to have a perfect harmony and balance overall. The 5004 is more angular with a significantly larger crown diameter and a prominent split chrono pusher. Diameter and thickness is significantly greater for the 5004 which is a negative when sitting on the table. However, on the wrist this disharmony disappears and works quite well. The 3970 on the wrist seems very delicate and almost feminine.
Dial – The dial on the 3970 is uniform with all of the subdials in synchrony and the dual color hands providing legibility. The white circles at the base of the hands on the subdials seem a bit large. The half baton hour markers on the 3970 work surprisingly well on a small dial size. The 5004 dial is significantly more beautiful and balanced in its subcomponents. The subdials are indented / depressed below the actual dial level and each of the subdials has a ‘railroad” track subdivision rather than the hash marks of the 3970 which makes them look larger and more open. Surprisingly, the hour and minute hands are dramatically different on the two watches- relatively straight sided on the 3970and more curved and beautiful on the 5004. The script for the days of the month around the moon phase are also different. The dial of the 5004 is far more intriguing than the 3970.
Movement – Perhaps the difference in their movements is the greatest surprise. The 3970 is extraordinary with a delicacy and a mystic maze that is endlessly fascinating. Yet, the 5004 is a level far beyond what one thought human ingenuity was capable of achieving. It has a depth and layering that almost feels as though one is looking inside an aquarium. It seems as there are six to seven levels of layered movements with the octopus at the top and the balance wheel far below. The 5004 is unlike anything I’ve ever seen before including the Lange Datograph .
First Impressions - The 5004 is a true horological tour de force and totally a step up from the 3970. Being able to split the second hands and time subunits is again a tour de force, but rarely practical. Somehow, I thought the Arabic dial would reinforce my lust for the 2499 first series. The 5004 is so much more than I thought it would be and thus I am surprised that I find myself continuing to be enamored by the 3970. I suspect that the 5004 will be relegated to the life of a safe queen while my 3970WG/BD will become my daily office wear.
