[Senior Patek Moderator]
Thanks Art for the interesting details (and pictures)! I had to go back and look again at this very good thread and the original article :-)
I think the Monochrome piece does, at least implicitly, explain the origin of the ten movements (see for instance the paragraph in the screenshot below or the subsequent one; the full piece is available at: monochrome-watches.com).
The concern myself and, I believe, other "Purists" had was actually *motivated by* the historical significance of the 135 Caliber. No matter how I look at it, this strange cocktail between a 157-year-old Brand that wrote important chapters of the history of this discipline, one of the "hot" contemporary Indies, and today's most popular auction house.....only strikes me as a conceptually unsophisticated, merely financial move
While I find KV's technical expressions extremely attractive to look at (our esteemed colleague Bill's picture #2 is pretty good evidence in this sense), it becomes a reason of concern, in my view, when a brand "trades a piece of her own history for a few inward angles," in a clear nod to the fashion trends of the moment.
I'm entirely with you (and Monochrome) on the remarkable value of these movements in the context of Zenith's history. Let me phrase it this way: Had Patek --- obviously my favorite brand, and only 26 years older than Zenith! --- resurrected a handful of important calibers from the past century and offered one to me *untouched* by outside hands (or untouched at all! ;-), I would have enthusiastically offered $130k in return to take care of such a historic treasure!
Even though I'm not as familiar with Zenith, I'm pretty confident that ten of their faithful collectors, respectful of Zenith's long history as much as I am of Patek's, would have loved to be given the same opportunity ;-)
Cheers my friend