Discussion
Miles_151, a self-proclaimed 'vintage man at heart,' sparks a compelling discussion on the WatchProSite forum, delving into the nuanced comparison between Patek Philippe chronographs powered by outsourced Lemania movements and those featuring Patek's in-house calibers. His inquiry challenges the community to move beyond simple preference, exploring the functional and emotional distinctions that define these horological masterpieces. This article synthesizes the collective wisdom of seasoned collectors, offering a deep dive into the enduring appeal and technical merits of both eras.
The Patek Philippe reference 5070, part of the Complications collection, marked a significant return for the brand to large-format chronographs. Introduced in 1998, it was the first non-perpetual calendar chronograph produced by Patek Philippe since the reference 1463, which ceased production in the early 1960s. Its design drew inspiration from a unique Patek Philippe aviator's watch from the 1940s, characterized by its prominent case and dial layout, yet reinterpreted for a contemporary audience. This reference established a new aesthetic direction for the brand's chronographs, moving towards more substantial case dimensions.
The watch features a 42mm case, initially offered in 18k yellow gold, housing the manual-winding Caliber CH 27-70. This movement, based on a Nouvelle LĂ©mania Ă©bauche, was extensively finished and modified by Patek Philippe, meeting the brand's stringent quality standards. It provides a power reserve of approximately 55 hours. The dial, in this specific configuration, is black, protected by a sapphire crystal, and the watch is water-resistant to 30 meters. The fixed bezel frames the dial, and the watch is typically fitted with a leather strap.
Reference 5070 appeals to collectors interested in modern Patek Philippe chronographs that combine traditional movement architecture with a more contemporary case size. Its limited production run and the subsequent introduction of variants in other precious metals contribute to its collectibility. The reference represents a distinct period in Patek Philippe's chronograph history, bridging vintage inspirations with a new era of larger watch designs.
Lemania movements are no longer available and hence more collectible. So whether collectibility equals to rarity / value to the owner is IMO how to choose between the two.
Yours is defiantly an opinion I value but that point aside what are the Pros and cons of each in your opinion?? What about the emotion? Or is it just a case of simply which looks better on the individual’s wrist ??? I wasn’t trying to get a response about which is considered more desirable or less desirable just looking for qualities of each which make us purchase both ? M.
The “old” Lemania movement has served many top tier brands for multiple generations. And it did it’s work flawless. Later in some brands started modifying it to their own “true or false marketing driving” standards. After which “inhouse” became the buzz word. But in my view nr doesn’t rule out the other. Both versions have their own appeal which makes it so grand.
And I agree with you. I guess I am trying to prompt discussion which could help justify having both in a collection. Are they significantly different to warrant purchase?? If so what are the significant differences? M.
5070 is more balanced because the sub-dials are aligned in the middle with the crown. The 5270 sub-dials drop below the middle and the overall design is less symmetrical to me. Although the functionality of the new movement might be better than the lemania (a point which I will defer to others who know more about the technical aspects), symmetry to me is more important.
I don’t think there is a difference in warranty.
This thread is active on the Patek Philippe forum with 29 replies. Share your knowledge with fellow collectors.
Join the Discussion →
