Which one looks more beautiful to your eyes based on aesthetics consideration alone? Obviously Gen 2 is more technically advanced than Gen 1 with 72 hours PR and an (inverse) pusher to quick-set the hour. Aesthetically, it loses the anchor shaped remontoi...
but upon personally inspecting older and newer timepieces, speaking to the watchmakers at Lange and touring the manufacture I realized the finishing techniques today have improved. Lange watches today are finished better.
Here's what one of the most respected watch journalists wrote to me in 2015: On the subject of production time, it is clear to me that Lange has gradually reduced the finishing on its watches over the years, so I assume they have industrialised other proc...
Or perhaps I was unclear. The finishing on Lange movements has, without question, decreased in their complexity and quality of execution over the years. Also, I really appreciate you sharing some insight into that private conversation. I suspect I who kno...
That has to be the craziest thing I've read on a watch forum, but I totally love it!😅😅 It seems to me that both CR and BFP are saying the same thing, and CR was responding to TWS's post, which claimed the opposite ...
My eyes automatically searches for that anchor shaped bridge when looking at Zeit movements. I was a little confused when Zeit-date came out because I couldn't find the anchor
With the exception to the barrel which is a lot more exciting in GEN1. The improved PR is a nice upgrade on the GEN2, and let’s be honest, any of us should feel fortunate to own either.
For quite a number of reasons, but an easy one would be that the newer movement just has so much more empty space; the kind of empty space that to me feels more sparse/anaemic than it does minimalist.