Blancpain

ThomasM
[PuristS]
14331

• Show profile
• Show other posts

Interesting comments

Hi, Jeff,

I look forward to your article.

I find your comments interesting. Which high performance cars do you have extended and long term ownership experience?  As you know, here on PuristSPro, we are always interested in reading the comments and opinions of people with real, hands on knowledge and experience.

Love or hate the "original" Lamborghinis, I find that often, personal passions aren't necessarily correlated witth objective measurements, leading to interesting inconsistencies of language.  This applies to other areas of interest driven mostly by passion, including high horology watches (accuracy, reliability, durability)

I do find this statement rather surprising, though - "Being entirely candid for many years Lambos... short on mechanical excellence"

Being someone who has owned and driven for several years more than one model of the "original" Lamborghinis (a 99 point driver 1967 400GT 2+2, among others) and knowing many people around the world who own as many Lamborghinis, Ferraris, Maseratis, Aston Martins, etc over several decades as most of us around here own Blancpains, PP, VC, AP, et al, I can honestly say that I can think of no one who can in any objective way agree with the statement, "Lambos... short on mechanical excellence"

They may not be reliable (mostly the electrical systems) and they might be temperamental (most highly tuned complex mechanical objects tend to be this way; so are perfectionist highly strung individuals) but in no way can their mechanical "excellence" be impugned, unless one wants to include most complicated Blancpains models, AP models from Renaud et Papi, the high complications from Patek, et al with this "turn of phrase."

Nearly every 1735 ever produced by Blancpain has had reliability or even basic functionality issues, but I certainly wouldn't call it "short on mechanical excellence."

I look forward to clarification from you on what you meant, so I can understand the proper context of your choice of words.

If it was merely an editorial turn of phrase used for comparative effect, I wonder if one might laud one thing without having to diminish another? In this case, could you have applauded modern Lambos, which I personally find to be less interesting or attractive than "classic" Lambos, much as I prefer a 275GTB/4 Longnose to a 599 - but I would not slight either one with the phrase "lacking in mechanical excellence" - without slamming "classic" Lambos?

Afterall, if using this same standard (unless I am completely missing something?) one could also reasonably argue that vintage and modern Blancpains are "lacking in mechanical excellence" which I am sure you would agree with me that this is certainly a highly questionable statement, knowing your love (and professional working relationship) with Blancpain, and of course, my well known respect and love for Blancpain products bought with my own money despite several pieces having reliability and functionality problems, some specific pieces needing to be dealt with more than a few times to "get right."

Put simply, if one were to apply what seems to be your implicit "basis" in referring to classic Lamborghinis as "Lambos... short on mechanical excellence" to other product categories, might one not say the same about Blancpain products, past and present?

I don't agree with the statement as applied to classic Lambos, and I don't agree with the statement as applies to Blancpain, so I look forward to some clarification from you on this point.

And of course looking forward to learning and sharing more about your experience and opinions of high performance cars. Knowing you for many years now, I never knew!  Chapeau to a fellow car enthusiast.

Cheers,

TM