Girard Perregaux

crown comfort
12358

• Show profile
• Show other posts

Girard-Perregaux 1966 Chronograph, a long-winded decision

Friends,

Ever since the 1966 Chronograph has been released it has been a grail GP watch for me I wanted to pursue. Initially, of course, my dreams were based on photos and reports and I was pretty sure that the blue dial / white gold version is the best of them all. However, over the years GP has released a number of versions/evolutions and what was needed was a real life on the wrist experience to make the right decision.

If I learned one thing over the years: NEVER make a final judgment or purchasing decision on catalogue photos only!

Not counting some special releases, like the 1966 doctor chrono, I count 6 versions that were/are available.

Most recently we have seen the integrated column-wheel hand-wound movement Chronos. A few weeks ago, I was able to handle both the cream dial and the black dial versions in the metal. No doubt, when turned over, they win the comparison hands-down. The manual wind movement is a league above for sure. But let’s consider what is most important to me in a watch:

• Case and dial design and overall balance has the highest priority, in the end, when wearing the watch, that’s what hits the eye
• The movement is a consideration but with less priority

Having handled the manual Chronos, I was able to quickly conclude that they do not make it to the final consideration list. For one, they do belong to another price range altogether, making it an even bigger stretch. But my main reservation is the dial design. I think the watch does not benefit from the inner tachy ring compared to the outer tachy scale on the earlier models. The sub-dials are still very closely together at the centre, which a new movement design should have been able to avoid. I’m also not a big fan of the cut-off hands and the lume and I do miss the blued second/sub-dial hands. Finally, the date window on this model is very obtrusive. I’m not a militant “no date” guy, but here it cuts into the tachy-scale and is pronounced with a gold frame, which in the metal is very disturbing. In addition, even on the cream dial there is a colour difference between the date and the dial (white over cream). And why oh why, do we need that “Chronograph” text?

The first release of the 1966 Chronograph really appealed to me. As already mentioned the blue dial looked extremely tempting. The first version I was able to try out was the Rose Gold/white dial model. Certainly was a lasting experience but I did tend towards the white gold. A few weeks back, I was then also trying on the white gold version, the one just reviewed by Blomman last week. I was still quite convinced but I missed the last kick. Perhaps I really needed to see the blue? What surprised me a lot was that the white gold version felt rather small on the wrist. Even the case is 40mm and I’m not a big bloke, it was going very much under the radar. I think the right size of a case is not only determined by wrist size but also by the dial design. The 1966 Chrono is a very complex dial that needs room to breathe. On the 40mm case, I felt that it could have done with an extra 1 or 2 mm. There is also the issue with the small movement dictating the closely centered sub-dials. Hmm, so the quest continued.

Now coming to the white gold / blue dial: Finally I was able to handle one in Dubai back in December. On the blue, the size was less of an issue due to the strong presence of the sunburst blue dial. So have I finally found my heaven? Not quite. Very much to my surprise, in the metal, the blue dial did not do it for me. What was the issue? Well, the Chrono Dial has a lot of print on it, esp. for the Tachy scale. On the blue, the print is done in white/silver and to my eye was just too overpowering the blue dial. All I was seeing was white print.

So what next? Back to the Rose Gold perhaps? When I visited an AD in January, he did have a Rose Gold Chrono on display, but the Ref 49542 in 42mm. This time, it was immediately clear to me that this is the version that speaks most to me. Why?

My issue with the size is completely gone, the extra 2 mm make a huge difference in the overall balance of the watch. The bigger size does not result in any discomfort on the wrist, it just gives more presence and a better dial layout.

Ref 49542 has a bigger movement (Cal 3300-0057). Yes, you can argue that the movement is still too small for the case when you look at the back, but the little extra size has resulted in perfectly placed sub-dials on the dial and that’s what counts more to me.

Well, there is the date window at 6 o’clock. Is that an issue? Ok, without it would have been better, but I hate to think if GP would have filled the empty space with text like “Chronograph” or “Automatic”. Then I rather have the date window. Here the date window is very unobtrusive. It does not cut into any print, has only a very thin black frame and the same colour as the dial.

I also noticed something interesting when comparing the dial layouts. All versions, except the 42mm, 49542 have the small seconds display on the left sub-dial, while the 49542 has it on the right sub-dial. Would be interested to learn why it is this way. For me, having the small seconds at the right side is more natural.

And there is one other feature on the dial that is the cherry on the cake: The applied numerals: a slightly bigger “12” on top and then “4,5,7,8” in the lower and “1,2,10,11” in the upper half, nicely placed so no cutting was needed. To my eye, they really enhance the look of the dial and overall balance of the watch design.

Ok, so now that I had found “my version” of the 1966 Chrono, I had to work out a plan to make it happen. From what I know, Ref 49542 was only produced in Rose Gold and not in large numbers because soon after its release the manual wind Chronos were introduced and replaced the automatic versions.

So here are my first impressions after a bit over a week in my stable. In general, this is not a daily beater watch for me, rather something for special occasions. So it was not on my wrist all the time, but certainly got my love and admiration more than a few times every day.

The handling is as you would expect: Flawless operation of the pushers and the Chrono function, very efficient automatic winding and a good power reserve.

The comfort on the wrist is also without complaint. The choice of the pin buckle is a wise move. The strap is very nice. If I compare the strap on the Chrono with my 38mm 1966, then it is softer, with a finer croco pattern and less shiny. Big kudos to GP for this as this part is often neglected and can ruin the look and feel of a watch.

However, ignoring all practical aspects, what really counts is the feel on the wrist and its sheer beauty. It makes my heart jump when looking down the wrist. The watch does not look for any effects with special reflections etc., it just shouts out: “I’m real quality and sophistication”. There is a lot of attention to detail in the design that let’s you discover new sides of it every day and that’s what makes it an interesting, long-lasting love.

So in conclusion, are there any downsides? Well, it did burn a big hole into my wallet and as a result makes we rethink my collection of modern GPs. With the 1966 Chrono I have the perfect dress watch, special occasion, crown jewel of my collection. The ww.tc FTC covers all casual, sporty looks perfectly well. Then I will need a pool/beach diver watch (Sea Hawk) and then what else? Ok, I need to keep a Vintage 45 and a modern Laureato as they are important lines. Everything else, only watches that are highly collectible are a sure keeper, while others I’m really question now as redundant. I will need to monitor in what direction that line of thought will take me.

CC