Girard Perregaux

AndrewD
[HoMe Moderator]
12829

• Show profile
• Show other posts

The details ...

Isn't that where the Devil lives?

Hi Mark,

I agree there are some superficial similarities with the now iconic PP5070, however there are also a number of important differences that need to be considered when making a final decision:

Bicompax chronographs have been in the range of both both companies for many decades, so both have a 'legitimacy' in this design. It is interesting that both GP and PP have addressed the 'challenge' of a small movement in these current watches by designing a dial with 'centralized' subdials and a prominent tachometer scale.

What IS a delight in the PP5070 is the beatufully finished manual wind Lemania ebauche (the CH27-70). Some might find the automatic movement in the GP to be practical, but there is nothing as special or as beautiful as a manual wind integrated column wheel chronograph movement. Perhaps GP will go down this path in the future. And it would be a welcome addition.

The PP5070 is 42mm in diameter (verses 40mm for the 1966 Chrono) but aesthetically I prefer the simple sloping polished bezel and short lugs of the 1966 Chrono to the fancier stepped bezel and lugs of the PP. And 42mm is getting too large for a 'dress' watch on my wrist, so I like the proportions of the 1966 Chrono.

When it comes to the dial I actually prefer the GP for the blued hands which add a lot of colour to catch the eye and I dislike the partially 'eaten' Arabic numerals of the PP5070.

So if I was spending my own money, I would be happy with the 1966 Chrono on my wrist, but I would lust for an ALS Datograph or 1815 Chrono for the movement!

But these are just my personal preferences and I am trying to avoid being 'tripped up' by brand names.

Andrew