mdg
10639
The subdial hands are very plain...
...and the leap year aperture looks like an afterthought.
I’ve been eagerly-awaiting this one.
But it’s just not sitting right with me. The new dial looks extra-empty (compared to the previous model), and the previous 7-day PR was certainly a strong-point for a PC. I’ll have to handle it in the metal before making a final decision
This is a new model and it does not replace the previous PPC's as we knew them.
But, only this model will be available in SS (~$22k).
It’s gonna work for some people, for sure.
But not for me. Is it the same Kurt Klauss PC module, with the need to send back to IWC if it is accidentally dialed backwards? Or has that issue been resolved ? 22k is a good price point
I am not...
.... convinced .... of this dial. Hmmmmmhhhh. The proportions don‘t work for me. I have to see it in the flesh but it‘s definitely not love at first sight. Best Thomas
If I may
I think the dial layout is great for PC. I just think we are used too the 7 day layout with moon at 12 and year digits. Need to see in person but great value
Hmm, maybe I'm just too used to the 44mm layout, but...
...as much as 42mm seems more sensible and wearable, I'm having trouble with this dial. I'd be very curious to see the watch in the metal. Bravo to IWC, meanwhile, for offering this in SS.
Feel the same.
Of course we have to see it in the metal! Often the impression is different when you try the watch on your wrist. Perhaps this dial would have looked better combined with a 40mm case? For me 40mm would have made more sense to differ from the standard 44mm...
The more I study the images, the more my thoughts crystallize as to why this dial bugs me.
Partially, I think that because SO many perpetual calendars (UN, Moser & Cie., and some PPs excepted) use symmetrical 4-subdial layouts, this design subliminally whispers "tri-compax chrono," not "QP," to me. From a strict design standpoint, I also fi...
These are definitely comprehensible thoughts.
Especially your analysis of the dial architecture. But Moser for me is the opposite of a complicated looking perpetual calendar. But it´s design - for me - is always thoughtful an perfect. Look at this Moser for example: ...
The subdial hands are very plain...
...and the leap year aperture looks like an afterthought.
It’s legible, it’s clean. And it seems like a decent price point. I think it’ll do well.
For some reason I’m drawn to more busy dials on Perpetuals, it just seems more enticing and maybe even more romantic (in the sense of more information seems to convey the magic of a mechanical Perpetual better than a simple dial layout like the FPJ Perpet...
Interestingly it departs from the partial
Numerals display... I have very mixed feelings about showing partial numerals, but this Portuguese does not follow past design criteria in that aspect
Yeah you are right: I was thinking of the Portuguese chronos
They have the 6 and 12 occluded