Bruno.M1
4824
I think you are right
With all the increases we had a 5070 would probably cost 50K or more todiay (if they were still in production)
Nice and fair review...
By: Ditchkeuk : July 11th, 2011-09:02
... i think you summarized it very well. There is a point that we do not debate over enough, its how some Patek models make us feel sometimes almost indifferent, and then slowly ( and inevitably ) they start growing on us, until it becomes such an obsessi...
thanks, nice read
By: Bruno.M1 : July 11th, 2011-11:35
you can bet on it, every post about a 5070 is a post I read several times ;-) As for the looks, everybody has his own favorites, while I'll prefer the 5070 by far, I'm sure others will prefer the 5170. I also had the chance to 'play' with the 5170 some ti...
not so sure Bruno,
By: simplicity : July 11th, 2011-13:17
if we consider the last 5070 price : 34000 euros in France, November 2005 when i bought one , and what it would cost today if still produced, when you know increases of the prices at Patek , 5070 would probably cost around 50000....... ...... and first 51...
Great review!
By: waheha : July 11th, 2011-21:31
Thanks for your great review, murcielago-boy! I had a chance to play with the 5170 in Geneva 3 months ago, it is a absolutely stunning watch! About the movement, I have the exact comment as you do (quote) - "The quality of the 5170's chrono mechanism and ...
Very nice review
By: tahoeblue : July 11th, 2011-23:52
but we reach much different conclusions. Both among the best of chronos, but I find the tactile pleasure of the crown and pushers much greater on the 5070 than the 5170. Aesthetically I also much prefer the 5070, even though the 42 mm size pushes the limi...
Interesting read
By: ChristianDK : July 14th, 2011-20:55
Thanks for posting. It's interesting to read your impressions, especially since you had the chance to play with both at the same time. Refreshing, because they go against the initial resonce from many. I've seen the watch on a couple of occasions but not ...