Patek Philippe

The sub dial over lapping the outer ring bothers you, maybe its because you do not understand why. I will give my view on it, i see 2 possible reasons:

1- One of the golden rule of design states that "form follows function"... So i guess that the architecture of the movement is what decided where the sub-dials should be. In this 5170G, the movement fills the 39mm case perfectly ( contrary to 5070 ). So choices might have came down to squeezing more the outer ring where there is the tachymeter... or biting a little on it with the subdial.

2- As the spirit of the 5170 is to be last descendant of a great line of chronographs, designers had to respect some design details of the past models. This 5170G is a tribute to vintage chrono's. So if you take a good look at the 1436, you will understand the roots and the choices designers had to make. If you go back on the past ref that Oliver mentioned, they all have a "biting subdial".

The answer might be a combination of those 2 explanations. Food for thoughts and for a healthy interesting debate here

Anyway Akitaishi, chrono's and watches in general, do not need to be "perfect" as you mention. IMO perfection is not a good thing, it implies something too rational and cold that often goes against poetry, personality and caracter. The 5070 is a living example, with so many flaws but then again, maybe the most desirable of all in spite ( or because ) of its flaws.

My 2 cents,