patekova
1840
Thank you for your kind words and I like that description, “stunning in its simplicity”! [nt]
No message body
Vintage or modern that is the question. Here are 2 somewhat comparable watches in that they are both perpetuals, but ...
couldn’t be more different in the eyes of most collectors, particularly from a desirability standpoint. One (the 5496P) is platinum and water resistant, has the much more complicated retrograde function, is much easier to set since all calendar functions ...
The two-tone of the 5496 is fantastic...
...and the details of the individual elements for the markers and dates are incredible...a lot of work went into it. I would have preferred it to be a bit slimmer but that's just me. The clean face on the 3448 is what makes it great...simple and elegant. ...
Ok, I'll be different
I prefer that 5496P-015. The first model in 2011 looked sterile, but this 2016 reboot looks warmer and sharper. I like its aperture calendars and retrograde date. The 2014 bronze dial 5496P-014 is even better. The 5235G is my go-to if I want a 3448 case, ...
As you say, we are speaking of two very different references, and it's understandable the 3448 has assumed a somewhat iconic status because of its particular role in the brand's history..
But I agree that, even if in a different league in many respects, the 5496 is a good-looking and solid piece as well...Here's a wristshot of the P version (taken somewhere in Italy). Cheers ;-) ...
It depends heavily on the design of the watch.
I'm a big fan of the 3448/3450, I like the layout. But I also like the 5140 perpetual calendar. And some may find it strange, but I would rather have a 5160G than a 5496P. So I'm all over the place; I like both vintage and modern pieces.
Thanks for bringing up 5160G! I much prefer 5496P to 5159G, BUT 5160G is an amazing horological work of art.
As much as I love 5496P, I would love even more to have the 5160G on my wrist!
No No. I find the 5496P bulky and not very elegant. I tried all versions and the case is just too big for this design.
Buy a good winder for your 3448.
personally 3448 is something i like very much in terms of dial layout...
i happen to see one from our fellow purist, it has an understated elegance that i feel is absent today in most PC from PP. Thanks for sharing. Best, mahesh.,
Of the retrogrades the 5050 is my favorite...
...I saw a beautiful example way back when they were new, but I was poor(er) then so no deal.
Hi Patekova, thanks for the post which really got me thinking for a while before deciding on the ...
3448 because of its classy and classic understated elegence ! The 5496P is a formidable challenger, especially with the lovely applied dates. Enjoy them both often !
If it is between these two...
It is very simple choice for me. It will have to be a 3448. But it also must be a right 3448. Not all 3448 exude the same charm as the case and the dial play an important role. 3448 is a vintage piece and so it should have that charm. If it is too minty, ...
Thanks CL for your analytical response. The 3448 and 5496 are very different. I think it is accurate to say 5496 is a polarizing watch.
A lot of people like nothing about it.
The 5496 G wins!
I like it when a complicated watch shows her complexities. Furthermore, the 5496 has a very legible dial instead of the many displays. The two-tone appearance even makes it a little bit nonconformistic.
I LOVE the 3448!
My big problem with the 3448 is that it is essentially a “Museum Piece”. I wear my watches . If I was wearing a 3448 and it got a “ding” or a “scuff” it would really upset me. I can’t afford to have something in my ( very small) collection that I can’t we...
I certainly appreciate your viewpoint. Even with vintage I only want to buy mint unpolished watches. I try to keep them that way
eg, wearing a very soft cotton long sleeve lightweight shirt or sweater. A little anal on my part, but helps avoid, dings, scuffs, scratches (hairline or otherwise). But even with that, for me 3448 is definitely not an every day type of watch. If worn eve...