Patek Philippe

Hi everyone.
I wanted to ask a naive question.
As we all know PP have developed, amongst many others, their new calibers for the 5170 (first found in that ladies chrono) and a further development of that for the new Perp Chrono 5270.

What I want to understand here is why anyone would prefer a generic Lemania caliber piece over and above a genuine in-house PP caliber. I mean the Lemania's in the 5970 and 5070, although heavily re-worked in PP form, will be found in Vacherons and other high-end manufacturers... Why would you prefer an outsourced movement found elsewhere to power your PP than something made by the manufacturer? It necessarily means the lemania piece is NOT fully bespoke. I've been watching the debates between 5070 vs 5170 and 5970 vs 5270, and aesthetic objections aside, it's a no brainer - surely? An in house pp movement vs an outsourced generic? No doubt, the 5170 and 5270 have to be champions.

My feeling is that people always prefer what they have bought themselves and given that only a few people have the new pieces but many more (relatively speaking) have the older pieces here, the loyalty to what they already own is driving a unfair evaluation.That's human nature of course... But in my opinion, there is simply no arguing that the newer pieces are conceptually purer and simply more bespoke because of their in house movements. Will we find the caliber in 5170 in a Vacheron? No. And that's my point!

Please let me know your thoughts. Apologies if the post comes off "spiky" - written in a hury!! I wait to be corrected by your insight and knowledge!

Regards

MB!

My feeling is if both were manufactured and available at the same time people would definately prefer the in house movement over the lemania but obviously they aren't. I would never trade my 5970 for a 5270 but I am in line for a 5270.

The fact that very few people have already seen in the metal 5170 could explain they could not give a full advice on the new PP calibre.

And what to say about the 5270.

For me, I like at the first sight the new 5270, and not the 5170 for the dial and the pulsograph scale (wrong for me as detailled in a past post).

Cheers,

Patrickh

 

The 5070 vs 5170 or 5970 vc 5270 is not only about the movement but imo more about the asthetics

I do prefer the 5070 BY far, I've seen the 5170 and it is a very nice watch. If I had the money I would buy a 5170 too ... 100% sure. But the 5070 is for me and a lot of others the bette rlooking watch.Between the 5970 and 5270, I like the 5970 and might prefer the 5970 but since I did not see a 5270 yet I'm not 100% sure.

Now, about the movement, you said the inhouse is probably better than the heavily modified Lemania. Well, probably you are correct but that's (imo) not the point. Those movements are so good that being a few % better doesn't make any difference anymore

What makes a difference is the fact that the one is discontinued and was always sought after. In the future  Production numbers will grow because of the Asian demand. So if there will be made 5000 5170 and 5000 5270 PP by the year 2025, the inhouse will be not that rare, not compared with the old Lemania.

Look at several other examples, why do you think a Zenith based daytona ( 16520 ) is more expensive than a inhouse 116520 ? In 1999 the 16520 was a lot cheaper than the 116520 today but secondhand a 16520 is more expensive than a newer 116520. Or look at Panerai. A Pre Vendôme with a CHEAP ETA is several times more expensive than a 2003 ETA based or 2010 inhouse movement Panerai. Collectors want the most rare. Or why do you think a Rolex 16610 LV (green bezel) is a more expensive than the regular 16610 sub black bezel. The only difference is a stupid green bezel. BUT Rolex made 5 or 6 times more black subs than green subs between 2004 and 2010. And since they are now discontinued the secondhand price goes up too.

Now, if the 5170 and 5270 would be discontinued in 2013 because Patek would have made ( for some strange reason ) a completely OTHER inhouse movement and put it in a very different case, than ofcourse the 5170/5270 would become very sought after

 

I don't think most people will prefer a 5070 over a 5170 because they have one but simply because they really love it much more ... or they think about the collectibilty factor . The 5170 will be made a long time and if you start saving you can always get a 5170.

Now, not many people here have a 2499, more people have a 3970 or 5970. But I'm sure almost everybody will prefer a 2499 and not a 3970/5970. So when you say : "My feeling is that people always prefer what they have bought themselves and given that only a few people have the new pieces but many more (relatively speaking) have the older pieces here, the loyalty to what they already own is driving a unfair evaluation.That's human nature of course" I really can not agree.

This message has been edited by Bruno.M1 on 2011-03-30 10:08:53

I might be the first one to post a problem with the 5170 chrono. While using the chrono and stopping it then restarted it again it jumps for few seconds which I don't have with other chrono from Patek. Specially the 5970. Still waiting for an aswer from Geneva. I might say the calibre of the 5970 is much better.

Lemania movement found in 5070 and 5970 is not reworked...

To my knowledge (and please correct me if I am wrong) it is disassembled, refinnnised and
then reworked and reassembled...
So it is a Lemania based calibre but in a Patek way.....

Lemania wanted to have their name on the calibre, PP did not think that it was fair for
them considering their modifications and thus no more Lemania for PP....

It is a great movement that it cherished among collectors and earned a place in horologial history...

Yes, VC has a similar movement, but it is certainly nt the same...

Concerning the two new PP movements, they still have to "prove" themselves regarding horological merit...
Don't get me wrong, I am certain that they will- it is expected.

However 5970 is a collectors dream (at least for me) and has earned a place in the penthouse....

So, what would collectors prefer? Both...
But I assume that they would go for the 5970 first as it is rarer....
Also, dial and size are also factors....



Cheers

discussion has only become an issue in recent years.

 When I was a dealer and the popularity of chronographs was gearing up, I asked my rep, who ultimately became President, why Patek had no chronograph offering at all.  His response was that the cost of developing the movement was so great that even if they did and it was quite successful, it would take years and years for it to be profitable.

Also, when complicated watches were becoming popular, I asked if Patek would produce any pieces with moon phase indications that were not perpetuals. The answer was that if a Patek had a moon phase...it would be a perpetual. 

I guess the point I am attempting to make is that the developing complicated watch market, money, and the time to develop a new movement could have been Patek's reason for the Lemania movement being used. The Swatch Group thing (if a manufacturer used any SG's movements, the SG logo would have to be engraved on the movement) resulted in a craze of movement development by a multitude of brands.  This may account for the limited or staggered production of the 5070 and 5970 which bought them time.

The new pieces may be purer and bespoke but it doesn't mean they are better.  Personally, I prefer the pieces made prior to Patek's rise in popularity, I have no reason other than it seemed that those pieces were made when production numbers were at reasonable levels, even if they used outsourced parts/movements.

I don't have a large wrist so the size of the 3970 is perfect for me, the 5970/5070 are too large, and the 5270/5170 are completely out of the question..so the decision for me was quite simple.  It did not revolve around whether the movement was in-house or not.

Regardless, they are all ..... Patek Philippes.

and maybe not as simple as assuming that newer is always better or more desirable.

Having said that, I do think the new Patek chrono movement is beautiful, technically and aesthetically. But I also feel the same about the Lemania. There are certainly technical innovations, but when I have played with both 5170 and 5070, I don't notice any improvement in the feel of the new chrono movement. To the contrary, at least on the examples I have held, the 5070 has a smoother feel, and this is important to me in a chrono.

So far with limited "in the metal" experience with the 5170 (and none yet with the 5270), I don't see any aesthetic improvement in the new watches, in fact preferring the older Lemanias. One potential significant plus of the 5170 vs 5070 is the better size for my wrist, though these days 42mm does not seem nearly so large as a short time ago. And the 5270 could be going in the wrong direction, adding a mm or so over the 5970.

Not to raise any unfounded issues, but comments in this thread are not the first I have heard of possible reliability issues with the new movement, which I assume are to be worked out in time, but would give me some temporary pause.

Looking at the "minor" issue of price, it is hard to swallow a simple YG chrono at $76K or a WG chrono/perpetual at $159K (if memory is correct). So if at equal price, maybe a stronger case could be made to jump into the new movement. As a complete package including price, this is a big commitment for a watch which could be around for a while, especially when the jury is still out.

But if I had to make a guess, as Patek chronos both the Lemanias and in-house movement watches will be very sought after for a long time, and these forums will be filled for years with 5070 vs 5170 threads..... And soon 5170 vs Datograph threads, etc...

Great question to which you have already received some great answers. 

I have yet to see the new PP manual movement, but the mere fact that it is manufactured in-house means nothing to me.  Given that historically all watch movements were sourced from outside at a time when Patek was building the reputation it now enjoys makes me perfectly comfortable if not delighted to have the Lemania. 

There is also the Philippe Stern interview done in 2003 in which Stern stated that it made no sense given production numbers of that era to create its own in-house movement, but that if it did it would "probably been identical to the [Lemania] we currently use."  As I read the interview, the justification to incur the cost for building a new movement in-house was based upon the need for increased production and the need for financial and technical independence.  It seems evident that he couldn't have Hayek/Breguet or others dictating terms to Patek.  So now the new movement will be reproduced for decades to justify the R&D cost, while the Lemania will be confined to a relatively few special watches.

But regardless of the movement, for me it still comes down to the overall aesthetics of the watch.  I had the 3970, and while I very much appreciate the watch, it wasn't for me.  I did not need to justify my purchase of the 3970.  I just sold it and bought the 5970.  But I don't feel the slightest urge to sell the 5970 to buy the 5270.    On the other hand, if I loved the 5270 over the 5970, I would most likely ignore the fact that it wasn't a Lemania movement and buy it anyway. 

 Tlw

 

 

 

. 

 

just individual choice. If you are just considering from a collection stand point then consider that an infinite number of 5270's can be produced in-house.

You ask a question that require a 2 part answer.

1st Why pick a Generic when there's an In house movement available?

There are several reasons I will only focus on movement side of things

1. In house doesn't make it better. Season watchmaker will tell you new doesn't always mean better. New things always have tiny problems to sort out because it is new.
2. Some of the most reliable movement comes from movement supplier, ETA, Lemania, Valjoux ... etc. A beautiful movement is one thing but the most important thing is to make it work continously.
3. The Lemania movement have exist for many years. It is been tested and use by a lot of manufacturer and a lot of refinement have been done.
4. Historically PP is not a movement manufactuterer but Lemania is. A 80+ years movement manufacturer and a luxury watch assembler which one will you trust?
5. A movement that's been widely use by others doen't mean is inferior just not exclusive.


2nd People prefer what they have bought themselves

1. Wouldn't you? It only make sense since that the reason we buy watches.
2. "newer pieces are conceptually purer and simply more bespoke" Doesn't this statement tell us that the most important focus here is exclusivity which can not warrant a fair discussion.
3. Bespoke in watch will be going to an independent and build a piece unique. Owning a PP will give a us prestigious feeling, but bespoke?
4. If exclusivity is what we're looking for I think Lemania-Based PP will be a safe bet. There's no way of telling how many new in house movement watches PP will produce. I am almost 100% it will be more than the Lemania models.


Finally,

PP, VC, and AP have their history written in refining and assemble parts from 3rd party into their own brand. It's a dying art since most people these would prefer an inhouse movement. There is something romantic and satisfying of seeing a master watchmaker turn a ordinary movement into a masterpiece. People who in the knows greatly appreciate there are only a few.

Inhouse movement have turn itself into a marketing tools nowadays. It use to be purely for a better product but now we seems to be getting further from that. I'm accusing PP I'm just saying what I saw and some inhouse PP are great.

Hope one day you can find the joy of appreciating a finely rework generic movement in a fantastic watch.


Best
Tyler