Patek Philippe

After many weeks of hesitation I think I need some suggestion from others. Some of my friends(most of them already owns many PPs and collect for over 10 years) said to me that 5059R is the classic PP RETROGRADE with good dial, they think 5159 is too complicated and they don't like the thin elongated Romans number. And they think PP COMPANY just try to follow the market and try to enlarge the size but lost perfect balance do 5059, but they use the same movement. Others said (some of them are AD, friends don't understand much about the watch) I should buy a bigger size(36mm is too small nowadays ) and the 5159R's dial is even more beautiful and delicate. For me, MY wrist is not so big, so 5059R looks ok and good to me, and is cheaper to me!! (Since my friend will sell his 5059R to me which is in very good condition) Can any one give me more advise of these two watch 5059R vs 5159R?! I don't want to be regret after 5-8 years, since it is too small. Thanks for sharing some of your thoughts and maybe some wristshots would be awesome. Jacky

This message has been edited by Volvok on 2014-03-18 19:12:20

I used to own a 5059. It was my first PP PC. The 36mm case is offset by the 'hamburger' height. The dial is far cleaner and the retrograde date is an AWESOME complication. The 5159 doesn't look as clean. I equate the two to the difference between a rolex day. Date and day date II. The day date II and 5159 seem to be bigger for bigger sake. The day date and 5059 are just classic and appropriately sized. Unless you have massive wrists 36mm for a dressy watch is fine. If I could have kept mine and still gotten my grail, a 5970, I would have but it just wasn't in the cards. Best of luck and you are making a great choice either way.

I do not like the hands or long Romans on the 5159. That said, I prefer the 5050 to both of these by a mile. 

In my opinion, for this movement / complication, I like the 5050 > 5059.  Not the newer models as stated by others.

But I think Patek is a very very careful firm when it comes to meddling.

Maybe 5159R is better.

If its not small on your wrist then go for it.

No message body

..you are not looking for an exclusively dress watch...5059 in my opinion is more exclusively suited for dress occassions while 5159 is more all rounder making more of a presence..I like the absolutely gorgeous central dial pattern on 5159 and the more pronounced crown and lugs..I just find the 5159 more beautiful while having great respect and appreciation for classic purity of the 5059.

I also prefer 5059 to 5159. First I don't have large wrists, so I don't need a bigger version (I don't mind a bigger 5059 though) - the watch just sits perfectly on my wrist. Second, the dial of 5159 is just too busy. The hands, the sunburst dial, the elongated Roman numbers... Each of them has good with its own character, but when they all come together, it's too much for me. In all, I'd still prefer 5059 (even if they cost the same).

First of all, either watch is a fantastic choice, but I love this line for many reasons. Retrograde date, hunter caseback, I absolutely love both of these watches... but..

The 5059R was my first PP Grand Complication.  I was sorry to let it go, but a vintage Panerai came along which I had  to buy.

both are beautiful. rose gold is warm & inviting. choose what sings to your hearts desire.

No message body

With u

I would recommend the Ref. 5059, based on the size and the pictures I saw from the watches on your wrist. Different people have different wrists and of course different tastes, but when it comes to watches I think they have to please my wrist first. It helps a lot to enjoy them in the long run and that is something you are interested in, as you mentioned.

"... and is cheaper to me" Forget about it, at least you will do it quite quick when your choice makes you smile - even when it would be more expensive.

Good luck with your decision!

Oliver

Cosmetics are an individual choice but the 5159 appears to be somewhat overwhelming on your arm.

I have a relatively small wrist compared to the rest of me and some of the now, standard size watches are too large for me. Conveying a "look at what I have" rather than the discreetness of elegance.

I know the current trend is for larger watches but there is a point where proportions get out of hand and look just that way.

Just a thought. A tough decision based upon the amount of recommendations you've gotten thus far.

As much as vintage Pateks are tempting: after 20 years of age you will be given an estimated service cost.

I have not any experiences with estimated service costs from Patek but it sounds a bit expensive.

I would buy the current versions always as they are always technically a bit better than the old models.

If I would be you I would go for the 5160 R!

Best

Moritz

clearly works better on you. Having said that the newer version has more charm to me than the older. I am a big fan of small watches. If you note movement sizes they are prettty much standard size parts and average about 31mm. Thus, all these 40-45mm watches you see are just big empty air filled boxes. I like a case that truly fits the movement.and accents the strap. 33 to 35mm are ideal to me for a dress watch on a strap. Plus, you can wear that size watch and not worry about it because your wrist protects the watch. When you wear a watch that is off the wrist on both sides it hits everything as the watch protrudes so much. You cannot help but ding it all up.

Prefer the newer version dial, especially the center sunburst pattern, both are great watch to have, Good Luck and welcome to the Patek Family.

This is contagious, once you have your 1st Patek, more will follow, are you ready !!!!

after seeing the 5059R in person last weekend, I would chose the 5159G. The larger case and dial makes reading so much easier.  If I really have to pick the 5059, then it will have to be the white gold version. Al lthe best and let us know your decision. Cheers !

 

You cannot go wrong with any of these beauties, but IMHO the 5159 fits even better than the 5059. Reasons: the elongated Roman numerals look refined, extremely elegant yet classy. Actually, I know few watches that do such a great job with the Roman numerals (maybe the ALS Richard Lange is comparable). Also, the font type chosen for the retrograde date scale is more appealing than in the 5059 (admittedly, this is very subjective!). Thirdly, the dial design with the central pattern is riveting. Finally, since you already mention in your post that you don't want to regret the choice of case size after 5-8 years and run the risk of having taken a too small size, it may be wiser to go for the 38mm format.

Beautiful watches... but the last photo its orrible

but for your wrist size, definitely the 5059. When ensuring if the watch is a good fit for one's wrist, the size of the watch is naturally important but another factor that many of us tend to ignore is the way the lugs are formed. Looking at the photos, the 5159 appears a little too large on your wrist if one looks at how the lugs wrap around your wrist. Not to worry about how much the 5059 will be worth in the future because if anything the 5059 will hold its value better based on the fact that it was the lower priced watch in the first place. the sunburst dial on the 5159 is simply gorgeous but at the end of the day, buy the watch that suits your wrist best as mentioned by Oliver. The pleasure you will derive from wearing the right watch will far outweigh any monetary difference in the future if there is to be any difference.

Nice pics by the way.

Sham

...5059 because it fits your wrist much better

The 5150 just looks too large for you unfortunately because the sunburst dial is very lovely

Good luck with your decision and let us know what you decide

Cheers,

Gordon