Patek Philippe

Gentlemen,

This is a theme that comes on the table quite frequently: which chronograph do we prefer between the 5070 and the 5170 references?

 I won't give an answer to that question (if ever there is one). But as some buyers wish to enter the world of Patek chronographs from time to time and consider both of them, I thought it could be interesting to come around the subject in order to provide a little help and leaving a thread that some might find useful in the future.



The 5070 familly

There is of course a distinction between "which one is better" (objective, if we can remain objective concerning the 5070 which is much appreciated) and "which one we prefer" (subjective). The last chronograph of the post-WWII era, the 1463 (even if we can find some versions of the 1579 in the early 60's too) was produced till the end of the 60's (maybe early 70's too? I don't know). This means there was a very long period (until the introduction of the 5070J in 1998) without a chronograph-only model in Patek Philippe's collection.




Ref. 130



Ref 530



Ref. 1463

From 1998 to 2003 (for the J version), from 2004 to 2008 (for the R and G versions) and to 2009 (for the Platinum version), the 5070 illustrated the very significant come-back of a two subsidiary dials chronograph in the manufacture's catalogue. The design was back then quite bold because much less conservative and classical from the rest of the references. I could see a very little of its bezel inspiration from the 2501 (in 1951) but, as Nicolas answered before, the Spilt-second chronograph reference 2512 (from 1952, in 45mm) remains its main inspiration basis.

At the time, in 1998, as for nearly every new model a brand launches, some watch fans regretted Patek didn't create a closer interpretation of 2512's shape (by the way it is quite fun to have a look at the few available posts from that period on the net). They also underlined the fact the two subsidiary dials were placed quite close to the central axles or the overall larger size (42mm) etc... I mention this to emphasize the fact that nearly every time a significantly new model is launched, our tastes have to evolve and we may need time to get used to a new design. Of course, this may not be a constant rule.

Nowadays, the 5070 (and it would also be true concerning the 5970) is considered as an iconic patek Philippe watch as it is its most appealing chronograph from the modern period (and the only one for a very long time).



Nicolas' shot of his 5070G


Today, the 39.4mm 5170 reference (launched in 2010 in the J version) has the difficult task to convince old clients but also new ones that it is a great and legitimate heir to the 5070.



5170G



5170G



5170J


The front side -

Aesthetically wise, the 5170 is the "daughter" of the late 30's to late 60's 130 and 530 references and maybe, the last one i.e. the 1463 (inclined and flat bezel, very similar classical case shape) without its specific round pushers though. This is an aesthetical and philosophical choice that takes his origin in Patek's history and will remain a classic even in decades from now.




Credit: Bruno.M1



Credit: Bruno.M1

Concerning the dials, most of these old chronographs had a tachymeter scale (or none). The Pulsometric scale was very rare and is a different choice the brand seemed to want to make with the 5170J and 5170G Silver dial. The new 2015 black dial version looses this scale and remains with a simple "rail" minute ring. Personally, I'm a great fan of the Pulsometric scale (Tachymeter comes second).

As regards to the other elements, the old chronographs were produced in nearly every possible variation: leaf, dauphine or baton hands; Arabic, Roman numerals or applied markers only etc... It seems it was a time when every owners could personalize their Patek chronograph.





Credit: Bruno.M1

Everyone will have his favorite among these elements but I think it is not a good thing going that much into details. Watches should be seen as a whole and I don't think there is a unique best combination.

Hence, I won't point out these aesthetical differences between the 5070's and the 5170's dial layout.



Credit: Steelerfan1965

Aesthetical ideal change from a period to another and to everyone his own preferences. There is no absolute.

The movement side -

You all know the 5070 houses the famous and glorious Nouvelle Lemania 2310-based CH 27-70 caliber.



CH 27-70 (5070)



CH 27-70 (5070)

I won't detail all the differences but mention one or two things that are, in my humble opinion, worth noticing.
Aesthetically, the new movement influenced the two sub-dials layout:

- Some may say the 5070's three axles lining-up is better, others say that the 5170's triangle formed by the name and the two sub-dials is more balanced.

- Some would say the 5070's axles' lining up makes the observer feel the two sub-dials are squeezed between the outer scale and the central axles, others say the 5170's two sub-dials placed lower on the dial is disturbing.

Here again, everyone his own opinion on that subjective matter, depending on its background.
Personally, I like both




CH 29-535 (5170)



CH 29-535 (5170)

As for the movement's finishing, I think it is very difficult to make the difference (without a microscope), even if some may underline the fact the 5070's one has "angles rentrants" (inward angles) the new one has very discreetly avoided keeping, nevertheless still with a great overall look.

On the other hand, I would say that, technically, the new CH 29-325 in-house movement (five years development) has been cleverly improved with six new features (see details the appendix at the bottom of this post) and, from an engineering perspective, the design of the movement is directly coming from the work of Patek's watchmakers. The case, dial and the movement in the 5170 are all coming from Patek's creativity and watchmaking mastery. I personally like knowing that the whole experience of the brand's talented watchmakers have been gathered into this movement, creating a new caliber, from the beginning.


The movement is also equiped with a jumping minute chronograph counter and a stop-second feature, a dynamometric winding mechanism and a very soft pushers' activation.
I like that very much personally, even if, in the watch world, in-house movements are not necessarily meaning the watch is more accurate or reliable etc...


Conclusion -

I would like to conclude in saying that Patek Philippe has left through his history many iconic watches, proof of their technical mastery and aesthetical taste.
The 5070 and the 5170 are two very different watches coming from two different world in this chronograph lineage, at two very different periods and I don't think they should be opposed (hence my title o_O) and even more ranked.




5170G Black dial

As far as I'm concerned, they have nearly nothing in common (size, shape, movement...), except, without a doubt to me, the brand's DNA. The 5170 has not the aura of the 5070 reference, yet. However, as every new model, it needs time getting mature.

The fact the 5070 (or 5970) was in sight for such a long time that it has already influenced and shaped our taste. It is not necessarily that "it looks better" but it matches in a better way with how our tastes have evolved. The 5170 didn't reach this stage I think.

Like previous Patek Philippe chronographs, the 5070 is already a legend; the 5170 has yet to become one and has already its DNA. For potential buyers, the "one of each metal" theme can be a good one but getting one 5070 and one 5170 is I think a fantastic theme too Please share your opinion on the one you prefer between those two generations, keeping in mind it remains very personal! Cheers, Mark PS: Here is another link back in 2011 from Murcielagoboy giving his opinion on that matter ( patek.watchprosite.com )
 
 ________________________________________________________________________


Appendix: the 6 patents behind the CH 29-535 PS movement (From Patek Philippe's website)

IMPROVED SYNCHRONIZATION BETWEEN THE CLUTCH LEVER AND THE BLOCKING-LEVER

Ordinarily, the clutch lever and the blocking-lever are synchronized by the column wheel. The engineers of the CH 29-535 PS eliminated this intermediate step by fitting the clutch lever with a finger piece that directly synchronizes both the clutch lever and the blocking-lever. This solution simplifies and improves the precision adjustment of the control sequences because the watchmaker only has to adjust one point instead of two as was the case in the past. Moreover, this approach suppresses the jump of the chronograph hand when time measurements are started and stopped.

IMPROVED PENETRATION ADJUSTMENT BETWEEN THE CLUTCH AND THE CHRONOGRAPH WHEEL

The adjustment between the teeth of the clutch wheel and the teeth of the chronograph wheel is performed by a large eccentric column wheel cap, working directly with the tip of the clutch lever instead of the conventional eccentric placed next to the clutch wheel. This new system enables a more precise adjustment of the penetration between the clutch and the chronograph wheel.

SELF-SETTING RETURN TO ZERO HAMMERS

The reset hammers of the chronograph counter are equipped with a self-setting system that makes it unnecessary to mechanically adjust the minute hammer function and thus increases the reliability of the mechanism.

OPTIMIZED TOOTH PROFILE

The wheels of the chronograph mechanism feature an exclusive patented tooth profile (presented for the first time in 2005 when the ultra-thin caliber CHR 27-525 PS split-seconds chronograph was launched). It eliminates the risk of hand jump in both directions when starting a measurement ; limits the quivering motion of the chronograph hand ; increases energy transmission efficiency, and reduces friction as well as wear in the movement.

PIERCED-OUT MINUTECOUNTER CAM

A new minute-counter cam was created with a slot to prevent abrupt blocking in response to the reset command and therefore eliminates hand quivering.



This message has been edited by Mark in Paris on 2015-05-07 02:47:25

No message body

I hope you don't mind I created a new thread as I had prepared it already and thought having a wider discussion could be interesting for everyone of us

Good hunt H' !

Cheers, Mark

Thanks a lot Kari, I'm glad your appreciated it.

It is the kind of interrogation many of us have when dealing with Patek Philippe chronographs and I hope they'll be able to refer to this thread if they need advice.

Cheers Kari,

Mark

I am emailing it to myself to reread-I am sure I will find things later that I missed at first.

and just focused on different issues. It is part of the pleasure I think to discover what we like (or don't) about a watch.

There may be some details we didn't notice and we don't want to know about
To answer your size question, I think:

The CH 27-70 was already used in other watches (it was the Patek Chronograph movement) and was naturally chosen for the 5070 and 5970.

I think that, beside the question of the movement, they independently worked on how the two watches should look.
My guess is that they are not targeting the same clients and are not worn the same way.Thus, the 5070 could have been designed to match every type of clothes (casual or dressy) and could be used as an everyday wearer. The beginning of the bigger sized cases could help Patek going that way.

On the other hand, the 5970 is meant to be a more conservative watch, maybe for an older client target and, hence, keeping it at 40mm. The more important thickness would have made it huge in 42mm by the way.

That's how I see thing.

Today, the 5270 remains quite close to its predecessor whereas the 5170 is clearly choosing to refer to the old chronographs I mentionned in my original post. Hence, the 39.4mm.

Cheers, Mark

Great analysis. Great post.

As said, the 5170 has a better movement in terms of " technicity ". But in terms of finish, the way the bridges are designed, you feel it will be a movement which will be produced in bigger volumes.

The dials... You did well to post dials of some Patek Vintage Chronos. They had character. Their subdials were correctly aligned.

Now, the fact that the 5170 subdials are below a 3 / 9 line is really weird, in terms of aesthetics. If you see a triangle between the subdials and the Patek signature, it i a totally crashed triangle.

The use of black for the new dial is a good idea, but the dial configuration changed, is too simple, lacks character. The new black Rattrapante is another league, but another pleasure, too. THAT one is something.

Not that the 5070 is perfect, as I already stated. But it is cool, with all its flaws, and it has flaws!

To sum my opinion, Patek didn't do better with the 5170, except technically. Will this be enough?

Best, and thanks for this excellent post, Mark.

Sorry you had to write your answer a second time, I thought this post was worth doing after Hspee's question yesterday.

You know I wasn't that much a vintage guy but, concerning vintage chronos, I've been reading about them lately and some of the dial layout I could see on pictures only are absolutley unrivalled. They were also much smaller (33 or 36mm) and maybe it has an influence on the way it looks, I don't know...

I also prefered the 5170's dial with its scale. I would have prefered the black version kept it maybe. In the mean time, with that satin black color, would have it be looking too small that way ?

I also think I prefer the thin printings (subdials, numerals etc) of the WG and silvery dial version. In the mean time, I think that their are as many tastes as collectors.

Anyway the 5370 is perfection to me too, and shows th epotential of a chronograph black dial.

This being said, don't get me wrong, I love the 5070 too and I perfectly understand you points

Cheers Nicolas, Mark

It is such an interesting topic.

Yes, I will have to see it in the flesh, and check how the movement is finished, but I have the intuition the 5370P is the new reference in terms of chronogaphs. Which was, in my opinion, of course, not the case with the 5170.

Best,

Nicolas

Great post again Mark and thanks for including my wrist shot...Cheers,

Your wristshot deserved it, thanks for sharing them with us!

Cheers, Mark



This message has been edited by Mark in Paris on 2015-05-11 09:47:13

I do think I will be tempted by the black dial 5170.  I disliked the first yellow gold version, the second white gold variant with arabics was better and the third iteration may catch me.  However, I have a 5070R and think my move my well be to get the G version or if I can stomach the price the P.  Having the 5070 full set would be a bit of a dream.

Dave

They look so beautiful...

Opportunity...

Best,

nicolas

No message body

Patek chronographs both 5070 & 5170 are good looking 

and so difficult to choose!

Thanks a lot for your kind words geross, I'm gladd you enjoyed it.

Cheers, mark

in contradiction of many other members I am less interested in the technical aspects of a watch than in the way they apeal to me, not that I don't have the knowledge of the tech specs but at the end they come on a second basis if I have to decide wether I like a watch or not.

In this case the 42mm of the 5070 (R or P) where more important for me than the 5170's 39.5mm, also the blue dial of the platinum was more convincing, of course I was lead this way by a good friend who has a 5070 and the fact that I could wear it some times makes a decision a bit biased at the end   , so this went on for years (5 or 6 can't just remember it)  till a few weeks ago the opportunity came by to lay my hands on a 5070P, all lights went green and I took the plunch, not regretting it for a second.

There's no doubt this is the "king" in my Patek collection   !!

No message body

This is a fantastic move and I hope you'll share many of your future experiences with this watch with us


Back to your adequate answer, I feel that, for most of us, it finally ends at the same place: does it attract me or not, do I want it very much or not? etc...

Some integrate more or less objective creteria and make a decision.


You followed your way and I envy you very much

Cheers P@trick,

Mark

In the end it always comes down to, does the final product excite/speak to you.

especially on your last sentence. What can seem too simple may also last longer.

The size is indeed another criteria and has a huge importance on the way we live with the watch on our wrist.

Thanks for your comments H' 

Cheers, Mark

Gents, 4 years ago, I also posted a comprehensive (words only) review of the 5170 VS 5070 debate on this site... 

Thanks a lot for your words and for your link!

I just found it and added it at the end of my post as it is interesting to read such opinions.

Glad your appreciated this thread MB

Cheers, Mark

probably my favorite posts  … the  iconic 5070 vs  … something else

When there is 5970 or 5070 inside the title it is very exciting

And thanks a lot Bruno for all these fantastic pictures you share with us and that perfectly illustrate our beloved watches!

Cheers, Mark

however as most of us know we often collect with our heart and not our brain