• We would like to welcome Pete and Harry as an official Affiliate Vendor. Pete and Harry, co-founded by Erik (EFV) one of our long time members and friends, offers a wide variety of products, clothes, watches and accessories, antique, vintage, “pre-loved” and new - all at unparalleled prices. Please visit their new thread and give them a warm welcome.

  • STYLE. COMMUNITY. GREAT CLOTHING.

    Bored of counting likes on social networks? At Styleforum, you’ll find rousing discussions that go beyond strings of emojis.

    Click Here to join Styleforum's thousands of style enthusiasts today!

Nickd

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 13, 2016
Messages
989
Reaction score
1,296
For you, and given the two you are keeping, I’d add the Reverso and be done.

Starting from scratch, 16710, Speedy and a medium duo face Reverso.

From what I have, Sea Dweller, Monaco and 60s Seamaster 30.

I think about this fairly often, but never actually end up selling any, I don’t need to really. I had to return the Explorer 2 I got, so a replacement for that may be the next buy for me.

In the interim I also like messing about with cheaper watches, to that end I got a brace of 34mm Seiko 5s today for a song, this one is up and working already.

86188691-63F1-42B1-84D5-B6456837B034.jpeg
 

TheFoo

THE FOO
Dubiously Honored
Joined
Feb 11, 2007
Messages
24,544
Reaction score
6,114
I agree with every single point you’ve made. The one point I would add is that the fonts are also nicer on the 3448 — slightly more refined and less computerised.

Cumulatively all those small differences make a watch that is poorly designed, for any watch, but especially when compared to the 3448.

There is a pattern with Patek where almost all of the current line up are worse versions of models from the archive. I don’t know how their design team works but it seems it has been institutionalised in a way that systemically leads to bad design outcomes. Perhaps management or the owners interfere in the process too much which stifles the designers? I can’t imagine any good designer actively making design decisions that essentially take an archive model and make it worse.
I posted an article from A Collected Man on watch typography a few days/weeks ago. Very astute and in-depth observations. One could argue, as another poster suggested, that Patek is purposefully choosing very ubiquitous/anonymous fonts. That means something different today versus 50 years ago. Look at the reverse: where the likes of Lange and Hermes come up with their own custom typography. To me, this ultimately gives the impression of a far more commercial and marketing-driven watch, whatever the other aesthetic good and bad. I’d rather the font choice appear more aloof if that means a watch that isn’t over-slick.

The 3448 in question happens to use font consistent across the logo, date read-out, numerals, etc. However, with most vintage Pateks, you’ll find this is not the case.

Overall, I obviously disagree with a lot of what people have said about modern Patek and the 5396 specifically. Much of the criticism, if I had to guess, is more about taking down Patek and less about anything actually wrong. For example, take “finishing quality”. It is commonly lamented that Patek finishing isn’t what it once was. However, nobody who has ever inspected a 3448 or a Patek of similar vintage could honestly say it is, in the totality, better finished than the company’s current watches. Overall, case, dial, and movement finishing in today’s Pateks is far more refined and precise. Not even debatable. For instance, you might see more evidence of machine marks here and there, but the chamfers are sharper and more consistent. Does that trade-off make for better or worse finishing? Holistically, today’s production looks more refined than the old stuff. No Patek has ever been made that would meet the hand-finishing standards that Dufour employs today.

From a design perspective, I see the 5396 as a nicely executed evolution of the 3448. The read-out of the date is harmonized/improved and the addition of a 24-hour indicator is highly useful.

Picking this back up because I think it’s an interesting topic and I think some of the other responses didn’t trace the connection to watches.

There’s no mystery what I think about this urban development project. And I suspect many others here would agree that a fake town with fake buildings and fake history is not tasteful. However, I rarely see folks apply the same judgment to watches. Why the difference? I don’t really see one.
 
Last edited:

TheFoo

THE FOO
Dubiously Honored
Joined
Feb 11, 2007
Messages
24,544
Reaction score
6,114
My only issue with the 3448, is the lugs are not my favorite. However, maybe their more compact and angular appearance works better with the look of the recessed crown. To me it's dial is so much more appealing than that of the 5396.

I do prefer the lugs of the 5396, but maybe its because those are generally the lugs I prefer on a Calatrava. However the dial is a big miss for me. I suppose it's nitpicking, but anything in that price range would need to be perfect for me to pull the trigger on it. The biggest fail for me is that date cutting into the subdial. It just pisses me off. It could have been a really nice nice, but not perfect dial, if they had nixed the 24 hour indicator, and put the date on the subdial. Also it appears as though the subdial is shifted so high that even when the hands are at 10 and 2 they obscure the 24. Sure we all know it's 24, but it seems inelegant and sloppy. While on the 3448, when the hands are at 10 and 2, one can still see most of the number 31 for the date. The minute markers and hour markers are fine, but I'm really preferring the more delicate ones on the 3448. To me they vintage version looks more elegant, although, I'm sure the minute markers are easier to read at a glance on the 5396. I'm also not a fan of how they decided to have a big bolder "Patek Philippe" name at the top, but separated Geneve from it with the day and month windows. Sure, I get that its marketing to have the name be the first thing you see, especially when someone posts it on social medial. But I prefer the smaller more discreet PP with Geneve under it, and its placement on the 3448. In addition, I know some people like a seconds hand, maybe it's generally preferred, but on a watch like this I don't need it. I like the clean look of no seconds hand on a dressy piece.
I strongly disagree on the dial. The date window is actually a big improvement in my book: (1) easier to read, (2) harmonizes the full date read-out (everything in a window rather than windows-and-a-dial), and (3) creates room for the 24-hour indicator (which makes sense to be in a dial format, consistent with the hour/minute/seconds read-out). Not sure why it matters that it cuts into the 24-hour indicator. It cuts approximately halfway though the outer band of the sub-dial, so there’s no awkward spaces or disruption to my eye. Meanwhile, if you’ve ever had to use or set the time on an annual or perpetual calendar, you’d experience the functional benefit of a 24-hour indicator.

The one thing I don’t love is how the ‘24’ in the 24-hour indicator is obstructed by the short ends of the hour and minute hands. However, even if a slight flaw or compromise, I don’t see how it adds up to the laughable failure of design that many are characterizing here.
 

TheFoo

THE FOO
Dubiously Honored
Joined
Feb 11, 2007
Messages
24,544
Reaction score
6,114
On “dress” watches: there’s a difference between a more formal watch that only looks right with a suit and the broader category of watches worn on a strap that aren’t sport or tool watches. The latter can easily be worn casually with t-shirt and jeans while the former cannot.
 

jischwar

Distinguished Member
Joined
Mar 12, 2012
Messages
4,243
Reaction score
7,979
On “dress” watches: there’s a difference between a more formal watch that only looks right with a suit and the broader category of watches worn on a strap that aren’t sport or tool watches. The latter can easily be worn casually with t-shirt and jeans while the former cannot.
Mind providing some examples on the former vs the latter?
 

Drek Galloche

Timed Out
Timed Out
Joined
Apr 22, 2021
Messages
429
Reaction score
403
Breguet numerals font is a downmarket marketing ? But generic font is more exclusive and aloof? I dont follow.
 

TheFoo

THE FOO
Dubiously Honored
Joined
Feb 11, 2007
Messages
24,544
Reaction score
6,114
Breguet numerals font is a downmarket marketing ? But generic font is more exclusive and aloof? I dont follow.
What? Who said that? All I said was that there is something to be said for aloof/generic font choice, not that anything is more “exclusive” or definitively better versus worse.
 

TheFoo

THE FOO
Dubiously Honored
Joined
Feb 11, 2007
Messages
24,544
Reaction score
6,114
Mind providing some examples on the former vs the latter?
I wear my 5296 with jeans, no problem. You could do the same with any number of Pateks or Langes or JLCs, even if they are called “dress watches”. But what about a Tank LC or Golden Ellipse? Harder to pull-off.
 

jischwar

Distinguished Member
Joined
Mar 12, 2012
Messages
4,243
Reaction score
7,979
I wear my 5296 with jeans, no problem. You could do the same with any number of Pateks or Langes or JLCs, even if they are called “dress watches”. But what about a Tank LC or Golden Ellipse? Harder to pull-off.
Lot of grey area, but I see where you are going
 

Dino944

Distinguished Member
Joined
Dec 24, 2011
Messages
6,533
Reaction score
5,820
I strongly disagree on the dial. The date window is actually a big improvement in my book: (1) easier to read, (2) harmonizes the full date read-out (everything in a window rather than windows-and-a-dial), and (3) creates room for the 24-hour indicator (which makes sense to be in a dial format, consistent with the hour/minute/seconds read-out). Not sure why it matters that it cuts into the 24-hour indicator. It cuts approximately halfway though the outer band of the sub-dial, so there’s no awkward spaces or disruption to my eye. Meanwhile, if you’ve ever had to use or set the time on an annual or perpetual calendar, you’d experience the functional benefit of a 24-hour indicator.

The one thing I don’t love is how the ‘24’ in the 24-hour indicator is obstructed by the short ends of the hour and minute hands. However, even if a slight flaw or compromise, I don’t see how it adds up to the laughable failure of design that many are characterizing here.
Well it wouldn't be the first time you've strongly disagreed with someone on this thread. :rotflmao:

All kidding aside, you can justify their design decisions, and yet I still find the date window cutting into the subdial very distasteful. It just looks like an afterthought to me. Oooops, where do we put the date now that we put in this 24 hour indicator where the date was..."Oh, f*ck it, just cut another window in the dial, who cares where it goes." Overall, there are just too many details that I've already mentioned that make the 3448 a far more appealing design to my eye, however YMMV.
 

TheFoo

THE FOO
Dubiously Honored
Joined
Feb 11, 2007
Messages
24,544
Reaction score
6,114
Well it wouldn't be the first time you've strongly disagreed with someone on this thread. :rotflmao:

All kidding aside, you can justify their design decisions, and yet I still find the date window cutting into the subdial very distasteful. It just looks like an afterthought to me. Oooops, where do we put the date now that we put in this 24 hour indicator where the date was..."Oh, f*ck it, just cut another window in the dial, who cares where it goes." Overall, there are just too many details that I've already mentioned that make the 3448 a far more appealing design to my eye, however YMMV.
Ah, and this isn’t your first time bashing Patek.

People obviously overlook worse sorts of things when they want to. Langes have cut-off numerals and dials all over the place. The awkward dial overlap on the Lange 1 is somehow a “feature”. Honestly, I still don’t see how the date window on the 5396 is even a problem compared to those flaws. It does not disrupt any numbers. It does not create any awkward spaces. It is a common and logical place to put a date. It is scaled similarly to the hour markers, with which it completes a circle around the dial. Most importantly for a complicated watch: it reads easily.

And who is more guilty of the inferior aping of archived models than Cartier? There is not a single model they currently sell that isn’t a worse version of a historical piece. Moreover, the mechanical side of the equation for Cartier is quite so-so. At least the likes of Patek are making functional and mechanical improvements along with their design iterations.

I can understood why something like the 5396 isn’t exactly to everyone’s taste and there are certainly things one can nitpick, but I think when people are attacking it for being a critical failure of design, something else is going on.
 
Last edited:

UnFacconable

Distinguished Member
Joined
Jan 22, 2007
Messages
2,930
Reaction score
4,036
I posted an article from A Collected Man on watch typography a few days/weeks ago. Very astute and in-depth observations. One could argue, as another poster suggested, that Patek is purposefully choosing very ubiquitous/anonymous fonts.
I read that article and found the following interesting (discussing the evolution of Patek's 3940 over a 20-year period:
As the reference evolves, this brand signature becomes gradually larger and more muted, whilst the subdials also begin to evolve to a more contemporary font. As a result, if you hold a 3940 from 1985 and one produced twenty years later, they are on the surface, almost identical. However, the subtle differences in typeface size and font mean that one feels distinctly like a vintage piece, whilst the other feels much more modern. Beyond the obvious element of rarity, this is why collectors have tended to gravitate towards the earlier executions of this perpetual calendar, as they speak to a certain Patek Philippe aesthetic which is long lost today.
I will grant you that it's entirely possible that Patek has chosen modern generic fonts, including the much-reviled Arial, out of some sort of purposeful approach but that doesn't mean people have to like it.

I can understood why something like the 5396 isn’t exactly to everyone’s taste and there are certainly things one can nitpick, but I think when people are attacking it for being a critical failure of design, something else is going on.
You don't appear to be aware of the arbitrary nature of your commentary. You criticize Lange for its flashy finishing without stopping to acknowledge that in 2021 almost the entirety of finishing, beyond the very basic machining done by the likes of Rolex and ETA, is all for show. Pick your Patek - it doesn't have a better service life or performance than the simplest Rolex coming off the robotic assembly line in 2021. If there is a non-aesthetic benefit to Patek's superior finishing in 2021, I don't think I've heard of it. Of course you can choose to eschew gold chatons, blued screws, etc. in favor of the finishing details you like for whatever reason you like, but that's based on your personal priorities. Yet you continue to stridently argue that Patek's finishing choices are somehow objectively superior to Lange and others.

You talk about Poundbury as if the appropriate reference is Lange, but in reality Poundbury represents all mechanical watches built in the last 50 years. There is no reason in 2021 for anyone to produce a mechanical watch, least of all one with the sort of savoir faire that Patek is so proud of. You are certainly more than welcome to enjoy Patek and to prefer Patek to Lange for all the reasons you do, but don't be surprised if other people disagree with your arbitrarily justified positions and have their own arbitrarily justified positions. I know you will return to your stock response that I'm arguing against discernment and any objective criteria, but that's a weak argument and I think you know that by now.

There are many different paths to watch enthusiasm. Everyone else here is fairly transparent about their preferences but you seem to be alone in arguing that whatever arbitrary preference you seem to have at the moment is somehow objectively superior and beyond dispute. If you were sitting on a 3448, I have no doubt that you would reverse your argument in favor of it over the 5396 and would be telling us all about its superior balance, font style and unobstructed dial elements. You are certainly free to prefer the 5396, but don't call it Patek bashing when everyone else prefers the 3448. It often feels like you're on a HS debate team and feel compelled to argue an arbitrary position to the death. It's cool, you do you. But don't be surprised that it's entirely unconvincing.
 

Ebitdaddy

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2019
Messages
550
Reaction score
963
Whether you prefer Patonko's Phillip or Apeman Pigucci we can all agree the Millenary is underrated. Thx for coming to my ted talk. Also yes PP finishing sucks at the price range VS independents but you can also flip them in 2 days if you ever need to sell. So buying one used and flipping when you get bored is unlikely to lose you much if anything.

IMG_3531.jpg
 
Last edited:

Styleforum is proudly sponsored by

Featured Sponsor

How often do you get a haircut?

  • Every 2 weeks

  • Every 3 weeks

  • Once a month

  • Every 6 weeks or longer


Results are only viewable after voting.

Related Threads

Forum statistics

Threads
464,201
Messages
10,026,835
Members
209,414
Latest member
Eugenethur
Top