ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX
3 November 2024, 03:53 PM | #151 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Feb 2020
Location: UK
Posts: 359
|
TS's Take on the Cubitus Release
Quote:
All I meant was that it’s hard for me to imagine anyone choosing this over the Nautilus, given the choice between the two (and perhaps not having at least one already in your collection). But for the sake of this discussion, let me rephrase: Personally, I wouldn’t pick the Cubitus over the Nautilus. It’s not that deep, my friend, and to be fair - I do think it looks great on your wrist. P.S we agree on RM so it’s all good Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
|
3 November 2024, 11:43 PM | #152 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Feb 2018
Real Name: Roger Lococco
Location: Asia
Watch: 126719BLRO Pepsi
Posts: 2,975
|
Stern is getting roasted on the Internets.
https://youtu.be/2ABQAH8qE0A?si=IqzlI1eZLOhTs-ld Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
__________________
116500 Daytona White Dial 126710BLNR GMT II 126719BLRO Blue Dial Pepsi GMT II |
4 November 2024, 12:21 AM | #153 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: los angeles
Posts: 314
|
To summarize TS reign at PP: cancel SS version of the most popular and recognizable version of Genta’s design, reduce water resistance to 30m on the rest of the collection and then turn what is left into Santos. Job well done!
|
4 November 2024, 12:35 AM | #154 |
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: United States
Watch: Rolex and Patek
Posts: 11,268
|
I would counter with the size of the movement being so tiny in the case. How hard would it have been to design just a tad larger square plates. Every new Lange comes with a specifically designed movement to fit the case.
|
4 November 2024, 12:45 AM | #155 | |
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: United States
Watch: Rolex and Patek
Posts: 11,268
|
Quote:
|
|
4 November 2024, 12:48 AM | #156 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: Europe
Posts: 3,485
|
You should have started with: put his (now ex-) wife in charge of design.
|
4 November 2024, 01:00 AM | #157 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: Europe
Posts: 3,485
|
Quote:
Contrast Stern's interview which was not the first one that has been debatable with some of Romain Gauthier's interviews, for example. Night and day. |
|
4 November 2024, 01:01 AM | #158 | |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Sunderland
Posts: 1,314
|
Quote:
Ditch loads of AD’s and loyal customers Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
__________________
Instagram @scurfawatches |
|
4 November 2024, 03:40 AM | #159 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Aug 2022
Location: Tenerife
Posts: 653
|
The water resistance hasn't actually been reduced, it's been realigned and reclassified . The actual depth is the same as the others used to be. Just a certification thing more than anything
|
4 November 2024, 05:12 AM | #160 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: May 2017
Location: cambridge
Posts: 2,339
|
correct, i agree, the movement is beyond funny.
|
4 November 2024, 05:14 AM | #161 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: May 2017
Location: cambridge
Posts: 2,339
|
i'd say a hedging against warranty cases...ohhh you have a water damage....you surely have dived with the watch. or you swam too fast, which put the effective pressure over 30 bar....
|
4 November 2024, 06:11 AM | #162 |
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
Join Date: Jul 2022
Location: Budapest, HU
Watch: 17000B, B+W
Posts: 2,329
|
|
4 November 2024, 06:22 AM | #163 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: May 2017
Location: cambridge
Posts: 2,339
|
yes sorry and thanks, you are of course correct! i am notoriously bad with numbers. it is an affliction rampant in my profession:::)))
|
4 November 2024, 09:14 AM | #164 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: los angeles
Posts: 314
|
water resistance has been reduced from at least 100m to 30m, full stop!!! The rest is poetry...
|
4 November 2024, 01:24 PM | #165 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Aug 2022
Location: Tenerife
Posts: 653
|
Quote:
where as generally 30m WR means don't go out in the rain. WR ratings had always been a fudged nonsense. If it's guaranteed 30m then you're pretty much covered for everything unless you're a deep sat diver. There's a lot of dick swinging over WR but only because it wasn't to be trusted and because it couldn't be trusted buyers went for 5000m WR just so they felt safe to wear it in the shower.. Again from my understanding PP haven't changed anything in their manufacturing to suddenly go from 120m to 30m just being more honest. Sent from my Pixel 8 using Tapatalk |
|
4 November 2024, 03:06 PM | #166 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Aug 2022
Location: I
Posts: 177
|
Quote:
An Aquanaut that was rated 120m is the same timepiece as one that is today guaranteed to 30m. PP jas not changed anything in the constitution of the Aquanaut for example. PP guarantee that you can actually go 30m underwater with such timepiece, which is enough to have a shower, swim and dive to 30m. It just takes time for people to accept that they can use their watch for almost everything except diving deeper than 30m. |
|
4 November 2024, 03:51 PM | #167 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: los angeles
Posts: 314
|
Quote:
|
|
4 November 2024, 05:01 PM | #168 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Oct 2020
Location: HK
Posts: 200
|
This water resistance issue has been fudged for too long and honestly I welcome PP's clarification on the topic as one of the market leaders. It never made sense to me how 30m water resistance means only splash proof... at least PP has now come out and said 30m = safe to do diving at 30m for example.
I wish that the rest of the industry would follow suit and get aligned on the standards. Honestly I doubt 99% of watch enthusiasts would reach anywhere near <30M. Even when rec diving, it is unlikely you spend much time at 30m deep |
4 November 2024, 05:12 PM | #169 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Aug 2022
Location: I
Posts: 177
|
What exactly was corrected down?
The Aquanauts or Nautiluses did not physically change in any way since and because of that announcement. If you so wish, you can take your newly acquired 2024 5167 and have it tested and compared to a 2015 5167. You should then be reassured (or disappointed) that TS did not correct it down. Based on the questions people asked when Nautiluses and Aquanauts were rated 120m/60m, I consider a more harmonized and simple communication to be an improvement. Obviously, a clearer and simpler communication still takes time to be correctly understood and accepted. With time, this should help people understand that their 60m 5712 can actually be used underwater. |
4 November 2024, 05:57 PM | #170 |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Sunderland
Posts: 1,314
|
My opinion of the 30m water resistance is the testing, now it could be done after the final casing using a bench tester, they have a built in compressor, this would save huge amounts of time, here is my bench tester
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
__________________
Instagram @scurfawatches |
4 November 2024, 07:25 PM | #171 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2020
Location: Scotland
Posts: 511
|
This was PP’s response to my query re 30m soon after they changed the rating…
“The answer to your question is yes. The new unified standard of water-resistance is set at 30 metres for all watches certified as water resistant. This measure enables Patek Philippe to guarantee the same performance level across all the models concerned. It also enables us to provide clarity as to the day-to-day activities in which clients can engage while wearing their watch: washing their hands, showering, bathing, swimming and other aquatic activities, including diving to a depth of 30 m. However, as you also mentioned, watches fitted with a leather strap should not be exposed to water in order to retain the strap’s appearance and prevent any damage to it. We do also encourage annual water-resistance tests, which will be completed at an authorized Patek Philippe Service Centre, to ensure your watch remains at this level functionality.” It would seem reasonable if one were to claim water damage that they might well ask you for proof you undertook such a test before swimming. Etc. NB the watch has to be rated as water resistant in the first place so keep you minute repeaters dry! |
5 November 2024, 12:03 AM | #172 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: los angeles
Posts: 314
|
Quote:
Now, as to the poetry for people who bought the most idiotic “justification “ ever. Take Rolex, does one have any issues taking 100m GMT to 100m? I do it with my Pepsi all the time, something like 50m usually. Do I need clarification and annual water testing? Absolutely no. It just works, that is luxury! PP used to think it needed to complete with Rolex and therefore slapped 100m WR to match Rolex. It was never capable of that. Just the thinness of watch would have indicated that. It was always puzzling how such thin watch could have had comparable WR of much thicker Rolex. However, people thought it is Patek, premium manufacturer so they must have figured it out. They didn’t, they lied. Now we come to my comment, TS could have improved WR to the claimed number. Instead, he chose to put round movement into square watch, sorry, meant to say he downgraded WR to the lower number. And that is PP way under TS!!! |
|
5 November 2024, 12:11 AM | #173 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Aug 2022
Location: I
Posts: 177
|
Quote:
TS, or PP, did not change anything to the structure of the timepieces that were rated 120m. How is that downgrading? |
|
5 November 2024, 12:47 AM | #174 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: los angeles
Posts: 314
|
Quote:
If u need proof, login to the PP website, and check specs for yourself. Specs are there for a reason. PP doesn’t believe its watch can safely go much beyond 30m. Do you need more proof???? |
|
5 November 2024, 04:57 AM | #175 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Bay Area
Posts: 868
|
The water resistance rating going down, and the arguments TS or Patek is making for the downgrade is laughable.
I don't understand the arguments here, but none look good: (1) 120M was never achievable. It was just a marketing ploy to make the watch inline with other "sports" brands. It was always only 30M. So it was basically a lie. (2) It really is 120M, but we're baking in a cushion so people don't go diving in the thing. That's one heck of a cushion....90M of cushion. This doesn't sound or smell right. (3) The entire industry is lying about their water resistance. All watches 100M or more are really just around 30M. Okay, that's easily tested, and I think it has been. There would have been many many lawsuits or claims of fraud if the entire industry was kidding itself. (4) Patek has discovered a new measurement system, something heretofore never discovered by human kind. In this new system, 120M is really 30M and the rest goes from there. We all know the probability of this being correct (other than in TS' mind). The fact is if the Nautilus was originally 120M and now is rated for 30M, that's a downgrade no matter what TS says this means for swim-ability. Whether 30M means you can swim in it or not, it doesn't matter. That's a straw man argument as to what the watch is actually rated for, not what you can do with it. If Patek is calling out other watchmakers for claiming 3 bar on a luxury watch with a push down crown, but also saying to owners not to swim with it, I get that, but that doesn't change the fact that you had a watch "rated" and "advertised" as 120M that is now being rated at 30M. This being a sports watch with the name "Nautilus" on it. ALS says 120M for the Odysseus, and I am assuming that is not a lie. Omega says 300M, and I am assuming that's not a lie (with METAS, it is certified as being correct to even more, since testing has to be above 100% of the rated WR). What Patek is doing lately, it just makes your head ache after awhile. |
5 November 2024, 06:00 AM | #176 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Aug 2022
Location: I
Posts: 177
|
Quote:
The change in communication is not related to a change in construction of the timepiece. |
|
5 November 2024, 06:40 PM | #177 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 608
|
Patek and AP VC have never been proper robust sports and diving watches. They’re all too delicate. Need to buy a Rolex for that.
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|
*Banners
Of The Month*
This space is provided to horological resources.