When did Patek Phillippe stop hand finishing their watches?

[mafoofan]

Very recent 324 SC from a 5296:



Bad iPhone pic, but the long chamfered edges appear smooth and don't appear to have any of the machine marks as seen in some of the examples above.

[mafoofan]

Very recent 324 SC from a 5296:



Bad iPhone pic, but the long chamfered edges appear smooth and don't appear to have any of the machine marks as seen in some of the examples above.

[tyler1980]

Originally Posted by thomaspp

Correct me if I’m wrong but Patek seal requirements are made up by Patek itself and Geneva seal requirements are actual objective criteria created by a third party.... how can one even compare?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

thats the problem though. Everything i have read basically said that a watch could meet the minimum requirements and get a geneva seal. No special points for exceeding them. That puts a lesser watch on the same level as a superior watch as they have the same seal. VC as a top tier brand dont even have every watch carry a geneva seal, just certain ones. Patek applies the same standard to every single watch. Hardly seems fair when one brand cherrypicks models and one has the same standard for everything.

Plus AFAIK there was no requirement on rate testing of the movement when they left the geneva seal. that might have now changed though as i thought i read something about the geneva seal upping their game after patek left and they changed some things.

from an article...
"The Patek Philippe Seal goes far beyond the requirements for the Geneva Seal and addresses the two major complaints about it: that its criteria deal only with the watch movement and that they are only concerned with movement materials and finishing, not rate performance. In its press release announcing its seal, Patek takes a clear shot at both the Geneva Seal and COSC, Switzerland’s independent chronometer testing body, both of which judge uncased movements, not complete watches.It is indisputable,” Patek Philippe says, “that a hallmark of quality must apply to the whole watch. This fact called for a new seal that defines all competencies and features of relevance to the manufacture, precision, and lifelong maintenance of a Patek Philippe timepiece. The rules apply to all of the manufacture’s movements regardless of their complexity. It not only applies to the movements: it encompasses cases, dials, hands, pushers, spring bars for straps, etc., as well as the aesthetic and functional aspects of finished watches. Moreover, given that a Patek Philippe watch is first and foremost an instrument that measures time, the Patek Philippe Seal makes a binding statement regarding rate accuracy.”

Patek’s technical requirements are stricter than COSC’s. For calibers with diameters of 20 mm or more, the accuracy must be within -3 and +2 seconds per day. For calibers with diameters of less than 20 mm, the accuracy must be within -5 and +4 seconds per day. The requirements for tourbillon watches are even tighter. Patek will perform its rate tests in several phases of the manufacturing process. The final tests are conducted on fully assembled watches.

What’s more, under the terms of its seal, Patek Philippe offers the watch industry’s first promise of lifetime service on the watch. The firm pledges that it will service and restore every watch it has made since its founding in 1839 in Geneva. (The requirements for the Patek Philippe Seal, and other information about it, are available at www.patek.com.)

[Russell996]

Originally Posted by mafoofan

I've been reading the requirements of both seals. Interesting that the Patek requirements, though overall broader and more strinngent, are more vague when comes to polishing bridges--edges must be chamfered and polished. However, the Geneva requirements specify that all signs of machine tooling must be removed. If I'm reading this distinction correctly, it might allow for the more poorly finished chamfers/bevels shown above.

Originally Posted by thomaspp

Correct me if I’m wrong but Patek seal requirements are made up by Patek itself and Geneva seal requirements are actual objective criteria created by a third party.... how can one even compare?

As per my previous post I can categorically say my Geneva seal 240 is not finished to the same standard as my Patek seal 240 and in comparison shows unfinished edges. If my Geneva seal piece meets the standard which of course it does then it would seem no wonder Patek wished to try to improve the standard.

[kunlun]

It's always possible, as others have mentioned, that Patek simply is releasing watches that don't meet either the Geneva or the Patek seal.

[thomaspp]

Originally Posted by enjoythemusic

Some personal feelings / thoughts after decades of Patek...
Personally, left the Patek market years back

Thanks for this post - very interesting personal insight and speaking from the heart. You are not alone my friend.

[thomaspp]

Originally Posted by tyler1980

thats the problem though. Everything i have read basically said that a watch could meet the minimum requirements and get a geneva seal. No special points for exceeding them. That puts a lesser watch on the same level as a superior watch as they have the same seal. VC as a top tier brand dont even have every watch carry a geneva seal, just certain ones. Patek applies the same standard to every single watch. Hardly seems fair when one brand cherrypicks models and one has the same standard for everything.

Plus AFAIK there was no requirement on rate testing of the movement when they left the geneva seal. that might have now changed though as i thought i read something about the geneva seal upping their game after patek left and they changed some things.

from an article...
"The Patek Philippe Seal goes far beyond the requirements for the Geneva Seal and addresses the two major complaints about it: that its criteria deal only with the watch movement and that they are only concerned with movement materials and finishing, not rate performance. In its press release announcing its seal, Patek takes a clear shot at both the Geneva Seal and COSC, Switzerland’s independent chronometer testing body, both of which judge uncased movements, not complete watches.It is indisputable,” Patek Philippe says, “that a hallmark of quality must apply to the whole watch. This fact called for a new seal that defines all competencies and features of relevance to the manufacture, precision, and lifelong maintenance of a Patek Philippe timepiece. The rules apply to all of the manufacture’s movements regardless of their complexity. It not only applies to the movements: it encompasses cases, dials, hands, pushers, spring bars for straps, etc., as well as the aesthetic and functional aspects of finished watches. Moreover, given that a Patek Philippe watch is first and foremost an instrument that measures time, the Patek Philippe Seal makes a binding statement regarding rate accuracy.”

Patek’s technical requirements are stricter than COSC’s. For calibers with diameters of 20 mm or more, the accuracy must be within -3 and +2 seconds per day. For calibers with diameters of less than 20 mm, the accuracy must be within -5 and +4 seconds per day. The requirements for tourbillon watches are even tighter. Patek will perform its rate tests in several phases of the manufacturing process. The final tests are conducted on fully assembled watches.

What’s more, under the terms of its seal, Patek Philippe offers the watch industry’s first promise of lifetime service on the watch. The firm pledges that it will service and restore every watch it has made since its founding in 1839 in Geneva. (The requirements for the Patek Philippe Seal, and other information about it, are available at www.patek.com.)

thanks for this! very interesting indeed.

Originally Posted by Russell996

As per my previous post I can categorically say my Geneva seal 240 is not finished to the same standard as my Patek seal 240 and in comparison shows unfinished edges. If my Geneva seal piece meets the standard which of course it does then it would seem no wonder Patek wished to try to improve the standard.

thanks! You are saying Patek seal is better finished? It is interesting because I have heard the opposite quite a bit actually. What two watches are you comparing?

[mafoofan]

Originally Posted by thomaspp

Correct me if I’m wrong but Patek seal requirements are made up by Patek itself and Geneva seal requirements are actual objective criteria created by a third party.... how can one even compare?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The requirements for each seal are defined by the entity that awards it.

There is no question that Patek awarding their own seal removes an element of impartiality when it comes to inspection and certification, but my point was that Patek's own polishing requirements appear less demanding and specific than for the Geneva Seal, as the latter specifically requires machine tooling marks to be removed whereas the former is silent on the matter. So, even before coming to the question of impartial/independent verification, one must confront the fact that at least in this small way, Patek has given themselves more wiggle room.

All that said, and as a separate matter, I don't see the big deal about third party verification. With the internet, the consumer himself is capable of auditing whether Patek is keeping its promises.

[tom2517]

Originally Posted by thomaspp

Thanks for this post - very interesting personal insight and speaking from the heart. You are not alone my friend.

Yes you are not alone. I have been saying this for years but now I see more and more realizing Patek is not what they used to be. They are the largest producer of haute horological watches and made sacrifices/shortcuts along the way to achieve those production numbers and also fatten their wallets, the Stern family are billionaires don’t forget.

True hand made watches like Dufour and Roger Smith takes too much time to make and none of them gets rich from doing it.

[Russell996]

Originally Posted by thomaspp

thanks! You are saying Patek seal is better finished? It is interesting because I have heard the opposite quite a bit actually. What two watches are you comparing?

I have read many things written by many people with their own agendas, I prefer to do my own investigation where possible and to take nothing as black and white.
5085 240 movement Geneva seal - 2005 piece.
5131 240 movement Patek seal - 2015 piece.
My 5131 Patek seal movement under a loupe is noticeably better finished than my 5085 Geneva seal movement. I am not surprised since they are very different pieces at different price points, having said that it clearly demonstrates that Geneva seal doesn’t guarantee a better finished movement. Both look great without a loupe.

[tom2517]

Originally Posted by Russell996

I have read many things written by many people with their own agendas, I prefer to do my own investigation where possible and to take nothing as black and white.
5085 240 movement Geneva seal - 2005 piece.
5131 240 movement Patek seal - 2015 piece.
My 5131 Patek seal movement under a loupe is noticeably better finished than my 5085 Geneva seal movement. I am not surprised since they are very different pieces at different price points, having said that it clearly demonstrates that Geneva seal doesn’t guarantee a better finished movement. Both look great without a loupe.

To make a conclusion on this we would need a 2015 or recent 240 movement in lower price point under magnification. Otherwise it could be Patek has made an improvement in production technology and not necessarily 240 movement is finished better at higher price point.

[lapince]

Better not to look at movements with a loupe, unless we are talking Dufour, Smith or Voutilainen, then yes they are perfectly finished

[TJMike]

Originally Posted by tyler1980

thats the problem though. Everything i have read basically said that a watch could meet the minimum requirements and get a geneva seal. No special points for exceeding them. That puts a lesser watch on the same level as a superior watch as they have the same seal. VC as a top tier brand dont even have every watch carry a geneva seal, just certain ones. Patek applies the same standard to every single watch. Hardly seems fair when one brand cherrypicks models and one has the same standard for everything.

].)

The only VC that does not have the seal is the SS Fiftysix three hander. All other VC watches have the seal.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[slashd0t]

I inquired back in 2015 about handing finishing on my 5167 and this is what I got back:

Dear Sir,

We thank you very much for your interest in our products.

Please note that „the Geneva stripes „ on the watch model 5167A are semi-automatic, which means by machine with the assistance of an operator.

Here are some others «Hand finishing » that we can find on a watch Ref. 5167 :

· Circular graining on the base plate : by hand
· Smoothing down (decoration on the back of the bridges)
· Chamfering by hand
· Sinking of the holes
· Polishing of the teeth of the wheels
· Polishing the pivots end
· Circular satin finish

Yours faithfully,

Patek Philippe SA
Commercial Dept.

[tom2517]

Originally Posted by slashd0t

I inquired back in 2015 about handing finishing on my 5167 and this is what I got back:

Dear Sir,

We thank you very much for your interest in our products.

Please note that „the Geneva stripes „ on the watch model 5167A are semi-automatic, which means by machine with the assistance of an operator.

Here are some others «Hand finishing » that we can find on a watch Ref. 5167 :

· Circular graining on the base plate : by hand
· Smoothing down (decoration on the back of the bridges)
· Chamfering by hand
· Sinking of the holes
· Polishing of the teeth of the wheels
· Polishing the pivots end
· Circular satin finish

Yours faithfully,

Patek Philippe SA
Commercial Dept.

Well, what is the definition of “by hand”. On Patek’s website the videos shows the chamfering is done with hand holding a machine tool, I suppose one can still call that “by hand”. But it is certainly not the old ways where the chamfering is done with hand holding a wood stick.

[tyler1980]

Originally Posted by TJMike

The only VC that does not have the seal is the SS Fiftysix three hander. All other VC watches have the seal.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

They have been doing more and more recently as just a few years ago it was way less. Not sure of all the requirements but I’m pretty sure the previous gen overseas weren’t (non in house movements maybe being the reason??). They highlight the Geneva seal a lot so it’s reasonable to assume most people think the same standard applies to everything when it doesn’t

There are some other watches (ladies versions I believe) without as well

Maybe a better example is Cartier.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[TJMike]

Originally Posted by tyler1980

They have been doing more and more recently as just a few years ago it was way less. Not sure of all the requirements but I’m pretty sure the previous gen overseas weren’t (non in house movements maybe being the reason??). They highlight the Geneva seal a lot so it’s reasonable to assume most people think the same standard applies to everything when it doesn’t

There are some other watches (ladies versions I believe) without as well

Maybe a better example is Cartier.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I was totally mistaken. There are quite a few diamond-encrusted Traditionnelle small models that do not have the seal. A couple of Malte small models and most of the 1972 collection do not have the seal.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[mafoofan]

Macro shots of a new 324 in a ref. 5296:

[PJ S]

Check your watch, that jewel under the pivot end of the rotor looks like it has a hair/thread in it!

[mafoofan]

Originally Posted by PJ S

Check your watch, that jewel under the pivot end of the rotor looks like it has a hair/thread in it!

Ha good catch! Wonder if it's on the crystal? Will take a closer look.

Isn't anybody else going to scrutinize? I thought the whole point of this thread was to investigate the current quality of Patek finishing. This is a basic model with a basic movement, so it should be a good benchmark.

[Jay (Eire)]

Appreciate the input / views on this thread. I'm not familiar/ knowledgeable enough on this topic to add anything, but following closely.

It's an interesting discussion vis-a-vis what I hear a lot from a certain subset of the Patek collector base (or sometimes former collector base) who do seem to differentiate between the "old" PP and the "new" PP.

[MCMartiny]

A Collected Man has some very nice movement close up photos of the watches for sale on their site (including Geneva and Patek seal Pateks):

Geneva seal 5396G:

https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/06...g?v=1529921144

https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/06...g?v=1529921144

Patek Seal 5524G:

https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/06...g?v=1507027317

https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/06...g?v=1507027323


Both of these are PM complications (but not grand complications) so comparable watched based on the 324 movement. At-least to my eyes it looks like the level of finishing is similar on both the Geneva and Patek seal 324 models.

Anyone seeing something different?

[RussW]

Originally Posted by Jay (Eire)

Appreciate the input / views on this thread. I'm not familiar/ knowledgeable enough on this topic to add anything, but following closely.

It's an interesting discussion vis-a-vis what I hear a lot from a certain subset of the Patek collector base (or sometimes former collector base) who do seem to differentiate between the "old" PP and the "new" PP.

Pick any subject you want, there will always be a camp who says old is better. In 20 years the current (2018) watches will be “old” and these will then be better.

[KBM]

Very interesting topic. This reminds me of an interview with Jeff Kingston I recently read in WatchTime. At a certain point, he comments on this exact topic, albeit not referring specifically to Patek.

"WT: What makes a brand or watch collectible to you?

JK: What makes a watch valuable to me is understanding why it’s special. What is outstanding about this watch? Why is it particularly good at what it’s trying to do? What is particularly good about the way it’s made? I think I’ve been lucky enough now to spend time with watchmakers to understand real value in a movement and to understand real value in finishing. What’s tragic is how poorly understood those things are, in general, even by people who hold themselves out as watch collectors. I’ll give you an example: take finishing. You’ll hear people say, “Oh, the finishing of this particular watch is fantastic.” Then I’ll look at it carefully. I’ll look at the anglage on the movement bridges, and I’ll find that there’s not a single interior angle. The French would say angle rentrant and you can tell by careful examination that the anglage was done mechanically with an industrial tool called a touret, it looks like an electric toothbrush.
If it has sharp angles, either interior or exterior, you can’t do it with a touret. Then it has to be done the traditional artisanal way with a series of files, successively finer, followed by wood burnishing. That’s what great finishing is. Look at the watch I’m wearing right now. Examine the tourbillon bridge. If you look inside that bridge, you can see the angles are crisp and sharp and impeccably polished. That’s perfect traditional file-created anglage. You can’t do that except with a file.
But, people will hold out other watches to me and say, “Gee, isn’t this really wonderfully finished” The answer is, “It’s okay, it’s kind of industrialized.” They don’t understand the difference between real traditional handwork and glitz. Another example is skeleton watches. Most of them are made entirely with a machine. The part pops out of the machine and then has a coating applied. There is no hand finishing at all. I look carefully at watch finishing and can come to an understanding as to whether the finishing represents great tradition, great craft. Is this really now a piece of history in the way it’s being done or is it simply industrialized? I don’t know that enough watch collectors who buy watches really understand the difference".

Full interview here:

https://www.watchtime.com/wristwatch...ain-watchtime/

[Jay (Eire)]

Originally Posted by RussW

Pick any subject you want, there will always be a camp who says old is better. In 20 years the current (2018) watches will be “old” and these will then be better.

Agreed, be it TV shows, watches or (my) Liverpool FC...they might be right about the Pool though!

I think this sentiment re PP is not just about quality or design, I think it also has a lot to do with increasing production numbers and the resulting decline in exclusivity.

[RussW]

Originally Posted by Jay (Eire)

Agreed, be it TV shows, watches or (my) Liverpool FC...they might be right about the Pool though!

I think this sentiment re PP is not just about quality or design, I think it also has a lot to do with increasing production numbers and the resulting decline in exclusivity.

I agree on production numbers. I would like to see these fall and also for Patek to stop making so many versions of the same watch, eg 5524 should have just been WG only imo. Did we really need the 5980/1a to be available with three dial colours and also available as r, 1r and ar?

[unknown]

and that's one of the reasons why I love the 5070 so much

[kunlun]

Originally Posted by unknown

and that's one of the reasons why I love the 5070 so much

A+

[tom2517]

Maybe the angle or the lighting but these chamfering looks crooked.

[kunlun]

This thread is part of an on-going discussion of the shift at Patek away from hand-finishing for many of the pieces on the lower and mid level of their catalogue, as they have increased production on those models. I wanted to update it with a link to further discussion on the matter (and will continue to update as I see conversations continue).

"Some reflections on the decline in Patek's movement finishing":
https://www.watchprosite.com/patek-p...66.10114201/0/