Fragile?!?

[bsodmike]

Why do people think so of Patek Philippe watches?

I do know that a service can take up to a year, and cost significantly more than other companies - but that's to be expected with the watch (obviously).

What makes them so fragile, and how 'fragile' are they really?

TIA!

[oneillba]

No clue, but I would like to "test drive" one to find out.

[DSJ]

I don't think they are particularly fragile, just not as "rugged" as Rolex. Their cases are thinner, their movements are not as shock resistant. But they can be worn every day in a business environment!

[BigHat]

Originally Posted by bsodmike

Why do people think so of Patek Philippe watches?

I do know that a service can take up to a year, and cost significantly more than other companies - but that's to be expected with the watch (obviously).

What makes them so fragile, and how 'fragile' are they really?

TIA!

It's just a rumor that won't die around here by people that don't have a clue about them.

Of course, as with all things TRF, there are three posts running on this topic.

To save you a search: Watch brands MAKE DIFFERENT MODELS. There are few universal attributes. The Nautilus and Aquanaut are VERY robust watches and in terms of practical use, they're a Sub.

They also make extremely complex watches in dress watch cases. A perpetual calendar, moon phase, retrograde date etc add to moving parts. While they are very dependable, they obviously have more that can go wrong and more parts that need to be reconditioned. If you wear it like you'd wear a Sub, you could have more problems than you would with the Sub. I don't think they are more fragile than the Rolex equivalent -- Cellini.

Go to a Patek site where people can intelligently discuss the +/- of them. Many Patek fans do get irritated with the delays in service and you can read about that stuff, but most of the posts are positive by people with real-world experience.
Of course, if you buy a complex $50k- $100K watch and expect to be serviced at the speed and price of a Sub, you've made a serious mistake. Same applies to VC, AP and Lange.
Many of the great marques were in business for 200 years before someone even thought of the word Rolex and much of their product has successfully been passed down for generations.

I would also suggest a mod move this to the "Non-Rolex Watch" forum.

[JJ Irani]

Originally Posted by bsodmike

Why do people think so of Patek Philippe watches?

I do know that a service can take up to a year, and cost significantly more than other companies - but that's to be expected with the watch (obviously).

What makes them so fragile, and how 'fragile' are they really?

TIA!

Good point there, Michael.

Like I said in Bubba's thread on "Rolex DD vs Patek", on another forum, one guy wore a PP to the Opera. After the performance, he clapped so hard and loud along with the others, that something inside the PP snapped and it cost him thousands in Pounds to set the watch right again.

Yes, they are fragile, especially the dress models. I guess the Nautilius would be tougher!!

JJ

[Jocke]

Originally Posted by bsodmike

Why do people think so of Patek Philippe watches?

I do know that a service can take up to a year, and cost significantly more than other companies - but that's to be expected with the watch (obviously).

What makes them so fragile, and how 'fragile' are they really?

TIA!

In my opinion they are fragile.

Some parts are very tiny and small at the movement so they will break easier than a Rolex part.
I know a few guys that have buy them and short after that sold them because they have problems
with them.

There is a lot of nice Patek´s but I don´t believe it´s a watch you should wear daily.

Maybe I will get one in the future, we have to see.

Jocke

[Mort]

Not to get in the Rolex vs Patek debate, I think both are top tier makes.

Yes a Rolex is a tank, we all have our storys on how abused a Rolex can take and I think that is part of all of us Rolex owners buy them.

As far as Patek goes, yes maybe you should not wear one base jumping, playing golf,deep sea diving ect, but to say it cant be worn for daily wear is not a real true statement.

I wear mine several days a week to work every week. I have not had any trouble with it so far. The only thing I have been able to jig it for as if it gets hit,it does scratch easy, thats only because it is gold. I imagine that the SS models like the Nautilus or Aquanaut are more rugged in a sporting capacity.

Since this is a Rolex forum with a large emphisis on sport or tool models, it is hard to see what a few of us with Pateks experience to judge them as far as durability. On another Forum that has a large Petek following, I do not read that their Patek's are falling apart wearing them on daily basis.

[BigHat]

Originally Posted by Mort

Not to get in the Rolex vs Patek debate, I think both are top tier makes.

Yes a Rolex is a tank, we all have our storys on how abused a Rolex can take and I think that is part of all of us Rolex owners buy them.

As far as Patek goes, yes maybe you should not wear one base jumping, playing golf,deep sea diving ect, but to say it cant be worn for daily wear is not a real true statement.

I wear mine several days a week to work every week. I have not had any trouble with it so far. The only thing I have been able to jig it for as if it gets hit,it does scratch easy, thats only because it is gold. I imagine that the SS models like the Nautilus or Aquanaut are more rugged in a sporting capacity.

Since this is a Rolex forum with a large emphisis on sport or tool models, it is hard to see what a few of us with Pateks experience to judge them as far as durability. On another Forum that has a large Petek following, I do not read that their Patek's are falling apart wearing them on daily basis.

Well said.

If one sincerely thinks a PP comes apart when you clap your hands or pick your nose I have a bridge I'd like to sell you.

Learn the facts from the owners of PP here: http://forums.timezone.com/index.php...rm_id=26&rid=0

[bsodmike]

Originally Posted by Mort

As far as Patek goes, yes maybe you should not wear one base jumping, playing golf,deep sea diving ect, but to say it cant be worn for daily wear is not a real true statement.

I wear mine several days a week to work every week. I have not had any trouble with it so far. The only thing I have been able to jig it for as if it gets hit,it does scratch easy, thats only because it is gold. I imagine that the SS models like the Nautilus or Aquanaut are more rugged in a sporting capacity.

Since this is a Rolex forum with a large emphisis on sport or tool models, it is hard to see what a few of us with Pateks experience to judge them as far as durability. On another Forum that has a large Petek following, I do not read that their Patek's are falling apart wearing them on daily basis.

Mort, thank you for your comments. This makes far more sense then most of what I've heard.

First of all, it's a Patek. You wouldn't be mowing the lawn with one on, or operating heavy machinery, climbing some rock...you get my drift.

I would *think* that a Patek (especially a basic 5127) should be able to survive the rigours of office life and desk diving...

All the best,
Michael.

[SPACE-DWELLER]

Originally Posted by bsodmike

Why do people think so of Patek Philippe watches?

I do know that a service can take up to a year, and cost significantly more than other companies - but that's to be expected with the watch (obviously).

What makes them so fragile, and how 'fragile' are they really?

TIA!

Strictly Patek topic in the Rolex forums??

Anyway, Rolex watches are over-engineered and can take a LOT of abuse. Patek watches are not.

[Jedi]

With a nod to Mort and Matt, I have to agree wholeheartedly about the whole 'robustness' issue of Patek.

I own wear 2 Patek Philippe watches. A 5296 Calatrava in white gold; and a 5165 Aquanaut.

JJ's comment comes to mind about a Nautilus being potentially 'tougher' and I can safely say that the Nautilus comes with the same movement as the Aquanaut and some Calatravas, namely the 315. It's one of Patek's base movements upon which many of their complications are built on top of, like Rolex's 3105 being the base for the 3185/6. It's a tough movement good enough to day to day use, but for bashing around like a Rolex? Probably not, but would it break if you clapped your hands? Unlikely. A grand complication? Yes, it might, but then again, please be gentle with a grand complication.

I've worm my Aquanaut to the beach and pool, and never suffered any ill effects. My Explorer II suffered a thump on the desk when I was making a particularly nasty point during a meeting and it's rate stability jumped all over the place for days. My Aquanaut has suffered the same fate and it's never deviated. My Explorer II runs about 2 seconds faster after a plane trip, my Aquanaut doesn't seem to care.

Do take a look at Matt's posting on TZ and their responses, linked here, it doesn't get any clearer than that. I particularly like the line about Bugatti's and Jeeps.

The non-Rolex watch bashing is getting a little tiresome of late, but that's just me. But when it comes to ignorance and a refusal to be open to new opinions and facts, it becomes more than tiresome.

Like I've said many times, I like the tank on my wrist each day, but I get EQUAL pleasure out of my Pateks and other watches.

[Markg]

heres a thread on another forum that may help...

http://forums.timezone.com/index.php...=0#msg_3713800

[warrenmich]

It's a matter of TIME before we all "kiss and make up!"

[JJ Irani]

Originally Posted by warrenmich

It's a matter of TIME before we all "kiss and make up!"

Who wants to kiss me?

[Jedi]

Originally Posted by warrenmich

It's a matter of TIME before we all "kiss and make up!"

It's more about trying to instill a sense of open-mindedness and rationality as opposed to flagrant non-Rolex brand bashing based on rumour, speculation, and lack of statistical considerations.

[Ashley]

Originally Posted by JJ Irani

Who wants to kiss me?

Hey, big boy!

[BigHat]

Originally Posted by Jedi

It's more about trying to instill a sense of open-mindedness and rationality as opposed to flagrant non-Rolex brand bashing based on rumour, speculation, and lack of statistical considerations.

I'm with Lee, but I do welcome more open-mindedness. I have ZERO personal grudges and admire most of the members here, I simply can't let an assertion I know to be wrong to stand. After all, aside from the camaraderie, I come here to learn.