Rolex vs PP

[fsprow]

I find the watches that I keep and wear do well on the “smile test” when I look down at my wrist. At this point, these are mainly Pateks, with only one Rolex left in the collection (an old Explorer). What causes the smile? I expect it’s a combination of appearance, history of the brand, wearability, long-term serviceability and perceived value. But I expect my test differs from others - a good thing.

[Marcjvr]

Originally Posted by Tallbark

I know that PP is among the golden three’s of watchmaking. If we look past our personal brand preferences; what do you get in for example an aquanaut that you don’t get in a Rolex? If you look past value, brand, prestige etc?

The movements for example, hand made in PP, are they technically better than Rolex movements?

I would love a PP, but outside my price range unfortunatly. But I also heard that they are expensive to service and that it take like a year to get it back.

I’m not trying to bash any of the brands, I’m just curious about the actual value you get in an PP if you take away prestige and brand…

Lamborghini vs Mercedes

[*M5]

Originally Posted by bp1000

Hard to quantify the differences in words.

In my view, you will understand what Patek is about when you handle and own one of their comp's or grand comps. They are borderline perfect, everything is exquisitely done and the extra mile engineering when it comes to some of the movements is like nothing you experience with most other brands.

They are a very slow moving beast when it comes to changes but they redefine the way things are done sometimes or perfect other peoples technical advancements.

I never understood the aquanaut or to some extent the nautilus. When I think Patek I think of pm dress watches and mechanical excellence. I see the nautilus as lovely as it is, Patek's way of saying thanks for buying our complications, here is a casual equally beautiful sports watch for the weekend or something on rubber for the holidays and travel. Yet they have an issue because those 2 are now the brands flagship (from a demand pov) models. In my view it shouldn't be that way.

Those 2 Pateks don't compete with a sub, Daytona or similar. I dont think anyone has beaten rolex at their sports watch game. Just over the recent years, the Nautilus and Aquanaut just got hyped up by rich public eye people who want the ultimate flexes.

Well argued.

Sent from my Pixel 7 using Tapatalk

[fskywalker]

Originally Posted by alphadweller

With Patek, you get a product for which the amount of human involvement during the production process is higher.

For example, with Rolex, all the finishing is machine made, only the final assembly is manual. In the case of Patek, most of the finishing is also automated but on top of the manual final assembly, we have hand finishing embellishment in key areas that are likely to have the greatest visual impact. So essentially more hours are spent on the manual finishing of a Patek movement.

With regards to the quality of the movement, Rolex have state-of-the-art manufacturing facilities allowing a high level of automation, but this doesn't make the quality of their movements inferior. They go through high internal requirements for precision.

Here's an excellent article from SJX comparing the amount of watchmaker hours between brands, with Patek sitting between 30 and 99 maximum watchmaker-hours per watch, and Rolex standing at a much lower 1 to 9 watchmaker-hours.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[7enderbender]

Rolex make an extremely well made mass-produced product that is highly reliable. Patek makes pieces of art with a lot more attention to detail while still making quite a few watches in many cases (relatively speaking).
Both brands have some nice looking watches. Both brands in many ways also have watches where I’m personally not interested in the design language. In both cases, my take is: less is more. I love my older Sea Dweller and looking to get an Explorer 1. That’ll cover my Rolex needs. Patek is not on my list. The “basic” Calatrava is really the only one I find attractive.
In that league my preference is VC just based on design. AP I don’t get at all.

[alphadweller]

Originally Posted by vliberman

Your math is better than mine; I calculated watches per watchmaker (1,000,000/9,000). Assuming 2,000 hours per year per person (250 x 8 that is 18 hours per watch (2,000/111). I assumed 1 million units per year. So roughly double hours per watch for Patek.

This should suggest that on average Patek should cost double that of comparable Rolex. Says nothing about quality as productivity and manufacturing processes are more important for that.

So if one takes something like Nautilus vs Sub, price difference should be double or 20k for Patek.

According to the author of the article, if we combine the watchmaker-hour with the average retail price, we can compare crafmanship value between brands, or the different pricing power brands have.

Patek would charge on average US$773 per watchmaker-hour (derived from a $29,837 average retail price for 38.6 hours of watchmaker work).

On the other hand, Rolex and other non-HH mainstream brands (Omega, Breitling, IWC, Cartier) ask more than $1,000 per watchmaker-hour on average. Looking at the graph, Rolex charges a whopping $1,500 per watchmaker-hour (derived from a $12,000 average retail price for 8 hours of watchmaker work).

In conclusion, although counterintuitive, a HH brand like Patek offers a much better value proposition than Rolex at retail. In other words, Patek could charge more for their watches if they had the same pricing power as Rolex, almost twice as much as they are charging today. Sounds kind of mad if you think about it...IMHO. Would only makes sense for someone who values hand finishing above everything else, and not so much robustness and accuracy of the movement, for instance. I'm happy with what Rolex offers, kind of a sweet spot to me in the watch landscape. I appreciate the hand finishing in a movement, but it's not my number 1 priority.

[zengineer]

Originally Posted by geoach

If you don't own a Patek you won't understand the difference.

Are you like that in person?

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

[np2016]

The fit and finish of Pateks the bracelets/straps, polishing hours they do just on the cases, materials, inner visual workings, complications etc are miles ahead of rolex. Pictures online dont do any patek justice until you hold one in your hand. Rolex is strickly a tool watch made to take a good beating under any circumstances. Pateks are a piece of hand crafted art work made for your wrist that cant take the beating a rolex can. My 5167a is the most comfortable timepiece I own the tropical rubber strap feels like pure cashmere on my wrist just like my 5711 bracelet also. During the summer I wear my 5167a more than my Daytona, sub, gmt, deepsea etc unless i am going to do something very physical than i wear a rolex.

[KatGirl]

PP is for wealthy people. Rolex is for regular people, who are doing well, financially, but not considered wealthy. I know there are exceptions, and rich people wear Rolex, too. I consider the top 3 brands as way too fancy, for my taste, anyway. They’re just not my style. Rolex makes a nice high quality sports watch, that is very durable. You can put it on your wrist and go about your day, without worrying about your watch. I wouldn’t comfortable with a 6 figure watch on my wrist. I’ll take a Rolex, or even a Seiko, over a PP, VC, or AP, any day.

Kat


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[subtona]

Originally Posted by Tallbark

I know that PP is among the golden three’s of watchmaking. If we look past our personal brand preferences; what do you get in for example an aquanaut that you don’t get in a Rolex? If you look past value, brand, prestige etc?

The movements for example, hand made in PP, are they technically better than Rolex movements?

I would love a PP, but outside my price range unfortunatly. But I also heard that they are expensive to service and that it take like a year to get it back.

I’m not trying to bash any of the brands, I’m just curious about the actual value you get in an PP if you take away prestige and brand…

As far as the movements. Each of them are made to a high level of quality and will continue to tell you the time longer than you are able to ask it for that information.

The patek has nicer finishing and is made meaningfully thinner.

Rolex presents some obstacles when it comes to vintage watches.

Patek will continue to service their watches for generations.

I have examples of each being worn as a daily watch for decades and performing as expected.

Really comes down to choice (and means) and good fortune to get either at retail.

I wear the sub and the nautilus interchangeably.

Only other factor that I would consider is theft exposure.


Re service. A base model patek is only a few hundred more than a Rolex. I have had patek return service watches in just 2 months.

[subtona]

Originally Posted by enjoythemusic

That 'Golden Three' you refer to was somehow chosen back in the 1960s, and so far after asking many magazine editors, etc not a single person can tell me who voted for those three, and what the criteria were.

Do you know what it was 60 years ago? And then the obvious question is, is a 60 year old 'list' no one can tell you how it was decided upon...

So, is a list from the 1960s even relevant in 2023? i think not.

Your thoughts?…

Very interesting perspective

I would say several of the independents easily turn that list on its head.
journe & rexhep come to mind.


I am very content with what patek offers but honestly have very narrow interest or appreciation for AP and VC.

[enjoythemusic]

Originally Posted by subtona

I am very content with what patek offers but honestly have very narrow interest or appreciation for AP and VC.

Very much understand. Being content is fine. Was like that with PP years ago.

Over the decades I seem to seek a bit more excitement. Thankfully we have H. Moser, Czapek, Armin Strom, and many others. Heck, even Bvlgari(!) is making some very impressive pieces (imagine saying that just ten years ago, nope). The overall choices have expanded to the point where guys like Torsti Laine can have a nice workshop and produce 'one-off' custom pieces of excellent value (imho). Might take 9 months or so, yet well worth the wait.

jmho

My wife's custom Laine is below, obviously there are serious watchmaker hours and talent here, for less than even the most basic of Pateks that lack black polish and other hand decoration (and dial). To me having her choose the colors, finishes, indices... makes it more exciting.

Again, just mho. I did the PP thing a while back and yeah it was good. My wife misses the 5110 dealer wall clock we had for years. Anywho....

[kmzandrew777]

Originally Posted by subtona

I am very content with what patek offers but honestly have very narrow interest or appreciation for AP and VC.

VC is older than PP and also has an illustrious history, but AP really never belonged in the holy trinity.

VC and AP are well known for their complications as well as for being watchmakers to royals, popes, and the wealthiest for well over a century.

AP doesn't really have that history. To be honest, the holy trinity should be PP, VC and Breguet as Breguet really has the most prestigious history, having supplied watches to French royals back in the 1700s as well as to Napoleon.

[biza]

Originally Posted by geoach

If you don't own a Patek you won't understand the difference.

Good point

[codecow]

Originally Posted by KatGirl

PP is for wealthy people. Rolex is for regular people, who are doing well, financially, but not considered wealthy. I know there are exceptions, and rich people wear Rolex, too. I consider the top 3 brands as way too fancy, for my taste, anyway. They’re just not my style. Rolex makes a nice high quality sports watch, that is very durable. You can put it on your wrist and go about your day, without worrying about your watch. I wouldn’t comfortable with a 6 figure watch on my wrist. I’ll take a Rolex, or even a Seiko, over a PP, VC, or AP, any day.

I think Patek are suitable for folks at nearly any income level, they don’t have to be stuffy. For example I’ll wear my 5116 with gym shorts, flip flops, and a mustard stained Scorpions shirt and it fits in fine.

The other thing is, nobody will know what it is. You wear a Rolex sports model or even a Datejust and people will recognize it.

[subtona]

Originally Posted by enjoythemusic

Very much understand. Being content is fine. Was like that with PP years ago.

Over the decades I seem to seek a bit more excitement. Thankfully we have H. Moser, Czapek, Armin Strom, and many others. Heck, even Bvlgari(!) is making some very impressive pieces (imagine saying that just ten years ago, nope). The overall choices have expanded to the point where guys like Torsti Laine can have a nice workshop and produce 'one-off' custom pieces of excellent value (imho). Might take 9 months or so, yet well worth the wait.

jmho

My wife's custom Laine is below, obviously there are serious watchmaker hours and talent here, for less than even the most basic of Pateks that lack black polish and other hand decoration (and dial). To me having her choose the colors, finishes, indices... makes it more exciting.

Again, just mho. I did the PP thing a while back and yeah it was good. My wife misses the 5110 dealer wall clock we had for years. Anywho....

Attachment 1379297

Attachment 1379298

Attachment 1379299

My appreciation for patek is one of a broader experience with a variety of brands.

I have dabbled in a few independents, the result was really a return to the beginning. My collection is simple now with only Rolex (sub/expII) and patek, I am confident I will never purchase another Rolex in my life (the two I have are very specifically perfect for my purposes), so that leaves patek and a couple of independents and unique pieces I would never qualify for.

My experience with independents has been a mixed bag. Some had service issues, many were simply too thick or out of proportion in comparison. The same reason I like Rolex as a sports watch, it is thinner than the competition. Also one of the things I appreciated about journeys earlier pieces, he prioritized the low profile.

While I agree many of the independent brands are lovely to look at, the ability for service and longevity of design is something they often have not established yet.

It is a rare thing to capture lightening in a bottle. The sub/speedy /3940/5711/15202 / 5970/etc.

that laine is certainly beautiful in so many details.