Printable View
Shamlessly lifted from another site, but this is quite a nice write up about Genta's timeless designs:
http://www.fratellowatches.com/patek...uet-royal-oak/
I can't help but like the RO more...
Edit: Added a poll, since they seem to be flavour of the month!
Honestly, I've never been a big fan of either, but I think the most recognisable would be the Royal Oak with such a unique hexagonal design.
I just wish they wouldn't produce all these different colored variants. I saw the current range yesterday and just wasn't impressed.
I like them both. I dont lust after them, but I like them.
Two vastly different designs though IMO.
both are great watches however if i had to choose it would be the royal oak, just love the bracelet on them
Octagonal strictly speaking but I agree it is a little more noticeable. The RO is definitely the more sporty-looking. It is asy to forget when seeing face-on shots quite how slim both these watches are - just c.8mm, which by sports watch standards is very dressy, if that makes sense? Chap next to me at Wimbledon a few weeks back had an old Nautilus on and I was struck by how dainty it looked. I think he was struck but how I kept sneaking a peek between points :culpability:.Quote:
Originally Posted by W44NNE
This is one of the classic grudge-matches! Even though I've got an AP 15300, I feel the Nautilus has the edge. They both have beautiful dials, but the PP case is a little less angular and the movement prettier IMO.
Its a fair bit pricier than even the 15202 though!
PP for me in this particular shoot out. I cannot think of another piece that looks like it. I am very happy to be corrected on that point if I am in error. Who knows? I might be able to aspire to ownership.
The AP wins this one for me. I know that the PP is an iconic watch, but doesn't really do much for me.
Quite different choices imo. A RO would be more of a competitor for Hublot (which it wins hands down of course, the RO I mean).
I like both the PP and RO (I have the ROC in fact) but isn't the (steel) PP at least twice the price of a ROC, let alone the RO?!
Love all the Genta watches and have owned the IWC 322701. But the RO AP would have to be the one...
PP for me. I've never been too keen on the screw-heads of the RO.
I think that I would be happy with either. However, if I HAD to choose just one, the Nautilus edges it - just barely (for me anyway).
Cheers,
Well, it's certainly a close poll at the moment!!
i've gone for the PP, as given the choice of "if they were £1k each, which would you buy based on looks.."
The RO is a striking watch, but I much prefer the subtlety of the Nautilus.
Nauti but nice:
http://i1121.photobucket.com/albums/.../DSC_0035a.jpg
PP for me too. In fact I just got back from New York where I was hoping to see one and try it on, unfortunately both Wempe and Tiffany had none in.
I have to declare a conflict in that I own a white dial 15300. As has been said, it is very striking and quite an "obvious" watch. The rotor in gold with the heraldic shields of the two founding families is a thing of beauty. I love too the waffle dial which offers something different.
Hwever, the bezel and bracelet do, as has been noted before, pick up scratches very easily but as a summer watch I think it is perfect.
All that said, I am growing to appreciate the nautilus more and more and could easily see myself with an annual calander on black leather strap as I age badly! Still, I guess I have to vote AP. an interesting comment above about the PP being a bit more stealth. I think that is correct.
No brainer for me, AP RO all the way!
Very close call for me, but then the Nautilus takes it.
Being an AP owner , I obviously like the AP design ......that said, I do love the PP.
Ideally for me it would be the PP with the AP bracelet.
I would have to say the pp gets my vote!
... to me it is a no contest, as their is only one "original" - and that is the Royal Oak, being the real pioneer of a new category of watches when introduced in 1972. And as the current model still has the Cal. 2121 inside, that history is well preserved.
Also, the design is more stringent with it's strict angular patterns - and with regard to the design principle, the real counter part to the RO is not the Nautilus, but the 1832 Ingenieur, following the round pattern. The article got it wrong in this respect, as the 1832 was not designed in the late 70ies, but in fact Genta started working on this directly after the initial success of the RO - so both Nautilus and 1832 were introduced in 1976 (the Inge actually a bit before the Nautilus), it was the VC 222 that followed later in 1977.
Perfect fit and you feel the difference to the 15300 - although it is just one millimeter:
http://i404.photobucket.com/albums/p...SC_0072-01.jpg
http://i404.photobucket.com/albums/p...SC_0079-01.jpg
http://i404.photobucket.com/albums/p...SC_1131-01.jpg
And the price differential between RO and Nautilus could be wisely spent for this one:
http://i404.photobucket.com/albums/p...SC_0396-01.jpg
http://i404.photobucket.com/albums/p...SC_0463-01.jpg
Btw, the 1832 was the only one of the Genta Four with an inhouse movement (Cal. 8541ES, the Cal. 2120/2121 is based on the JLC 920 and was supplied by Jaeger)
So, would a swap these two for a Nautilus?
http://i404.photobucket.com/albums/p...SC_0038-01.jpg
Not in this life ;-) ...
Cheers,
Christian
The only problem is those fugly bezel screws. Why did they do that to such a lovely watch? If they were on the back: cool. But they aren't.Quote:
Originally Posted by u2112
For me it would absolutely be the RO - I've recently seen one with white dial, and was amazed. I originally thought I wouldn't like it, but it was stunning. I'm still working on the shape of the Nautilus, though :smile-new:
Either version of the AP would get my vote.Quote:
Originally Posted by Henrik Gelardi
AP for me, I think the PP design speaks of an era, the RO less so.
The decision is based entirely on the design and says nothing on the undisputed quality of both watches.
... and I currently have two Royal Oaks! There is huge variation across each of the ranges, of course. I had the white gold, power reserve Nautilus on a leather strap, but found it a bit too thin. I then had a steel Nautilus with an annual calendar on a leather strap - I loved it until I saw my current rose gold Royal Oak Dual Time. After that the Nautilus didn't get a look in at all. I also have an early Offshore (first series, so quite subtle).
The APs seem just as well made to me, but a bit less staid, without losing the retro vibe. The Dual Time has drawn lots of positive comments from non WIS - mostly women! ;o) I'm planning to let the Offshore go as the Dual Time actually has enough heft to wear casually, but still works with a suit.
PP in this comparison.
That goes for me too :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Optimum
But I must admit that I am slightly biased.
Regarding the two AP(15300 and the original jumbo) - I have tried both and the original jumbo gets my vote. I love how the crystal sits so close to the dial plus the movement and overall case looks sleeker as it appears to be much thinner than the 15300. Also really like that 1832! You have great taste....
Quote:
Originally Posted by u2112
Given the two choices no comparison for me, has to be the PP. Although I also think the PP is over rated looks wise with soft melted edges that look ackward and out of balance and proportion to my eyes.
The only thing I like design wise on the AP is the waffle dial which I like no matter what the colour, other than that the rest of the watch is at adds with itself and looks cheap as a result, the strap really is the most ugly thing I have ever seen.
With the designs as they stand, I prefer the PP, as I can't live with an automatic without a seconds hand. The AP if it had a seconds hand, as I don't believe the PP is worth $8k more.
So, in the current reality, I guess that leaves me with neither!
I am rarely jealouse, but your post does make me. :XQuote:
Originally Posted by u2112
The old jumbo Ingenieur is one of the watches I really like to have, but is just a bit out my league. The size is much better than the 3227 which is affordable for me, but the case is too high for my wrist.
Patek for me but both nice
Patek. As the service costs at AP are nonsense.
... with the Ingenieur Jumbo there is also a less costly option - although this model is even rarer than the automatic 1832: The 3003 quartz version:Quote:
Originally Posted by Time Cat
http://i404.photobucket.com/albums/p...SC_0116-01.jpg
http://i404.photobucket.com/albums/p...SC_0095-02.jpg
http://i404.photobucket.com/albums/p...SC_0096-03.jpg
http://i404.photobucket.com/albums/p...SC_0074-01.jpg
Both watches share identical cases, bracelets etc., just the movement is different (Cal. 8541ES vs. Cal. 2405) - even after 40 years, they are still quite reliable (mine is less than 1s off per month). And the good thing is, that the automatic caliber could be fitted in the case should need be. This is still done by IWC who changed movements back and forth in the 70ies to shift autos sitting like stones in the AD shelves - today, of course, no one would swap an automatic for a quartz movement, so the tides have turned. The total number of working quartz jumbos is estimated somewhere in the double digits - so, much more exclusive than any of the auto models (at about halve the price...).
Cheers,
Christian
I'd never noticed that the RO doesn't have a second hand!Quote:
Originally Posted by jukeboxs
Do any of the RO models have a second hand? I'm looking at the AP website and the only one that seems to have a second hand of any sort is the chrono. Is that correct? Doh, I found the 3120 movement and RO's with a centre second hand.
I prefer the PP and have a Nautilus 5711A. Having owned a Royal Oak I don't understand the love of the bracelet, it caught wrist hairs all the time and my g/f hated it as anytime my hand went anywhere near her head the bracelet would snag on her hair.
Go Patek, your bird will thank you!
Always loved the Nautilus design and hated the AP (although seeing them side by side they are definitely related). The AP has definitely grown on me of late. Nautilus sadly out of budget, but AP may be within reach, so that's that then!
don't mix RO and ROO, very different aproach to watches..Quote:
Originally Posted by W44NNE
PP Nautilus , for me the ultimate watch , one which I will sadly never own .... :-(
David
Indeed. RO/ROC - classy.Quote:
Originally Posted by pacchi
ROO - errrr...no comment.
I inagine that was my thread, but pleased to see the article being distributed!Quote:
Originally Posted by RickChard
Since posting that, I've tried on the PP Chrono (£35k - Eeek!) and the 5711 (£24.5k) at a local AD. The Chrono felt good, but way to expensive. The 5711 by comparison wsa way to small and light, I couldn't feel it. A few weeks ago I tried the RO 'Jumbo' and it felt very, very good, however the one in the AD's had quite a scratch on the bracelet.
Perhaps one thing in favour of the AP though, the AD reckons that the classic 39mm 5711 AP is going to be discontinued soon, maybe worth a punt for future values.