ciaca
156
You feel harder...
Mar 24, 2015,20:21 PM
Because there is a huge difference between the movements of the two watches.
The Lemania 2320 housed in the ref. 5070 is one of the most beautiful manual chronographs with traditional "side action" (please excuse my terrible english technical vocabulary), the last survivor of a golden generation (Valjoux, Venus, Universal, Longines, Landeron and others) of beautiful manual chronographs fully optimised in the actions of levers (then the smoothness pushing the buttons), unlike the modern automatic vertical clutch chronograph housed in your watch, something really disappointing from a company which should do just excellence, but which doesn't (well, not always).
The same difference you'll find acting the pushers of the 5170 with its manual in house chronograph which is one of the best conceived of the modern age. And of course you'll find the same difference if you try any other high end chronograph that shared the same Lemania ebauche used by PP, but costing less than 1/5 A Breguet 3237, a VC 47101/11, Daniel Roth, Roger Dubois, Franck Muller and so on, all the same smoothness.
This watch is one of the many attempts they made to shift some their model to a more sporty casual look. When i saw it the first time, i thought "i like it".
From an aesthetic point of view i still like it, but the poorness of the movement, and the lack of some detail (for example a poor and not well conceived integration between the bracelet and the lugs with details you could find in any cheap Omega or Rolex from the 70's, the total absence of mixing between polished and brushed surfaces and some terrific errors in the design of the dial they haven't corrected), together with the price i judge insane for a simple annual calendar, cooled my enthusiasm.
It still remains one the few convincing restyling in a more casual and sporty style, for my tastes, together with the ref. 6000.
Regards
This message has been edited by ciaca on 2015-03-24 20:26:07