Very nice pics, Clemens! So you also own the older version beside the 5004? Which one do you prefer? The 5002 for me seems to be more balanced, the 5004 more cleaned up - what I did´nt like in the beginning were the cutted numbers in the meanwhile I could live with it :-) best, -Christian
I no longer own the 500401, I had to say goodbye to two of my favorite watches to fund my grail watch, the Pisa Perpetual. The other one that left was the Portuguese Automatic 500107.
When I got the opportunity to acquire a 500201, I jumped on it and I'm very happy with this version. Both are quite different, with the 5004 more modern and in my opinion a bit better suited as a 'formal' watch.
Great pictures, Clemens! And I like your description of the difference between the 5002 and the 5004. In this case, my preference would go to the 5004 or 5009: you describe why.
Let me share my view. i thought the 5002 was so perfect that it could not be bettered. The refreshed 5004 had a darker black but lacked the "9". The darker dial was an improvement but the loss of the 9 upset me and several others. It's not a big thing. It's just personal preference. Having said that, I would feel very uncomfortable on an aircraft if I knew the pilot was muddling along with a watch without a 9.
Quite a good point, Thomas. The whole number thing is a bit like a nursery rhyme that starts with 10 little people, where every time one goes away.
The first Mark XI had 12 numbers, all of them. Then, the first victim was the 12, it was replaced by a triangle. Then came the Mark XII, and the 3 was replaced by the date window, a consession to the market of course, why should a pilot's watch need a date? Then came the Big Pilot. The original very big one from around World War II had all the twelve numbers, the new one lost yet another number, the 6. The 3 was now occupied by the power reserve indicator, why should a pilot's watch need a power reserve indicator?, the 6 by the date window. And then came the newest Big Pilot, and it lost the 9, it was occupied by... nothing! Why? I read that it was a question of balance in the design, you could envision the cross hairs of a telescopic sight, shown by the bigger markers, which also carry the lume. The other point of the new design was that the numbers could be slightly bigger, on the whole making for a livelier design.
So, the sacrifice of the 9 solely for design purposes was an issue with the tool watch enthousiasts. The issue disappears when you choose some of the chrono's, here the 9 is replaced by a subdial, which is OK of course, as here there is a functional reason. I wonder what a pilot would do missing a 9 because of the chrono...
Thanks for explaining, Paul! I can understand the point about the 9 now. Personally I think the -02, -04, and -09 are all great. Between the -04 and -09, I think I'd go with the -09. But I would have a harder time choosing between the -02 and -09. Unfortunately they are all too big for me anyway.
I don't know if it's any consolation but with the -04/-09 you gain half a 2 and half a 4 so adding them all up they all have 7 numbers. :-)
Thank you! And didn´t you also find the cutted 2 and 4 a little bit annoying in the beginning? This is what disturbed me - and it´s the same with the Portoguese Chrono. The cutted numbers were the reason why I didn´t purchase. In the meanwhile I changed my mind but not regarding the Portoguese Chrono … Best -christian
At the time, I thought the watch was perfect. The removal of the 9 for no reason just seemed illogical. Happily, I have grown up during the last 10 years and have become much more one minded. I now think that power reserves on the dials of watches are completely unnecessary. I think the new 8 days Portuguese with the power reserve on the back is the way to go. Having said that, I prefer solid backs and anti-magnetic protection. I will continue to change my mind about these things and when I stop doing so, I hope someone will put me in a box and bury me ;-)