Definitely personal taste primarily and what someone is looking for I think. To my eyes, the RL is dressier than the 1815. Size wise, I think (though) not positive that the 1815's offer more choices than RL's and therefore may appeal to a wider audience. One thing is certain - both are watches to die for . . .

 

Definitely personal taste primarily and what someone is looking for I think. To my eyes, the RL is dressier than the 1815. Size wise, I think (though) not positive that the 1815's offer more choices than RL's and therefore may appeal to a wider audience. One thing is certain - both are watches to die for . . .

HNY to you, DRHR. Haven't seen you in a while. Hope all went well with you and yours over the holidays and that your 2015 is off to a great start. <smile>

Have to agree with you on which is dressier looking. I too think but for personal taste, it's a toss up, although I notice that the back plates on the two are slightly different, although I don't really know why. I'm sure I could find out, but as I said, knowing which I'll buy already, whatever the reason, it won't matter as it's not going to alter my choice...gotta love differences in watches that don't matter....LOL

Tell me, does the 1815 sort of remind you of an IWC? To me it does, although that's just an observation on my part, not a plaudit or put-down. And that's not even to say that any IWC does actually resemble it all that much, it's more of the design ethos I have in my head of what an IWC Portuguese looks like than what one really looks like. (Nope, I haven't actually looked to see if there's an IWC that does somewhat closely resemble the 1815; it doesn't matter really if there is or isn't.)

Overall, I think neither watch is uniquely styled so that one couldn't find at least a few other fine watches that fairly well resemble it. I guess it's just that the ones that might resemble the RL aren't leaping into my mind and the the IWC does come to mind re: the 1815.

TY for participating in the thread.

All the best.

 

Happy New Year, tony! I see what you're saying, agree that there are more watches resembling the 1815 or vice versa than is the case with the RL. Size is always the biggest issue with/for me. I like certain IWC pieces a lot but most, if not all of them are larger than I would like or could comfortably wear. Just that alone would leave me with the 1815's though of course I know I can find smaller sized watches from competing brands. I am a definite Lange fan though, having owned a few over the past 5 years with absolutely no regrets or doubts.

 

Don't want to make this excellent thread go off the tracks, but did want to add my own comment on the matter of IWC. I also like their pieces a lot but find that all of them are too large in case diameter. If they would just launch a line of 38.5-40mm versions of their watches . . .oh wait, then I would be choosing between IWC and ALS. Put to the choice, ALS would win every time for me. As many of you know, I likely put way too much weight in a watch's movement vs. its aesthetics (although in many ways a visibly superior movement could be considered aesthetic as well). The new loupe I got over the holidays won't help my disease either.

 

I took a look at it. I liked a lot about it. Obviously a wonderful amount of handwork and beautiful. Aesthetically I like the movement more than the 1815, while similar I like the additional cutouts that show off more of the movement itself. The dial was very nice as well but in this style of dressier watch I'd pick other options. I also didn't understand the price premium over the 1815. It is my understanding that the RL was developed to be more accurate but that is quite a premium. Also, the short reserve time (38 hours or so? Far from a major concern I found it odd that a modern movement would be under 40-48 hours)

 

I agree that the Richard Lange doesn't get as much forum love as the 1815 but I don't think the disparity is as great as it first appears. As you are no doubt aware, Lange makes the 1815 as well as the 1815 up/down and although it feels like everybody is posting about the 1815 a lot of them might be posting about the 1815 up/down or vice versa.

I see the Saxonia and the 1815 as Lange's "entry" level watches (around $20k) with the Saxonia being dressier and the 1815 being more casual. The Richard Lange is more comparable to the 1815 up/down since they both sell for around mid $20k and are a little more complicated than their siblings. The up/down has the added complication of the power reserve. The RL has other complexities that are beyond my feeble WIS-ness to understand. Basically the watch honours Richard Lange, son of FA Lange who developed many patents including several that were important in the evolution of observation watches. These watches were dedicated to precision time measurement for use in science and navigation. One cool thing is that apparently after using 38hrs of power reserve the watch will just stop rather than slowly losing accuracy as it loses power.

You can read all about it in a forum post by Alex on thePuristS.
A. Lange & Söhne Discussion Forum:

Anyway, between the 1815 up/down and the Richard Lange, I prefer the 1815 up/down. The roman numerals on the RL make it feel quite dressy, and at 40.5mm it is a tad bigger than I'd like my dress watch to be. That being said, it is a great-looking watch and the movement is gorgeous.

 

With RL, the screws on balance wheel are vertically put, whereas 1815's screws are traditionally towards the wheel centre (or is it the RL way a truly traditional way?). I read about how vertical screws are different but still to this date it is not a proven better way, but that is the only thing I can think of from technical perspective to explain the price difference.

 

I find this thread's topic very interesting and relevant to my current selection process. I have enjoyed the posts so far, and look forward to further posts on this. Happy New Year WUS folks.

 

I saw the RL pour Le Merite and was very impressed but didn't try it on, I preferred it to the 1815 that I saw. I expect the same would be the case for the regular RL too. As said above it is very dressy though, I would probably go for an 1815 up/down if looking for an informal option. All being said and done I would probably pick the RL

 

Tony, to answer your question about the additional bridge, I suspect it is to secure an additional wheel and pinion to drive the center seconds hand.

You can find something similar on Dornblüth's central second base caliber:

 

Well to start, the price gap is quite significant between the two and so are the movements. What looks similar on the outside is made up for on the balance spring. Not a lot of brands make their own balance springs (i can count them on one hand) and from what I've read, that RL is worth every penny in terms of movement. Further, Lange really take their RL line seriously and some sources i've read even suggest higher level finishing (like that is possible).

That aside, I find both to be beautiful dress watches. The central second does require a few additional parts (some consider it a sort of complication) so that could explain the additional bridge. That said, I would have an issue with both. The size of the RL is a tad too large for me, and I don't like the aesthetics of the movement in compariosn to toher Lange calibers. The 1815 is stunning but i would opt for this instead...

• 
  1815 UP/DOWN
  

 

I chose the RL and have never regretted it.







Cheers,
Rob

 

I chose the RL and have never regretted it.







Cheers,
Rob

Stellar pics Rob, this thread is making me pay a lot more attention to the RL. I just stumbled across pictures of the boutique white gold version with blued hands, definitely going to have to hunt one down to try on

 

Well, TY all for sharing your thoughts. As I said, I didn't create this thread to ask "which one should I buy." I pretty well decided that already. I just wanted to "fish" to see if anyone would identify anything that militated against the RL, that mattered to me, and that might have been the reason why several folks have of late been chirping about the 1815. Nobody has and that's about what I expected. So, that's that.

Some time back, I thought the ALS I would add into my collection would be a L1, Zeitgeist or Saxonia Thin. I finally decided against the L1 and ST. I just don't like the L1, and the ST is basically just a different looking Altiplano to me, having markers rather than numerals. The RL with it's Roman numerals, however, being contemporarily sized makes a good companion to my 3520, which is tiny in comparison not only to the RL but every other watch I have, even though I have no issue with wearing it when the mood/opportunity strikes. I still think the 3520 a more elegant looking and dressier (by a tiny margin) watch, but that's beside the point for me; the RL is more than adequately formal.

At some point, I'll try on the RL and ZG and choose one. I don't know which, but I know once I try them on at the same time, I'll immediately know which one. My goal is to add an ALS to my collection. I'm not a movement junkie and I have no practical basis for preferring one over another; it's not as though either will fill a void other than that of simply not having an ALS.

TY again for your thoughts.

All the best.

 

Well, TY all for sharing your thoughts. As I said, I didn't create this thread to ask "which one should I buy." I pretty well decided that already. I just wanted to "fish" to see if anyone would identify anything that militated against the RL, that mattered to me, and that might have been the reason why several folks have of late been chirping about the 1815. Nobody has and that's about what I expected. So, that's that.

Some time back, I thought the ALS I would add into my collection would be a L1, Zeitgeist or Saxonia Thin. I finally decided against the L1 and ST. I just don't like the L1, and the ST is basically just a different looking Altiplano to me, having markers rather than numerals. The RL with it's Roman numerals, however, being contemporarily sized makes a good companion to my 3520, which is tiny in comparison not only to the RL but every other watch I have, even though I have no issue with wearing it when the mood/opportunity strikes. I still think the 3520 a more elegant looking and dressier (by a tiny margin) watch, but that's beside the point for me; the RL is more than adequately formal.

At some point, I'll try on the RL and ZG and choose one. I don't know which, but I know once I try them on at the same time, I'll immediately know which one. My goal is to add an ALS to my collection. I'm not a movement junkie and I have no practical basis for preferring one over another; it's not as though either will fill a void other than that of simply not having an ALS.

TY again for your thoughts.

All the best.

I was curious about your interest in this topic as Lange is a 'movement company' and you have made clear in the past you aren't a 'movement person.' Have you seen the ST in person? I did at a local shop you are familiar with, and my thoughts about the Altiplano being too similar disappeared. Again, I am more of a movement junky.

If you are buying a Lange to just have an ALS in the collection, and you think the 3520 is more formal, than you should really consider the L1 again. . .

 

This thread is very helpful as I am also considering between these two ALS watches (RL rose gold and 1815 small seconds rose gold) Between these two watches which do you think is better for an someone in their 60s. I thought 1815 is more for a younger look (maybe 50s max) while the RL goes well for all ages.

Any thoughts or comments would be appreciated! Thanks

 

This thread is very helpful as I am also considering between these two ALS watches (RL rose gold and 1815 small seconds rose gold) Between these two watches which do you think is better for an someone in their 60s. I thought 1815 is more for a younger look (maybe 50s max) while the RL goes well for all ages.

Any thoughts or comments would be appreciated! Thanks

Well, I'm not far from 60 and the RL is without question what I prefer between the two. There's something about Roman numerals that just always looks more refined to me. Then again, I wear a PP 3520 for formal events and that was the very first HEW I bought, and I bought it purely for looks when I was ~30.

Pushing 60, it seems no less well suited to my taste and style. FWIW and to give you a sense of the types of outfits I'll wear that would inspire me to choose my 3520 or the RL, for formal wear I wear looks that range from colorful, Hermes tie and crumb-catcher sets worn with midnight blue or white dinner jackets to standard black and white. For very dressy business wear, I prefer ventless suits , white tone-on-tone shirts with bright, and tone on tone ties that match or are in the same color family as the suit, and French cuffs with double-sided cufflinks.

I know the 1815 would look very nice with those same ensembles, but to me, the Roman numerals have more subtle flair, and that's a theme I seek to capture in when I'm dressin' "to the nines." The very sober numbers on the 1815 just don't work for me in those situations. They "feel" more like "everyday" business attire given my sartorial preferences.

The pic below is the best one I can readily find that illustrates the dressy business suit look and feel I go for.

That's Mr. Grant in North by Northwest. The suit he wore in that movie is downright famous, not just for being a gorgeous suit, but also for being such a fantastically well tailored and well made. If you want your tailor to mimic it, the "411" on it is here: Cary Grant -The Suits of James Bond . (I won't lie; I've more than once told tailors, "make it look like something Cary Grant would wear." LOL)

All the best.

 

I am more drawn toward the 1815, but I can see the appeal of the RL also. They're both wonderful pieces really, and as others have mentioned, it comes down to personal taste. When are you looking to purchase, Tony?

 

Tony my preference is for the Richard Lange over the 1815, especially the rose gold which I found more versatile than expected. I recently got stranded in NY for a day after a flight was delayed and had a chance to stop by the Lange boutique to try on both the WG boutique RL and the rose gold (cheers Ronaldo). I was totally unprepared for the snow so am wearing quite a few layers of whatever was clean left in my suitcase. I had the RL pegged as a very formal watch but was surprised by how 'not awful' the RG was with my casual attire. Certainly more so than the white gold which looked totally out of place. It is a really beautiful watch, I don't think you will have much difficulty finding opportunities to wear it

 

Tony my preference is for the Richard Lange over the 1815, especially the rose gold which I found more versatile than expected. I recently got stranded in NY for a day after a flight was delayed and had a chance to stop by the Lange boutique to try on both the WG boutique RL and the rose gold (cheers Ronaldo). I was totally unprepared for the snow so am wearing quite a few layers of whatever was clean left in my suitcase. I had the RL pegged as a very formal watch but was surprised by how 'not awful' the RG was with my casual attire. Certainly more so than the white gold which looked totally out of place. It is a really beautiful watch, I don't think you will have much difficulty finding opportunities to wear it

TY for your comments.

I think the greater "warmth" that rose and yellow gold have are what make that "not awful" thing happen. Call me crazy, but I think yellow and rose gold "feels cozier" than does white gold, steel or platinum, and yet, I generally prefer white metals to non-white ones. I have no rational explanation for why I feel that way.

All the best.