WatchUSeek Watch Forums banner

1 - 5 of 5 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
361 Posts
Discussion Starter #1 (Edited)
Hi all,
I was at my local Jaeger LeCoultre authorized dealer the other day and was looking at two very well known watches in the Master Ultra Thin line. The Master Ultra Thin Moon and the Master Ultra Thin Perpetual. Having the two side by side, I was astonished that the Perpetual was the thinner of the two, despite all the extra complications. The MUT Moon is 9.9mm thick, housing a movement with hours/minutes/central seconds, and a moon phase with a pointer date. However, the Perpetual is only 9.2mm housing a movement with the same hours/minutes/central seconds, and a moon phase, but then adds a perpetual calendar with full year, month, day, and date. I'm amazed at how thin they were able to keep the entire package. In my mind, this watch truly rivals the Patek 5327J with similar functions. Some minor changes, with the JLC offering a central second hand and full year display and being offered in stainless steel at 0.51mm thinner than the Patek. For a fraction of the price! Needless to say I love this watch. However, I do propose one question...With all that being possible from the brand, why is it that the MUT Moon is not considerably thinner? I'm surprised that the watch isn't closer to 8mm thick. Rather than the current, close to 10mm thick version that it is now.

John

MUT Moon Front.jpg MUT Moon Side.jpg MUT P Front.jpg MUT P Side.jpg Patek front.jpg Patek side.jpg
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
51 Posts
It all comes down to cost. Miniaturizing mechanical movements are costly, which is why the perpetual cost 2x as much as the moon.

Sent from my SM-N950F using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
158 Posts
I own the JLC Master control date (2017 model). The date is a basic complication.

The width of the watch is 8.8 mm. Relatively slim.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
361 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
I understand that everything always comes down to cost, and there is a lot invested in making these pieces. I also understand that I am kind of comparing apples to oranges inside the brand as these are very different complications. However, they are technically under the same product line... The Master Ultra Thin Series. I would think that the thinnest should be the two hander, then the sub seconds/date models, then thicker up to the Moon/center seconds models, then thicker with the perpetual, then even thicker with a minute repeater/chronograph or what ever other complication you want to add. Always getting bigger as we add more complications. It just seems like they could do it thinner than their perpetual. Sure, it would be a little more expensive but we are not talking perpetual thin money once you drop that pricey complication.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,191 Posts
Completely different calibre movements. Their evolutions may be completely different even though both models are part of the same line. These are not modular designs like say the chronograph complication in a Valjoux 7750
 
1 - 5 of 5 Posts
Top