# Aquanaut - a poor man's Nautilus?



## Roystock (Jul 11, 2013)

Hey everyone,

I have always wanted to add a Patek to my collection but have little love for the Nautilus or the Calatrava.
The Patek Aquanaut caught my attention recently, specifically, 5167A.

The discussion on Nautilus (standalone, vs AP, vs FPJ, vs VC Overseas etc) are well documented.
How about Aquanaut? Do you think it is just a poor man's Nautilus or a respectable Patek watch?
Does is have no historical importance "just because" it wasn't design by Genta?


----------



## Roystock (Jul 11, 2013)

Some official pictures here for those who need to refresh.


----------



## MarqDePombal (Jan 1, 2015)

This is the poor man's Nautilus 









Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## EnderW (Mar 16, 2015)

It was Aquanaut that caught your eye... so unless you wanted Nautilus and are settling for Aquanaut due to $ limits, I don't see how one is "poor man's" version of the other.

Both use same movement - Cal 324. So the insides are identical - difference is really in style and how Patek positions them
Yes there is a price difference, but frankly - there is no poor mans Patek. Poor people don't spend 5 figures on luxury watches.

Btw... poll missing an obvious choice: Not a fan of Aquanaut. Don't like its style (not a question of price, which is high). The design is too sporty for my tastes, not a fan of rubber and steel bracelet way too blingy


----------



## Roystock (Jul 11, 2013)

EnderW said:


> It was Aquanaut that caught your eye... so unless you wanted Nautilus and are settling for Aquanaut due to $ limits, I don't see how one is "poor man's" version of the other.
> 
> Both use same movement - Cal 324. So the insides are identical - difference is really in style and how Patek positions them
> Yes there is a price difference, but frankly - there is no poor mans Patek. Poor people don't spend 5 figures on luxury watches.
> ...


Thanks for your comment. 
I realized that. I did include a fifth choice (similar to your comments). It somehow didn't show up and I have yet to figure out how to edit a poll.


----------



## Rallyfan13 (Feb 23, 2013)

That's a lot of money for a piece of rubber. A serious watch should be on a bracelet.


----------



## mpalmer (Dec 30, 2011)

While I don't see the Aquanaut (or the Nautilus for that matter) as good value compared to other options at that price point, I would have a really hard time calling the Aquanaut a poor man's anything - after all Paul McCartney wears one for heavens sake...


----------



## Rallyfan13 (Feb 23, 2013)

Yes but he's got an ex wife.


----------



## Spangles (May 27, 2015)

Two questions:

Could someone explain the point of the aquanaut in PP's line? The Nautilus is the sport watch, why have another one with the same movement?
Is the idea to keep the # of nautilus watches made low and then have a larger number of cheaper aquanauts at a lower price? 

What are people's take on the 324 calibre movement? 35hr to 45 power reserve is quite low, otherwise not bad?


----------



## drhr (Mar 14, 2011)

Owned one, passed on the Nautilus cause it was too dressy and I prefer other dress models/brands. The rubber strap is, bar none, the most comfortable attachment I've ever experienced (trust me, I've experienced a lot) and worth way more than they charge for it. Beats anything metal that I can see imo. No such thing as poor/rich man's watch, just watches that I love . . .


----------



## tigerpac (Feb 3, 2011)

Has always come across as the ugly half-sister to the Nautilus.


----------



## Beaunecrusher (Feb 10, 2014)

As others have pointed out, it needs at least two more choices. Frankly I am not a fan of either; and just because they are Patek does not make them any more attractive. Both the VC overseas, the Royal Oak are much more attractive.


----------



## ssclassa80 (Dec 10, 2013)

Rallyfan13 said:


> Yes but he's got an ex wife.


Good one


----------



## hornsup84 (May 15, 2014)

Unlike a lot of folks here, I actually like the look of the Aquanaut (especially the Travel Time version), but couldn't see myself spending that much on a travel watch on rubber. At the price point, there are so many other watches that would be in line before it.


----------



## Monad (Dec 31, 2015)

hornsup84 said:


> Unlike a lot of folks here, I actually like the look of the Aquanaut (especially the Travel Time version), but couldn't see myself spending that much on a travel watch on rubber. At the price point, there are so many other watches that would be in line before it.


This is my perspective. I actually prefer the look of the aquanaut to the nautilus, but it would be great if it came on a bracelet.


----------



## hornsup84 (May 15, 2014)

Monad said:


> This is my perspective. I actually prefer the look of the aquanaut to the nautilus, but it would be great if it came on a bracelet.


You can get the regular Aquanaut on a bracelet:

PATEK PHILIPPE SA - Aquanaut Ref. 5167/1A-001 Stainless Steel


----------



## Roystock (Jul 11, 2013)

Monad said:


> hornsup84 said:
> 
> 
> > Unlike a lot of folks here, I actually like the look of the Aquanaut (especially the Travel Time version), but couldn't see myself spending that much on a travel watch on rubber. At the price point, there are so many other watches that would be in line before it.
> ...


Aquanaut is probably the perfect choice for me. I like its look more than nautilus, I also prefer rubber to bracelet. Now I only need to see if I like its history (or the marketing material )


----------



## Monad (Dec 31, 2015)

Roystock said:


> Aquanaut is probably the perfect choice for me. I like its look more than nautilus, I also prefer rubber to bracelet. Now I only need to see if I like its history (or the marketing material )


Haha, true. Although it's PP, so how much detail do you need? 

Frankly, if I got one I would probably wear it on rubber anyway. It'd just be nice to have a matching OEM option for dressing it up a bit.


----------



## tigerpac (Feb 3, 2011)

Launched in 1997...



Roystock said:


> Aquanaut is probably the perfect choice for me. I like its look more than nautilus, I also prefer rubber to bracelet. Now I only need to see if I like its history (or the marketing material )


----------



## BusyTimmy (Jul 24, 2009)

Considered a number of times, however ultimately I chose to spend my money on a WG Rolex as it moved me more.


----------



## Rallyfan13 (Feb 23, 2013)

hornsup84 said:


> You can get the regular Aquanaut on a bracelet:
> 
> PATEK PHILIPPE SA - Aquanaut Ref. 5167/1A-001 Stainless Steel


That's better, that's not terrible at all actually.


----------



## KiwiWomble (Sep 13, 2012)

I prefer the aquanaut, the rubber is cool


----------



## Verdi (Aug 10, 2009)

Good topic. 

My view as one who's interested in these models. 
I do like the Nautilus and I'd like to have one. Than I look that Aquanaut is pretty much half the price of the Nautilus and similar in many ways. Not the same though. 

Having said that I would probably buy the Aquanaut before I get the Nautilus and later upgrade if I feel the need. In this way I get to experience both models and not break the bank for one watch. 

So, in a way, yes, Aquanaut is the PP for someone with limited funds; because in my case if money won't be an issue I belive that I'd go for Nautilus straight away.

But let's not pitty ourselves. The word poor and PP don't really go together in the same sentence.


----------



## clintfca (Apr 25, 2013)

I don't see the 5167 as a poor man's Nautilus/Patek/etc. It's not about rubber strap vs bracelet but that I find the simple dial of the 5711a (blue) more visually appealing than the simple dial of the 5167. That said, if it was between the 5164a aquanaut vs the 5712/a nautilus I would choose (and did) the 5164a.

The rubber strap really is comfortable, especially in tropical weather (which I'm currently experiencing).


----------



## tony20009 (Sep 25, 2013)

An Aquanaut is definitely not a "poor man's Nautilus." Aside from the styling, they are the same watch, so much so that they are more alike than is a BMW or MB sedan and the coupe version of the same car. The differences are purely cosmetic in the uncomplicated versions. The Nautilus line offers more complications and it includes precious metal options and diamond covered uncomplicated versions.

All the best.


----------



## Toothbras (Apr 19, 2010)

I saw a guy with an Aquanaut begging for change last week. He could barely afford the subway fare back to his house in the Hamptons. Let's face it, times are tight and people need to cut back where they can. One of the first cuts is going from spending an exorbitant $25k on a wristwatch to a much more reasonable $15k.


----------



## GETS (Dec 8, 2011)

I bought the Aquanaut instead of the Nautilus for two reasons:

a) I prefer the look
b) I have a AP RO 15300 (so I didn't feel I needed a Nautilus that was too similar)

Mine is on a bracelet:


----------



## masyv6 (Jul 19, 2015)

Nautilus > Aquanaut. Both are great watches, however.


----------



## kenkls (May 24, 2015)

I have the 5712G. I love the Aquanaut. 
They are similar in design but not of the same watch. Using " a poor man's" something is not suitable in this comparison. Not everyone likes the casing of the Nautilus. I actually prefer the aquanaut design. The main reason that I didn't pick the Aquanaut simply because I am not that active anymore. And I have two ROO for those activities. 


從我的iPhone使用Tapatalk 發送


----------



## drhr (Mar 14, 2011)

Verdi said:


> Good topic.
> 
> But let's not pitty ourselves. The word poor and PP don't really go together in the same sentence.


Might depend on pre or post aquisition ;-) . . .


----------



## Dr_Who (Jun 10, 2013)

What's with the poor man mentality with this place.

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk


----------



## yankeexpress (Apr 7, 2013)




----------



## Roystock (Jul 11, 2013)

drhr said:


> Verdi said:
> 
> 
> > Good topic.
> ...


Well said


----------



## tony20009 (Sep 25, 2013)

drhr said:


> Might depend on pre or post acquisition ;-) . . .


ROTFL


----------



## tony20009 (Sep 25, 2013)

Dr_Who said:


> What's with the poor man mentality with this place.










or, with poetic license, perhaps









I don't think it's a mentality so much as an inflammatory and snobbish discussion topic.

All the best.


----------



## Dr_Who (Jun 10, 2013)

tony20009 said:


> or, with poetic license, perhaps
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Nicely visualised.

Sent from the fourth dimension using Tapatalk


----------



## Verdi (Aug 10, 2009)

drhr said:


> Might depend on pre or post aquisition ;-) . . .


If you end up poor because you got yourself a PP, that makes you also a fool, poor&fool.


----------



## fargo (Jul 22, 2014)

I love Aquanaut's rubber strap, it actually makes it look very nice. But it looks very unattractive with the steel bracelet. 

In terms of dial though, Nautilus looks much nicer, the Arabic numerals on Aquanaut don't seem to fit well. 

If I ever buy an Aquanaut, it would be due to the beautiful rubber strap and fit (and the strap's fit with the Patek-logoed clasp). But, would I pay $15K for that, probably not.


----------



## hydrocarbon (Aug 18, 2008)

Despite its higher cost, I'd say the Nautilus is the somewhat-poorer relation of the Royal Oak.


----------



## Monad (Dec 31, 2015)

That Bagelsport is hilarious.

Also, I think that PP should make the Aquanaut even more "poor mans" ... drop the date window, which would make it much cleaner, and be a reason to drop the price.


----------



## drhr (Mar 14, 2011)

Verdi said:


> If you end up poor because you got yourself a PP, that makes you also a fool, poor&fool.


Yes, but you have a PP, so round and round we go . . .


----------



## tony20009 (Sep 25, 2013)

Dr_Who said:


> Nicely visualised.


Thank you.

All the best.


----------



## tony20009 (Sep 25, 2013)

drhr said:


> Yes, but you have a PP, so round and round we go . . .


And gold is definitely edible....LOL










All the best.


----------



## mlcor (Oct 21, 2013)

Leaving the "rich man, poor man" debate to the side, I vote for a choice not in the poll. I am in the (apparently) tiny minority here that doesn't care for the design of either the Nautilus or the Aquanaut. Odd, I know, especially given the eclectic nature of my collection, but there you have it...


----------



## clintfca (Apr 25, 2013)

mlcor said:


> Leaving the "rich man, poor man" debate to the side, I vote for a choice not in the poll. I am in the (apparently) tiny minority here that doesn't care for the design of either the Nautilus or the Aquanaut. Odd, I know, especially given the eclectic nature of my collection, but there you have it...


Totally understandable. A lot of people admire PP for their calatravas and complications+ on leather straps and not for their Nautilus or Aquanaut line. There was a time when I could not fathom why anybody would spend 17K on the 5167, 24K on the 5711, 35K for the 5164a, etc

The design grew on me over time and I found myself eating my own words when I excitedly purchased a 5164a half a year ago.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## shnjb (May 12, 2009)

If I hadn't been poor, I would own both.

If I were forced to choose one, I'd probably choose neither and look for a Royla Oak 
The rubber strap on the Aquanaut really gives it a nice sporty look.
However, in the end, I don't think wearing any of these watches for "sports" makes any sense, so I'd probably have to choose the Nautilus or a Royal Oak over an Aquanaut.

The price difference, at this level of excessive spending, is not a meaningful one.


----------



## omega1234 (May 17, 2012)

I've always preferred the Aquanaut. Something about high-end sports watches on black rubber just appeals to me .

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G928A using Tapatalk


----------



## jamesL0VE (May 24, 2015)

Slightly different look!

Sent from my SM-N920I using Tapatalk


----------



## Roystock (Jul 11, 2013)

I just saw an aquanaut (steel) for the first time. Although the wearer was 2 table away, the watch still looks sharp. I think I may fall for this one


----------



## Cranworth (May 28, 2013)

I just don't get either of these watches. They look like something that you'd see with swag lamps and macrame wall hangings and AMC Pacers. Spotted a nautilus on a client's wrist at a meeting a while ago - he since had to send it in for an expensive repair because the dial fell off or something like that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## rvr06 (May 23, 2012)

The Aquanaut is not a poor man's Nautilus! Just a simpler and less fiddly design. I would purchase an Aquanaut over the Nautilus any day. Go for it.


----------



## maikeru (Sep 5, 2014)

I definitely won't say that the Aquanaut is the poor man's Nautilus. You can get at least 2-3 "decent" watches with $17k.

I once considered the Aquanaut but ended up with a white 5711.

IMO Aquanaut is more versatile as daily wearer, while the Nautilus looks dressier. 

I definitely won't say that the Aquanaut is the poor man's Nautilus.


----------



## Rallyfan13 (Feb 23, 2013)

Bagelsport for the win.


----------



## JWNY (Mar 12, 2012)

If i could turn back the clock, I would only own 3 watches

- Calatrava
- Nautilus
- Aquanut

since the 5711 and 5167 share the same movement, it's no slouch. Poor man's Nautilus is a little harsh


----------



## Woodburywatchguy (May 16, 2019)

I personally like the aquanaut more than nautilus.


----------



## Bauzen (Feb 4, 2012)

Rallyfan13 said:


> That's a lot of money for a piece of rubber. A serious watch should be on a bracelet.


About 8-9 years ago, I remember an AD putting the Aquanaut on my wrist, and I had a similar sentiment - I thought, for this kind of money, you don't even get a bracelet? WTF?
I actually left the store feeling offended, thinking Patek was an obnoxious brand gouging customers. I mean, how could they justify this?

But for whatever reason, the Aquanaut stayed in the back of my head. I recalled how thin the case was, and specifically how comfortably the rubber brought the watch snugly onto my wrist, and planted it there in a way that other sports watches can't do - Like when riding a motorcycle, bracelet sports watches bang around, and if they're heavy, that adds up over 100+ miles of riding.

I ended up buying an Aquanaut (at a deal too good to pass up) a few years later, and it has been my go-to, my daily, and the watch I undoubtedly and whole-heartedly love the most. I'd get rid of every watch in my collection outside my dad's Datejust before I parted ways with the Aquanaut. I used to think I wanted a Nautilus, but after 7 years of daily-wearing an Aquanaut, my opinion of it is that it's the Patek sports watch that was actually designed to keep on your wrist while doing any activity imaginable, and most folks that buy them have difficulty parting with them because they're so versatile.


----------



## CSG (Feb 3, 2014)

I love the Aquanaut and would love to own one but wouldn't pay for one at their prices. I don't care for the Nautilus at all. I was surprised that Paul McCartney and Ringo Starr both wear Aquanauts over all the other watches they could own.


----------



## Bauzen (Feb 4, 2012)

CSG said:


> I love the Aquanaut and would love to own one but wouldn't pay for one at their prices. I don't care for the Nautilus at all. I was surprised that Paul McCartney and Ringo Starr both wear Aquanauts over all the other watches they could own.


John Mayer wears his Aquanaut more than any other watch too, and he has owned just about everything.


----------



## CSG (Feb 3, 2014)

Bauzen said:


> John Mayer wears his Aquanaut more than any other watch too, and he has owned just about everything.


Interesting. I understand he's a collector so that's a bit of an interesting choice. I can't imagine McCartney and Starr wear them as ambassadors and certainly either of them could wear far more expensive Pateks like I understand Clapner does.


----------



## Sean Pizzle (Dec 3, 2015)

drhr said:


> Yes, but you have a PP, so round and round we go . . .


He may have it, but he's still poor as he'll never own it (what with simply holding on to it for the next generation).

Seriously, though, the Aquanaut Travel Time is my grail. I nearly pulled the trigger on one a few years back and couldn't justify the price to myself. Now I have two kids, certainly can't justify the price, and have some regret about not getting it when I could. C'eat la vie. Beautiful watch, maybe when I retire.

I any case, I prefer it to any of Genta's designs by far.


----------



## Roystock (Jul 11, 2013)

Wow, it has been 4 years since I started this thread, time flies. 
How things have changed. Back in 2016, we can still walk into a boutique to queue for nautilus and with some luck, we can pick up an aquanaut off the shelf. Today....

Back to the topic, Nautilus has grown on me over the years. 
Both of them can coexist in one's collection but if I have to pick one, it will be Nautilus (5712 or 5726).


----------



## brianinCA (Jan 13, 2014)

I like it, but I wouldn't buy one because it's too expensive for me. I happen to like it just as much as the Nautilus personally.


----------



## oztech (Apr 30, 2015)

I like both but the Aquanaut has the look IMO but way outside my budget so I will just admire it online.


----------



## Nikrnic (Aug 20, 2017)

Like Tudor is to Rolex.?. Hmm, I don't think so. The Aquanaut is one piece that works well on rubber. I'd take it over the 5711 any day. It just looks and works better for me with it's sporty flair to it, down the road that is.

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk


----------



## oztech (Apr 30, 2015)

I don't know for sure but just looking at them at the AD the Aquanaut looks like the time could be read easier in any lighting condition.


----------



## Peter in the North (Aug 6, 2019)

oztech said:


> I don't know for sure but just looking at them at the AD the Aquanaut looks like the time could be read easier in any lighting condition.


 You are right. I got my Aquanaut in 2005 and it quickly became my favourite watch. (It is back in Switzerland at the moment for a service.) I like the fast legibility it has in any light, and also the fact that virtually no one knows it has any value - it flies under the radar in that sense, unlike a Rolex for example.


----------



## Vallée de Joux - (Oct 19, 2020)

An exceptional timepiece, no question about it.

But still not a match to the mighty Nautilus IMO.

Different strokes for different folks, I guess.


----------



## Dootz (Jul 18, 2009)

Own one since a few months and absolutely love the watch, if its worth the pricetag is a different question.. for me the emotion/limited production and brand value of patek makes it worth the price. I did go for the 5164A, i love the GMT function and the case for me is more balanced, dial is more handsome as well in my opinion.

why i love it
doesnt draw attention unless to someone that really knows watches
easy option, dressed or casual, even in swimtrunks this watch works
super comfortable with the rubber strap

in short, the watch will not dissapoint


----------



## Vallée de Joux - (Oct 19, 2020)

Dootz said:


> Own one since a few months and absolutely love the watch, if its worth the pricetag is a different question.. for me the emotion/limited production and brand value of patek makes it worth the price. I did go for the 5164A, i love the GMT function and the case for me is more balanced, dial is more handsome as well in my opinion.
> 
> why i love it
> doesnt draw attention unless to someone that really knows watches
> ...


Beautiful picture. That particular version with the GMT complication is a beauty.

Ever tried switching straps on the Aquanaut? Always wondered how that would wear like with a leather strap.


----------



## Peter in the North (Aug 6, 2019)

Well here is mine on a leather strap. Just a quick shot with my phone. The strap is Horween Leather and made by Aaron Bespoke of Montreal. I think the watch looks very good on the leather strap. I also have the PP bracelet (something of a scratch magnet) as well as the rubber strap (which I don't much care for).


----------



## Dootz (Jul 18, 2009)

Vallée de Joux - said:


> Beautiful picture. That particular version with the GMT complication is a beauty.
> 
> Ever tried switching straps on the Aquanaut? Always wondered how that would wear like with a leather strap.


Thanks, 
i havent no, and i probably wont, i like the sport/casual look with the rubber for this watch. I actually dont have any leather strap watches in my collection thusfar, but as i'm slowly aging i am looking at a lange & söhne for a more dressy watch... to be continued


----------



## Bswcollection (Jun 29, 2020)

Dootz said:


> Own one since a few months and absolutely love the watch, if its worth the pricetag is a different question.. for me the emotion/limited production and brand value of patek makes it worth the price. I did go for the 5164A, i love the GMT function and the case for me is more balanced, dial is more handsome as well in my opinion.
> 
> why i love it
> doesnt draw attention unless to someone that really knows watches
> ...


Beautiful piece, I agree there is something about the case that just works for any occasion

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Bswcollection (Jun 29, 2020)

Peter in the North said:


> Well here is mine on a leather strap. Just a quick shot with my phone. The strap is Horween Leather and made by Aaron Bespoke of Montreal. I think the watch looks very good on the leather strap. I also have the PP bracelet (something of a scratch magnet) as well as the rubber strap (which I don't much care for).
> 
> View attachment 15567014


I haven't seen one of these on a leather strap...WOW that is very very sharp!

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## dinexus (Nov 18, 2012)

Peter in the North said:


> ...and also the fact that virtually no one knows it has any value - it flies under the radar in that sense, unlike a Rolex for example.


Is that really still the case though? This used to be one of my favorite things about the Aquanaut but given its street value and the way the waiting lists are with it, I find this hard to believe.


----------



## dbostedo (Feb 26, 2014)

dinexus said:


> Is that really still the case though? This used to be one of my favorite things about the Aquanaut but given its street value and the way the waiting lists are with it, I find this hard to believe.


Well compared to Rolex, PP is still largely unknown, and the Aquanaut isn't all that flashy. The fact that it's gone from ~$20K to ~$40K doesn't really change much in the way of flying under the radar IMO.


----------



## GrouchoM (Jul 11, 2013)

I'd like to be that poor man.


----------



## calvincc (Jan 15, 2012)

Aquanaut travel time is my dream watch of the moment 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## ekeyte (Sep 25, 2020)

I am surprised at the number of people who say it's a "poor man's Nautilus". I don't see that at all.


----------



## niverno (Sep 5, 2018)

I like the analogy the Tim Mosso used between the Aquanaut and the Nautilus to the Porsche lineup. The Nautilus is like the 911, a purebred racecar. While the Cayman is for an enthusiast's car. Both have different markets and serve different purposes.

Personally, I'd love a 5167r myself


----------



## jimkar (Jun 5, 2015)

Aquanaut is the one i would buy. I don't like nautilus. There is no such think as poor's man nautilus. It's like saying that rolex sub is a poor's man sea dweller. No logic into it. If for some reason patek priced the aquanaut more than nautilus, would anyone say that nautilus is a poor's man aquanaut?? It's not everything about the money. It's what you want. If you like aquanaut go for it. 

Στάλθηκε από το LM-G810 μου χρησιμοποιώντας Tapatalk


----------



## duke2earl (Aug 18, 2020)

I am the lucky person who owns both. I have an anniversary yellow gold nautilus on a leather strap that I wear for dress and a stainless Aquanaut on a stainless bracelet that I wear as a daily wearer. Neither one is a "poor man's" anything. They are different watches. And you don't need anyone's approval or opinion to buy and wear what you want.


----------



## Gilthoniel (Jan 29, 2015)

I personally prefer the Travel time 5164a to the time only 5167a.

It is more symmetrical and it doesn't have a date window. It is also beefier (ever so slightly) so it has a sportier presence on the wrist.

The 5167a is a wee bit too slender and dainty  Here's my 5164a on my 6.75 inch wrist.










IG: @thehorologydoc

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## calvincc (Jan 15, 2012)

The aquanaut chronograph and travel time are my fav watches. They definitely aren’t cheap anymore. Would be a dream to own either watches. 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Vallée de Joux - (Oct 19, 2020)

Peter in the North said:


> Well here is mine on a leather strap. Just a quick shot with my phone. The strap is Horween Leather and made by Aaron Bespoke of Montreal. I think the watch looks very good on the leather strap. I also have the PP bracelet (something of a scratch magnet) as well as the rubber strap (which I don't much care for).
> 
> View attachment 15567014


Thanks for your response. What a glorious combo that is!

First time I see an Aquanaut on a leather strap. Its already my favorite combination over the rubber.

Thanks again for sharing!


----------



## Omega9000 (Feb 13, 2015)

I have no business being on this thread but I'll give my .02. The aquanaut looks fantastic, but given the rubber strap, It shouldn't be your biggest player in your collection. If I saw someone with an Aquanaut in person, I would assume that they have some other heavy hitters in their collection. The Nautilus on the other hand can be a collection's big player, considering how their prices have skyrocketed, if I saw one in person I could assume that it could be the top watch in this fictional person's collection. 

But this is watches and not a science so you can do whatever you like and it would be right. Best of luck in your decision!


----------



## dbostedo (Feb 26, 2014)

Omega9000 said:


> The aquanaut looks fantastic, but given the rubber strap, It shouldn't be your biggest player in your collection.


If by "biggest player" you mean "most expensive", then I'm not sure what the rationale here would be. If I had a bunch of Seiko 5's, and loved the Aquanaut and saved up for it and bought it on rubber, why is that a problem for my collection?


----------



## Omega9000 (Feb 13, 2015)

dbostedo said:


> If by "biggest player" you mean "most expensive", then I'm not sure what the rationale here would be. If I had a bunch of Seiko 5's, and loved the Aquanaut and saved up for it and bought it on rubber, why is that a problem for my collection?


By biggest player I mean, most coveted watch. In my opinion, my most coveted watch is worn when I put a lot of thought into what I'm wearing and where I'm going. So if an aquanaut was the king of my collection, I wouldn't wear it to a black tie event, because of the rubber strap (now on leather... it completely changes the feel of the watch and becomes more suitable for this scenario). These aren't laws or guidelines, simply opinions. Everyone's collection can and does look different, so there is no problem in having a hypothetical collection such as Seiko 5's and an Aquanaut.


----------



## MrBlahBlah (Oct 8, 2015)

Gilthoniel said:


> I personally prefer the Travel time 5164a to the time only 5167a.
> 
> It is more symmetrical and it doesn't have a date window. It is also beefier (ever so slightly) so it has a sportier presence on the wrist.
> 
> ...


The 5164 is an incredible watch, but I do think that what sets the 5167a apart from other stainless steel sports watch is it's thinness. In my opinion, it's truly it's defining characteristic that really differentiates it from sports watches from other brands, and is also what makes it feel so "patek." With the 5164, you lose the thinness, but you gain a masterpiece of complication so it hits at the other Patek angle, which of course is great as well

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Multi-Industrious (Feb 6, 2021)

I recently got my 5164a after a decent wait and was shocked by how small it is on the wrist. Lug flare gives the watch presence but the bulk of the case feels a little bigger than a US quarter. Still love it though.


----------



## Dunnej (May 4, 2020)

It's definitely it's own thing. Was intended to draw a younger following for the brand, and it worked great in the late '90s. Now they got a big problem on their hands because all steel sports watches are unobtanium and are only available to the old rich guys who have been buying watches from Patek for decades. 

What's someone in their 30s supposed to do? We're the ones that are going to sustain Patek in the coming decades, and we're definitely not out here buying Calatravas.... Patek needs a new watch as a way in for the younger audience. AP has the Code....VC has the FiftySix...your move Patek.


----------

