amanico[JLC Moderator]
344488
Montblanc 1858 Monopusher Chronograph Tachymeter Steel version. First thoughts.
Nov 22, 2015,00:02 AM
Minerva has a rich patrimony of some wonderful watches and movements.
Montblanc revisits this large heritage, from time to time, in a modern way, for our biggest pleasure.
Let me introduce you the steel version of the 1858 Chronograph Tachymeter, which also exists in rose gold.
The rose gold version, which Foversta will review:
The steel version takes its inspiration from different chronographs which were in production in the Thirties and Fourties.
An example from the Thirties, side by side with the 1858:
And another one from the late Thirties, early Fourties:
From the first, the 1858 takes the case, the coaxial monopusher and Cathedral hands. From the second, it takes the tachymeter.
From both, the 1858 takes this incredible presence, spirit, the luminous hands and indexes, and the oversized case. An oversized case which is not so oversized from our days habits, since it is 44 mm big ( and 13, 5 mm high ).
But this generous size is not only a matter of current trend. There is a good reason for such a generous case: The size of the movement, which is... 38, 4 mm big and 6, 3 mm high )! THAT is unusual, by our current standards.
As we are at the movement, let's see this Cal 16.29, which is absolutely not disappointing.
All the codes of belle ( or at least traditional ) horology are here: Cotes De Genève, perlage, beveling, mirror polish of some parts, swan neck, and this splendid " Devil's Tail ", which, in fact, is a Chronograph break lever.
The 16.29 is a clear inspiration of the Cal 17.29 CH, born in 1929:
Which you can see here, in a condition which would require a good service.
The Cal 17.29 CH was already generously sized: 37, 9 mm big, 5, 85 mm high.
Both the modern and the original beat at 18000 alternances per hour, have a column wheel, a large balance wheel.
But the 16.29 has a better power reserve, with 50 hours, while the original had only 33 hours... A bit short.
The 16.29 adds a very sensual swan neck, and this beautiful " Devil's Tail ".
That being said, what I like a lot is the fact that Montblanc didn't stick to one chronograph, for this 1858, but to several pieces.
They opted for a classical tachymeter, instead of the snail one you can see on the dial of the chronograph from the Fourties posted above, they respected the spirit of the Chronograph from the Thirties, with choice of some key elements, such as:
- The Cathedral hands, which are luminous, as well as the indexes.
- The superb pear shaped crown.
- The Two subdial configuration.
- Last but not least, the coaxial chronograph monopusher ( located in the crown ).
The contributions from modernity are, naturally, the choice of luminova instead of radium as per the international reglementations, sapphire instead of plexy, a see through screwed case back, and the option of a blue dial for the steel version.
And another sensual touch is the use of an old Montblanc Logo, which I like a lot, much more than the better known " star symbol " to sign this dial.
All in all, Montblanc achieved to find the right compromise between the Minerva Patrimony and Modernity, to respect the spirit of the vintage chronograph without sticking to it.
The outcome is so breathtaking that, in my opinion, I rank it in the category of fine chronographs.
Dare I say, it is a Patek 5170 and 5070 killer.
Let me demonstrate it with the following pictures:
Patek 5170 / Montblanc 1858, front side:
Backside, Cal 16.29 / Cal 29-535:
The dial of the 1858 is much better balanced, its case is, at least in my opinion more sensual, the movement is better looking than the Patek, even if this last one has a power reserve which lasts 15 more hours.
And if you add the fact that the 1858 is a bit more than twice less expensive, in rose gold ( 2, 5 in steel! ) than the 5170G...
Patek 5070P / 1858 Steel... The comparison is cruel for this Patek which is... 5 times more expensive than the steel 1858.
You are not convinced?
Ok...
The dial of the 5070 has my preference over the 5170, but even here, Patek had to deal with a big case / small movement, which is obvious on the pictures and in the real. The 1858 is more harmonious.
The 5070 has a lot of charm, the 1858 is much more harmonious, the movement of the Montlbanc looks more refined, the case of the Patek seems a bit outdated in comparison....
Some will object that it not a Patek.
I would answer: " So what "? A signature on the dial doesn't make all.
When I see that kind of watch, I just want to applaud, and to call my banker to see if I can get one.
It is well thought, not made in the easy way, a serious and reasonable offer.
What more can we ask for?
Bravo, Montblanc. Bravo. This may well be my first Montblanc, and I will wear it proudly!
I just fear that the 100 pieces of this version will sell a bit too fast.
I just have to confirm these thoughts with a test in the real world, just to see if it sings as loud in my wrist than on these official pictures.
I will keep you updated.
Best,
Nicolas
This message has been edited by MTF on 2015-11-22 04:00:36 This message has been edited by amanico on 2016-04-11 22:45:39