5712 or 5726 for first Patek?

[RCorsa]

Talked to my AD who said 2 years+ for a 57261Aor maybe 5 years for a 57121A. No chance I’m waiting that long to get my first Patek. I have a a solid Rolex collection so need to branch out and these look special but if I’m going to spend 2x what do you all think?

[soxfan39]

Originally Posted by RCorsa

Talked to my AD who said 2 years+ for a 57261Aor maybe 5 years for a 57121A. No chance I’m waiting that long to get my first Patek. I have a a solid Rolex collection so need to branch out and these look special but if I’m going to spend 2x what do you all think?

Dude just buy from trusted Grey. Why wait?

[RCorsa]

That’s the plan just asking opinions on the two references

[mickyd329]

I struggled with this very question myself. I've asked for both and will take whichever one that might come available sooner, but my preference would be the 5726. I like annual calendars and the symmetry of the dial is appealing to me.

[7sins]

Prefer 5712, or the 3712 if you are willing to spend a few more dollars.

[nyc2la]

5712/1a by a country mile

[Vince_76]

Originally Posted by RCorsa

Talked to my AD who said 2 years+ for a 57261Aor maybe 5 years for a 57121A. No chance I’m waiting that long to get my first Patek. I have a a solid Rolex collection so need to branch out and these look special but if I’m going to spend 2x what do you all think?

What’s your spend at this AD? And how do they even give a timeframe of multiple years - never understood that.

[ts3]

Originally Posted by nyc2la

5712/1a by a country mile

What he said and I agree, by a country mile.

I wouldn't want any 5726. The dial looks uninspired to me and if I rationalize why I arrive at the following list:

1) Useless (for me) 24h ring (info I don't want takes up a lot of space - 3448/3450/5320 PC dials with a date ring instead are much more coherent)
2) Different font size for date window and the other two windows
3) Slightly different widths (and fonts again) for day and month windows (looks off and is hard to ignore once you have seen it)
4) Not a fan of 6 o'clock dates (not as big a nogo as a 4:30 date but still)

Most importantly, the 5726 is 3mm or around 40% thicker than 5712 which is a big minus for me but may be a plus for others.

People will say but the 5726 is an annual calendar and the AC has been a glorious Patek first. I'd rather not have the AC functionality but the more interesting micro rotor movement of the 5712.

So, if you like the quirky 5712 dial I would not hesitate. If that is a concern I'd go 5711 (or 5811 if you prefer WG).

[ts3]

Originally Posted by Vince_76

What’s your spend at this AD? And how do they even give a timeframe of multiple years - never understood that.

When I got on the list for a 5711 blue they said around 3 years. How? They knew how many people were ahead of me and how many examples they'd typically get every year. So working off a good old waiting list rather than allocating according to purchase history or similar nonsense.

[Goose 104]

The 5712 by a long way. It's so much thinner and I love the micro rotor. But if you prefer symmetry the 5726 is the one.

The 5712 is my grail - just love the dial layout and on the wrist the thinness makes such a difference. Killer watch

[Ashj52]

I think both are exceptional, but having tried them both on various times at the AD I do prefer the 5712. Sleeker profile which works better for my wrist.

[dbfagan]

I have owned both in the past. The 5726 is a thick watch and a lot easier to whack into things by mistake. I personally prefer a thinner watch which is why I recently opted for a 5167 over a 5164. It’s all a matter of personal preference.

BTW, I went “grey” as I hate playing these AD games.

[s14roller]

Only you can make the call on which you prefer. I was happy with either and depending on who you ask, they may have strong opinions for or against the 5712. I do think it’s a fun dial layout personally.

As for thickness, yes, 5726 is thicker but it’s 11.3mm compared to the 116500LN daytona at 12.5mm which I dont think I’ve ever seen anyone say that’s a thick watch

You need to try them back to back and go from there

[tigerpac]

5726 for me but both great.

[dchang81]

I personally think if you're gonna get something expensive like a grey market nautilus I'd rather it be something more unique like a 3700 or 3712 but that'd require some (a lot) additional funds.

[ExplorerI]

Personally I like the 5712. Also like it on a leather strap.

[mps354]

5712 for sure, love the micro rotor

[Chute]

5712 as it most resembles the original 3700 in size and in not having a center seconds hand. If you can get a new 5712, it has micro adjustments like the VC overseas.
I see tha allure of an annual calendar as you only have to adjust it once a year, but the 5712 only needs adjustment 5 times a year, so it’s not a huge plus to have an AC

[jgottsman11]

5712 for sure

[IamJacky]

Both are great choices but I went for 5726/1a-014



It's certainly thicker than 5712 but still at only 11.3 mm it's actually thinner than all of my Rolex watches that I'm used to wearing. The Annual Calendar function is very useful for me; dial design is clean and legible - absolutely adore the blue; also 120m water resistance - not that I would swim with this piece on but I have no problem wearing it through most of my daily activities.

Gets scratched easily for sure but I'm assuming most Nautilus are:

[srvrf]

Originally Posted by RCorsa

Talked to my AD who said 2 years+ for a 57261Aor maybe 5 years for a 57121A. No chance I’m waiting that long to get my first Patek. I have a a solid Rolex collection so need to branch out and these look special but if I’m going to spend 2x what do you all think?

In the big picture, I think that if you like the 5726/1A, 2-3 years to get it at retail and with your name on the papers would be worth it to me. You already mentioned that your collection is solid so you could enjoy what you have and before you know it, you'll probably get the call (assuming they don't revoke their AD status). To me the biggest reasons to go gray now is if they're trying to get you to buy watches and/or jewelry you don't want (sounds like they're not - not ure what the 2X means) or if you want it now (sounds like you want it reasonably soon).

[DonLee]

Originally Posted by ts3

What he said and I agree, by a country mile.

I wouldn't want any 5726. The dial looks uninspired to me and if I rationalize why I arrive at the following list:

1) Useless (for me) 24h ring (info I don't want takes up a lot of space - 3448/3450/5320 PC dials with a date ring instead are much more coherent)
2) Different font size for date window and the other two windows
3) Slightly different widths (and fonts again) for day and month windows (looks off and is hard to ignore once you have seen it)
4) Not a fan of 6 o'clock dates (not as big a nogo as a 4:30 date but still)

Most importantly, the 5726 is 3mm or around 40% thicker than 5712 which is a big minus for me but may be a plus for others.

People will say but the 5726 is an annual calendar and the AC has been a glorious Patek first. I'd rather not have the AC functionality but the more interesting micro rotor movement of the 5712.

So, if you like the quirky 5712 dial I would not hesitate. If that is a concern I'd go 5711 (or 5811 if you prefer WG).

The 5726 is 29% thicker. Not 40%. It’s about the same thickness as a VC Overseas.

The 24hr notification is useful for me if I need to reset the time and date. You could say that it’s usesless if you use the watch everyday, but then so is the powe reserve for the 5712 if you use it everyday.

Having a slightly larger date is a plus, not a minus.

The micro rotor on the 5712 is much cooler than the big rotor on the 5726.

The 5726 is a much more practical watch.

[Ellz]

Love your 5726 Jacky :-)

[TheHolyLuck]

5726 here coz I have a big hand and big wrist, so 5712 looks like a toy on me.
Pick depending on how it looks on your wrist !

[ts3]

Originally Posted by DonLee

The 5726 is 29% thicker. Not 40%. It’s about the same thickness as a VC Overseas.

Hah, 29% isn't correct either - based on the 11.3mm and 8.52mm from Patek's website the number is 33%. As to the VC Overseas... Not for me either for many reasons including how big it wears.

[rmlovett1]

5726 was a choice I recently made. I’ve owned the 5712, although beautiful, it just didn’t feel or look substantial enough to my eyes. I like bigger more substantial watches personally, so my choice was easy.
No wrong answer here, both are great pieces.

[dchang81]

I mean that's one of the things about the overseas is it tends to wear a bit bulkier than its dimensions would suggest.

[DonLee]

Originally Posted by ts3

Hah, 29% isn't correct either - based on the 11.3mm and 8.52mm from Patek's website the number is 33%. As to the VC Overseas... Not for me either for many reasons including how big it wears.

lol, stupid google was wrong.

[Carlazzo]

5726 for me.

[pdnb]

5712 has iconic thinness of the nautilus from the 5711.

My old eyes made it hard to read the date and I found the power reserve never ever gained power throughout the day.

I traded my 5712 for the 5726. Granted the 5726 is a thicker, but it has a nice heft to it where the 5711/12 you could argue maybe a little too thin.

You get a little more blue “real estate” with the 5726 vs. the 5712




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk