Ap Code 11:59 reps out

[Dr Fun Socks]

So apparently they were designed to be unrepable, but here they are! Whos going to be first to buy a terrible rep of a terrible watch?
https://puretimewatch.io/ap2020050704.html
https://puretimewatch.io/ap2020050703.html
https://puretimewatch.io/ap2020050702.html
https://puretimewatch.io/ap2020050701.html

Just kidding, it could he a great rep. I stand by the terrible gen statement though

 

[Dr Fun Socks]

A few pics, looks like the did the lugs integrated into the bezel like the gen.

 

[Sidhu6355]

Movement decorations are decent too, much better than ZF, however, a straight giveaway though.

 

[Dr Fun Socks]

A few pics of the gen. the balance is in the wrong place so clearly not a clone movement. But then again why would you clone a movement for this and not a popular watch like the 15400

 

[srhoque]

Everytime I look at the Code 11.59 watches, my love for AP reduces a tad bit. This lug integrated into bezel thing is a bad design for a dress watch (maybe its me). On first glance, these reps do look decend, in the sense that the case looks similar to gen. Maybe its lighting but the gold color is off. Rep thickness and DW font is also a give-away.

 

[Dr Fun Socks]

Everytime I look at the Code 11.59 watches, my love for AP reduces a tad bit. This lug integrated into bezel thing is a bad design for a dress watch (maybe its me). On first glance, these reps do look decend, in the sense that the case looks similar to gen. Maybe its lighting but the gold color is off. Rep thickness and DW font is also a give-away.

I think the main give away if someone saw you wearing one is that ap cant of sold any gens. I went past the ad before the lockdown and the were outside trying to give them away. No one wanted them... there are no gens in the wild, only reps. The code is a mythical creature.

 

[srhoque]

I think the main give away if someone saw you wearing one is that ap cant of sold any gens. I went past the ad before the lockdown and the were outside trying to give them away. No one wanted them... there are no gens in the wild, only reps. The code is a mythical creature.

Agreed. With their price point and “ugly” design, I can put my money to better use.

 

[m1994]

Definitely the case that was made is not that of a dres watch, however it is an incredible case.

If they rep the perpetual calendar I would definitely buy it, but I think it will be very difficult to rep.

Interesting rep.

 

[SHB]

Thanks for the news but for me it's a no go, can't stand this design.

 

[slaughterer62]

I wish AP luck in trying to develop a line of watches independent of the Royal Oak which has the same popularity. They clearly whiffed it with this one. The Code 11.59 just moshes the Jules Audemars line. Add the very unconvincing marketing spin and Bennahmias looks like the directionless visionless fool he really is.

 

[Jurgenk]

In the age of CNC machines, when a big 3 watch maker puts out a novel design that is touted in a major part for its anti-counterfeiting features, it’s a statement that’s tantamount to announcing the Titanic is unsinkable.

So this replica of unknown maker in addition to proving the principle also remains true to the original in failing to inspire.

But the details once known will be interesting just for morbid curiosity.

If AP did nothing more creative then utilize a new Depraz integrated chrono movement in an asymmetrical offshore-like design with Daytona-like thinness and utility that would get many to open up their checkbooks.

 

[BIONONE]

While i like the hand base and the pyramid stack which can't be seen too often these days on our beloved chinese fire crackers - i lost it that another maker is putting materials, money, effort and time into such a project... Maybe the asian market leads a trend towards this monstrosity of weird marketing and design combined.

I thought directly about ZF as they used a similar if not the same attention to detail on their 15500/15400 hands base - even if it still isn't comparable to a gen - it is a nice addition.

 

[legend]

I think the main give away if someone saw you wearing one is that ap cant of sold any gens. I went past the ad before the lockdown and the were outside trying to give them away. No one wanted them... there are no gens in the wild, only reps. The code is a mythical creature.

I agree.

My SA was trying VERY hard to sell the code 11.59, extolling on the craftsmanship, the intricate details of the watch and the tremendous effort put into the creation of the watch. He may be correct on all counts, but he neglected to mention that all the meticulous planning and execution does not translate to intuitive visual love and excitement for the typical AP fan. I was a very brief owner of a code 11.59 chrono before, and both the SA and I knew that I bought the watch only for the client profile and to be allocated the watch which I really wanted to buy. I ended up flipping it about 10 days later, literally unworn, at a price about $5000 less than what I paid (which was already fortuitous). I don't see how the code 11.59 can define what AP stood for. If sales of the series was what AP would have liked us to believe, there would have been no ready stock like there was for a long while, and no need for the SA to try so hard to push sales of the Code series to clients, something that there was no need to do ever for the RO and ROO series.

Among my 6-8 local AP collector friends, none of them is a current owner of the code 11.59. About half of them bought one for the client profile and for allocation priority but none of them, not one, liked the series. I can appreciate the details which went into the watch, like the pure 24k gold "Audemars Piguet" dial emblem and the beautiful double curved crystal, but at the end of the day, all these wondrous details come together and somehow degenerate into something visually uninspiring and bland on the wrist.

If you look at the big picture, all gens are "unreppable" in that one or more details will surely be wrong. So I think it will be more meaningful to look at the degree to which any gen is repped. Heck, even $500k-$800k RMs get repped, albeit atrociously, and there has been to date more than 20 rep iterations of the classic and "basic" Rolex 116610 Submariner, none of which are perfectly executed either.
It is beyond me why the rep factories will want to produce the code 11.59. The gen already looks like a rep Giorgio Armani. I wish AP will stick to what they know best, and more importantly, to what their clients want.

 

[QueTip]

I agree.

My SA was trying VERY hard to sell the code 11.59, extolling on the craftsmanship, the intricate details of the watch and the tremendous effort put into the creation of the watch. He may be correct on all counts, but he neglected to mention that all the meticulous planning and execution does not translate to intuitive visual love and excitement for the typical AP fan. I was a very brief owner of a code 11.59 chrono before, and both the SA and I knew that I bought the watch only for the client profile and to be allocated the watch which I really wanted to buy. I ended up flipping it about 10 days later, literally unworn, at a price about $5000 less than what I paid (which was already fortuitous). I don't see how the code 11.59 can define what AP stood for. If sales of the series was what AP would have liked us to believe, there would have been no ready stock like there was for a long while, and no need for the SA to try so hard to push sales of the Code series to clients, something that there was no need to do ever for the RO and ROO series.

Among my 6-8 local AP collector friends, none of them is a current owner of the code 11.59. About half of them bought one for the client profile and for allocation priority but none of them, not one, liked the series. I can appreciate the details which went into the watch, like the pure 24k gold "Audemars Piguet" dial emblem and the beautiful double curved crystal, but at the end of the day, all these wondrous details come together and somehow degenerate into something visually uninspiring and bland on the wrist.

If you look at the big picture, all gens are "unreppable" in that one or more details will surely be wrong. So I think it will be more meaningful to look at the degree to which any gen is repped. Heck, even $500k-$800k RMs get repped, albeit atrociously, and there has been to date more than 20 rep iterations of the classic and "basic" Rolex 116610 Submariner, none of which are perfectly executed either.
It is beyond me why the rep factories will want to produce the code 11.59. The gen already looks like a rep Giorgio Armani. I wish AP will stick to what they know best, and more importantly, to what their clients want.

Truer words have never been spoken about this 1159 shitshow they've came up with. I go +1 with the part that I don't know anyone either that bought one of them other than for profile reasons.

 

[chubbychaser911]

Did they really state that the watch couldn't be replicated? The Daytona was hated at first too.

 

[majwilliams0308]

Great points BIONONE I am very happy that this was replicated because this is a watch that is for sure not worth the premium AP puts on it.

Here's my quick breakdown (+ and - are denoted for positives and negatives):

Things colored orange are MAJOR negatives IMO.

Case:
+ Replicated fairly well
+ Lugs look good
+ Case back looks good to me at first glance

- VERY thick. Gen is 10.7mm, this is listed at 12.5mm. Let's hope that's wrong
- Crystal doesn't look like it has the shimmer effect and convex design of the gen, but that remains to be seen

Dials:
+ Black and white dials look good, blue is tough to judge in the light.
+Printing looks pretty good
+ Applied numerals - the "12" and "3" look great, really good.
+ Applied indices look good

- Applied logo (AUDEMARS PIGUET) is a bit thicker than gen - look particularly at the bridge between the I and G in PIGUET, its quite thick
- Applied numerals - "6" and "9" are the same shape. The piece that should close the circle part of the 9 and 6 ends shorter than gen.

Date Disc:
+ Placement looks correct
+ Background color looks correct

- Font is thicker and shorter than gen for the 28 date, which means it likely is for all dates. This is a major let down and flaw.

Hands:
+ Shape is good
+ finishing is good
+ Length is good
+ Seconds hand has same structure as gen. Very impressive


Strap and buckle look fine.

My one personal wishlist is that they also replicate the "Bol Shoi" edition with black and blue gradient dial, with applied window over the date

 

[molivio]

I agree.

My SA was trying VERY hard to sell the code 11.59, extolling on the craftsmanship, the intricate details of the watch and the tremendous effort put into the creation of the watch. He may be correct on all counts, but he neglected to mention that all the meticulous planning and execution does not translate to intuitive visual love and excitement for the typical AP fan. I was a very brief owner of a code 11.59 chrono before, and both the SA and I knew that I bought the watch only for the client profile and to be allocated the watch which I really wanted to buy. I ended up flipping it about 10 days later, literally unworn, at a price about $5000 less than what I paid (which was already fortuitous). I don't see how the code 11.59 can define what AP stood for. If sales of the series was what AP would have liked us to believe, there would have been no ready stock like there was for a long while, and no need for the SA to try so hard to push sales of the Code series to clients, something that there was no need to do ever for the RO and ROO series.

Among my 6-8 local AP collector friends, none of them is a current owner of the code 11.59. About half of them bought one for the client profile and for allocation priority but none of them, not one, liked the series. I can appreciate the details which went into the watch, like the pure 24k gold "Audemars Piguet" dial emblem and the beautiful double curved crystal, but at the end of the day, all these wondrous details come together and somehow degenerate into something visually uninspiring and bland on the wrist.

If you look at the big picture, all gens are "unreppable" in that one or more details will surely be wrong. So I think it will be more meaningful to look at the degree to which any gen is repped. Heck, even $500k-$800k RMs get repped, albeit atrociously, and there has been to date more than 20 rep iterations of the classic and "basic" Rolex 116610 Submariner, none of which are perfectly executed either.
It is beyond me why the rep factories will want to produce the code 11.59. The gen already looks like a rep Giorgio Armani. I wish AP will stick to what they know best, and more importantly, to what their clients want.

Literally the perfect summary

 

[Pope]

The gen already looks like a rep Giorgio Armani.

 

[Erinoush]

Ap has in its recent history the "royal oak", that 's such a heavyweight to carry that I doubt the brand can be loved soon for anything else...a bit like Rolex with its cellini line up...
Beside that if we are more pragmatic, nowadays AP became THE Trendy sport luxury brand for people who likes to get more than what Rolex is offering in a less classy style than what Patek is offering, and this code 11.59 line is obviously not at its right place for this public. It will probably not find any place in this market segment at the end...Seems that Ap doesn't really know their customer profile, which sounds strange for a company that generates such a turnover...

 

[Dr Fun Socks]

I feel bad for the rep factory, they seem to be the only ones who fell for ap marketing. Why rep a watch no one wants the gen of? I have a feeling these will be in the sale section of the td’s websites soon. For a few hundred bucks, sure its a nice enough watch. At 100x that price, no chance.