
The intricate gears and mechanisms of a watch with a complicated movement are usually hidden inside a metal housing. But not with Richard Mille’s latest creation, the RM65, which features a housing carved from a single block of sapphire crystal.
So if you were wondering how they justified that $US1.65 million price tag, there’s your answer. Besides providing an intimate view of the watch’s inner workings, the use of sapphire crystal also has some distinct pros and cons.
It’s typically used for the glass dome covering a watch’s face since it’s very scratch-resistant — meaning the entire M65 should stand up well to wear and tear. But because it’s still crystal, it’s not indestructible. So an unfortunate drop could leave one of the five lucky owners (it’s one of those super-limited-edition deals) of this timepiece with over one and a half million dollars worth of broken watch on their floor. [Richard Mille via Born Rich]



















Vebi
Wednesday, January 18, 2012 at 12:36 PMWhen people pay millions to buy a Swatch. Subtlety evidently isn’t in fashion anymore.
Luke
Wednesday, January 18, 2012 at 12:37 PMDid anyone else on the main page thought the price was $165 million?
Daniel
Wednesday, January 18, 2012 at 12:50 PMYup. I was intrigued in ready what justified that price. Then was let down D:
Dan
Wednesday, January 18, 2012 at 12:54 PMi sometimes wonder how people come up with the ridiculous prices for these sort of things….
Dan
Wednesday, January 18, 2012 at 12:56 PMperson1: i think it should cost 1.63 million
person2: nah, i think 1.65 million has a nicer sound.
Sam Timmins
Wednesday, January 18, 2012 at 2:15 PMRich people will buy ANYTHING…
morf
Wednesday, January 18, 2012 at 3:20 PMi wish i was rich so i could justify buying this piece of shit looking watch.
Kay
Wednesday, January 18, 2012 at 3:23 PMPeople shouldn’t be given the option of spending there money on things like this. The money could be used on so many other things
Kay
Wednesday, January 18, 2012 at 3:42 PMTheir
Gordy
Wednesday, January 18, 2012 at 3:41 PMDoesn’t look any different to one I imagine made out of perspex, ha ha ha, for $20.
chugs
Thursday, January 19, 2012 at 9:55 AMi thought the header said $165m and i was like holy shit what an ugly watch