or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › The Watch Appreciation Thread (Reviews and Photos of Men's Timepieces by Rolex, Patek Philippe, Breitling, JLC etc...)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Watch Appreciation Thread (Reviews and Photos of Men's Timepieces by Rolex, Patek Philippe, Breitling, JLC etc...) - Page 985  

post #14761 of 48312
Thanks Dino, great insights. I've always enjoyed the original Jumbo design, down to the font used for the '7' in the shot above. Minor detail obviously, but I thought it would've been nice if they'd kept that for the new 15202.
post #14762 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaplan View Post

Thanks Dino, great insights. I've always enjoyed the original Jumbo design, down to the font used for the '7' in the shot above. Minor detail obviously, but I thought it would've been nice if they'd kept that for the new 15202.

Hi Kaplan,

 

The original font on the date wheel is very cool.  As mentioned, I believe its probably different, but I'll let you know when I get to the 7th.  No quickset on the date of the 15202s. 

Quote:
Originally Posted by CHRK33 View Post

The past week or so has seen very helpful discussion of the RO 15202 and I, for one, have been following the discussion with great interest as I am debating going with the 15400 vs. the 15202.
I agree that the 15202 is iconic, but I do think that the updated 15400 in 41mm merits strong consideration for daily wear. I think there are advantages to the larger 41MM size (being 6'3, I think it transitions from dressy to casual a bit better), as well as a personal preference for the type font and AP positioning on the 15400. Additionally, the 15400 with blue dial is available to me NIB from Audemars boutique in Milan for 10K euros whereas the 15202 would cost 18000Euros; a pretty significant difference in price that is a factor (for me at least).
I would really welcome anyone's thoughts on the 15400 (many of you have a lot more experience with Royal Oaks than me); I am really firmly on the fence, but leaning towards the 15400 currently. Thanks in advance.

 

The 15300 and 15400 are great choices especially if one is maybe a bit harder on a watch and both give you a quickset for the date, and also the are each significantly less expensive than a 15202.  I'd feel less badly about banging a 15300/15400 around a bit, compared to a 15202.  Part of the price is that the 15202 is an ultra thin sport watch and has an ultra thin automatic movement, and its produced in much smaller numbers than a 15300 or 15400.  Years ago, it was very significant to make thin movements and thin watch cases.  The cal 2120 is famous and very costly to produce.   With the trend favoring larger watches, ultra thins matter less to some people today. 

 

There really isn't a bad choice.  Its what you are more comfortable with in terms of fit and cost.  I tried on several ROs before deciding...including the 15300, 15400, the 39mm ROC I believe 26300, and its replacement the 41mm RO Chronograph.  For me it came down to the Jumbo 15202 or the 41mm chronograph.  I greatly prefered the dial, lack of second hand, and the iconic design, the famous movement and that its closer to the original design than a 15300/15400.  The 15400 although nice, I just did not think the proportions worked as well as on its predecessor the 15300.  I'm sure technically everything was enlarged by the same percentage, but to me the bezel and case size looked more balanced and correct at 39mm rather than 41.  The 15400 looked larger, but a bit empty, having to shift the date inward a bit on the dial and I didn't like the wider metal ring shape holding the saphire crystal on the back making it evident the movement was from a smaller watch and just got recased.  But those were my personal hang ups with the 15400, but if you like it its a great watch.  I think the RO Chrono at 41 worked out a bit better since they had the subdials filling out the dial. In the end I have some chronographs, and I just thought everything about the Jumbo came together perfectly.  I hope to get another AP some day, but I bought with the mindset if I only ever buy one, which would I most want to own.  After trying each on, the decision became easy.

 

I'm not very hard on my watches, and its not something I would bang around like maybe one of my Rolex watches.  If I were going to treat it that way, maybe I'd have more strongly considered a 15300/15400 which has a thicker case and might better withstand some harsh treatment (although I know guys that have worn 15202 Jumbos as daily wearers).  Also with a 15300/15400 you will get a quickset date.  Try each one on and see what you think, and consider how you will use/wear it (are you tough on watches), and do you need a quickset date.  AP makes great products and each version of the RO can be a great choice for differnet people. 

post #14763 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dino944 View Post

Hi Kaplan,

The original font on the date wheel is very cool.  As mentioned, I believe its probably different, but I'll let you know when I get to the 7th.  No quickset on the date of the 15202s. 
Thanks, I'm not in any kind of hurry, just curious :-)
post #14764 of 48312
Dino, thanks very much for your insight on the 15400. Really helpful to get your thoughts.
post #14765 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by CHRK33 View Post

I would really welcome anyone's thoughts on the 15400 (many of you have a lot more experience with Royal Oaks than me); I am really firmly on the fence, but leaning towards the 15400 currently. Thanks in advance.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dino944 View Post

The 15400 although nice, I just did not think the proportions worked as well as on its predecessor the 15300.  I'm sure technically everything was enlarged by the same percentage, but to me the bezel and case size looked more balanced and correct at 39mm rather than 41.  The 15400 looked larger, but a bit empty, having to shift the date inward a bit on the dial and I didn't like the wider metal ring shape holding the saphire crystal on the back making it evident the movement was from a smaller watch and just got recased.  But those were my personal hang ups with the 15400, but if you like it its a great watch. 

Between the 15300 and 15400 I prefer the former, with regards to size, proportions and dial layout. I may be mistaken, but my understanding is that AP simply copy/pasted the existing movement into a larger case. It's for this reason that the date window on the 15400 is located at a greater distance from the bezel, and that the dial of the 15300 appears to be more harmonious by comparison. The 15400 is certainly a nice watch by any measure, but to me the entire 41mm series is a "tweener" - too big for a RO, yet too small for a ROO. If it were to be my first AP purchase, I would tend towards one end or the other and avoid the middle... just my 2 cents.
post #14766 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaplan View Post

I really like the first Jumbo with the solid case back but agree that the new one is very well designed - not sure which I'd actually prefer.
For those of you with the new 15202, does it have the same font for the date as the original 5402?
ClymerRO01.jpg

The date font appears different to me, as the 7 lacks the slight downwards stroke (see pic). And while we're talking similarities/differences between generations of ultra thins, I discovered that a few 15202 owners have actually swapped out dials for those of earlier generations to get their "ideal" combination of logo placement, font size, etc . I wouldn't go through either the trouble or expense myself, but it goes to show that there's room for customization with AP.

file-4.jpg
post #14767 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by medtech_expat View Post

I may be mistaken, but my understanding is that AP simply copy/pasted the existing movement into a larger case. It's for this reason that the date window on the 15400 is located at a greater distance from the bezel, and that the dial of the 15300 appears to be more harmonious by comparison.

Yes, you are correct. The movement of the 39mm 15300 was removed and placed in the 41mm case of the 15400, changing the distance of the date window to the bezel. I think it worked a bit better in the chronograph because of the subdials and because the chronograph is a thicker case.

The best thing a potential buyer can do is try them on, before buying.
post #14768 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by CHRK33 View Post

Dino, thanks very much for your insight on the 15400. Really helpful to get your thoughts.

Glad it was helpful. I strongly recommend trying them on if possible before making a final decision. Keep us posted on your thought process and shopping experience. Good luck!
post #14769 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by medtech_expat View Post

The date font appears different to me, as the 7 lacks the slight downwards stroke (see pic). And while we're talking similarities/differences between generations of ultra thins, I discovered that a few 15202 owners have actually swapped out dials for those of earlier generations to get their "ideal" combination of logo placement, font size, etc . I wouldn't go through either the trouble or expense myself, but it goes to show that there's room for customization with AP.
file-4.jpg

That's actually a prior generation of 15202. So I don't know that the photo used is a definite answer to which font is used on the 2012 Jumbo 15202.

Interesting that people have swapped dials. Although, in the collectible world that devalues a watch.
post #14770 of 48312
well, i am not going to be owning that transocean from work i posted earlier. but at least its staying in the family. just sold it to my brother.

what a great looking watch.

question - where to get a great fake i can swap it out with? devil.gif
post #14771 of 48312
The transocean is a great looking watch. It is one of the few Breitling I like beside the Navitimer.
Edited by Warren G. - 10/23/12 at 6:46pm
post #14772 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Warren G. View Post

The transocean is a great looking watch. It is one of the few Breitling I like beside the Navitimer.

+1. those are the 2 i really like.

man alive, if i wasnt jet set on a panny, that watch would be on my wrist now. and to think, we bought both of those watches at once, for next to nothing. ahh, if only to be the boss. thankfully, now that both watches have been sold, i can get them off my mind.
post #14773 of 48312
Although not really watches anymore, I'm definitely gonna have to classify this as watch porn!
post #14774 of 48312
those are friggin cool !!

oh look, a package on my dest, just for me. smile.gif
post #14775 of 48312
Pics please.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
This thread is locked  
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › The Watch Appreciation Thread (Reviews and Photos of Men's Timepieces by Rolex, Patek Philippe, Breitling, JLC etc...)