View Single Post
Old 14 May 2011, 02:26 AM   #13
cedargrove
"TRF" Member
 
cedargrove's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Real Name: Rich
Location: Canada
Watch: Milgauss, GMT IIc
Posts: 3,012
I had the exact same question a few months ago. Both are great watches, and I'm sure I would have been happy with either, but I chose the GMT mainly because of the better functionaility. My considerations were as follows:

- movement functionality - big advantage to the GMT with the second time zone / 24 hour hand

- bezel funtionality - slight advantage to the Sub with minute level of detail, but GMT bezel still useful for timing with 2.5 minute level of detail, or longer term timing with half hour level of detail

- depth rating - big advantage to Sub with 300m versus 100m, but had minor weight for me as I will never be close to even 100m with it

- centre links - personal preference - I like PCLs as they are a better match with the shiny ceraminc bezel, but not a big factor as I could always brush them (but I won't)

- icon - no doubt Sub is more iconic - I intitially gave this a little bit of weight, but realized this was no reason to buy a watch - I told myself "buy what you like, not what you're supposed to like"

Another point made above is the crown however I thought they were the same, both tri-lock.

As for the clasp, the GMT does not have the glidelock, but does have the easy extension. It was not a factor at the time as I have a very goo fit.

Finally, to me the lugs on the SubC look slightly shorter than the GMT. I believe this is an illusion, but it's how I see it. However this did not form part of my consideration.
cedargrove is offline   Reply With Quote