[the_natural]

Originally Posted by AEC

It's true that some owners have been unlucky getting the Speedmaster's current bracelet absolutely perfect. I actually have two bracelets for mine: the current reference 1958 with screw caps securing the pins, and also the previous reference 1998 with friction-fit pins.

So the current (1958) bracelet doesn't have screws (like a Rolex), it has pins with screw caps/covers? I was hoping it had screws like my Oyster bracelet, I don't have a tool for the pins.

Originally Posted by AEC

My experience with the two proves that, while they might appear nearly identical, the reference 1998 (previous) is slightly more adaptable because each of its individual links is actually slightly shorter than those in the the 1958 (current). Full length is ~equal for both bracelets, however the 1998 uses more links to achieve it (I don't recall whether it's one more or two more, but I can check my notes if needed).

After trying both bracelets for a while, my conclusion is the 1998 can be adjusted "perfecter" (I invented a word!) than the 1958, but I prefer to wear the 1958 because I can get it "perfect enough" for me, and I prefer the slightly different appearance of its slightly longer links. During the brutally cold winters where I live in The Great Lakes, I wear it one link shorter and with the micro-adjustment on its longer setting. In the warmer months, I go one link longer and move the micro-adjustment to its shorter setting, and the watch is loose enough to allow for swelling from rigorous activity or too much salt on my Margarita.

Very interesting. That seems to jive with what I've heard elsewhere, that the current (1958) has longer links (and not enough micro adjustment) and thus makes getting a perfect fit more challenging that it did before with the 1998.

Originally Posted by AEC

I have lots of experience wearing the Explorer 214270 and the Speedmaster Pro. The Speedmaster will wear slightly longer from lug to lug, a little taller, and a little heavier. The taller height is a good thing because the shapes and finishes on the Speedmaster Pro are fascinating, and its taller architecture is part of this trait. I like the weighty feel of it on my wrist.

Great info. I pretty much assumed all of the above, but it's great to get confirmation, and I'm doubly glad that you've had extended wrist time with both watches.

Originally Posted by AEC

I'm a huge proponent of the Speedmaster Pro, so I'll be glad to assist with more encouragement any time :-)

Thank you! This was a lot of help. I need to just make the drive and go see one in the flesh, try it on (however marginally helpful that is), etc. I really want to like it, and while I bought my Explorer sight unseen, I don't think I could (should?) do that with the Speedmaster. We'll see...