ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX
|
21 April 2018, 06:58 AM | #1 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Mars
Posts: 1,683
|
Another 15400 size thread
Hi all,
Is the 15400 too large for my 6.75in wrist? In some angles it looks huge on me. I do like the 15202 but the wait for a 15202st is quite long (I’m in no rush) and 15450 won’t work cause it’s too small (stock size was too tight). Thanks! Bonus: what do you guys think? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
__________________
|
21 April 2018, 07:12 AM | #2 |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: USA
Posts: 4,353
|
Personally, I think it is too big. Problem for me with the 15400 on a 7" wrist was that it wasn't the diameter of the watch really that was an issue, it was the size of the dial which made it seem even larger than it is. Why I can wear a ROO 42mm no problem at all but ended up selling the 15400 and buying a 15300 instead.
I do not mind the 15450 on you, maybe go for that or wait for a 15202. Or try to scoop up a 15300 if you can find one. And that 44 is way too big. My .02. |
21 April 2018, 07:33 AM | #3 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Aug 2011
Real Name: Josh
Location: Lost in time
Watch: Me Nae Nae
Posts: 9,821
|
It works but it’s a bit large. Even on my 7.5” wrist I felt the 15400 was a tad large.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
__________________
"Sometimes the songs that we hear are just songs of our own." -Jerome J. Garcia, Robert C. Hunter |
21 April 2018, 07:37 AM | #4 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: In denial
Watch: It's complicated
Posts: 1,610
|
I think it looks awesome.
|
21 April 2018, 07:54 AM | #5 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Florida
Watch: ROO
Posts: 1,040
|
the 44 looks great too...
40 is the new 36 personally I would never wear smaller than 40 and I do NOT have large wrists
__________________
41mm SS ROC blue dial |
21 April 2018, 09:47 AM | #6 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: May 2012
Location: hk
Posts: 691
|
|
21 April 2018, 09:54 AM | #7 |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: The States
Watch: Cosmograph Daytona
Posts: 7,043
|
I think it looks great.
|
21 April 2018, 10:57 AM | #8 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Hong Kong
Watch: AP
Posts: 3,825
|
I think it looks just fine - but if you are not absolutely comfortable with the size, don’t do it.
If the 39mm size works, the 15202 is a beautifully proportioned watch |
21 April 2018, 11:25 AM | #9 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Mars
Posts: 1,683
|
I like the 15202st better so I’ll wait for that!
__________________
|
21 April 2018, 01:34 PM | #10 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Hong Kong
Watch: AP
Posts: 3,825
|
|
21 April 2018, 11:26 AM | #11 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jun 2013
Real Name: Dave
Location: NYC
Posts: 7,181
|
This is becoming a very common issue. 15400 is too large, 15450 is too small, and the 15202 is nowhere to be found. Don't spend this kind of money on a watch if you're not 100% happy with how it fits, looks and feels.
Although they're very hard to find, it might be better to wait until you find a 15202 or a 15300. |
21 April 2018, 02:00 PM | #12 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Asia
Posts: 409
|
Quote:
i have no idea why AP discontinued the 15300. it's the perfect size and shape. was it cannibalizing sales of the 15202? i wish i could go back in time and buy a blue dial 15300. |
|
21 April 2018, 07:24 PM | #13 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: N/A
Watch: Royal Oak
Posts: 345
|
Quote:
If you were looking to buy a RO that had the Jumbo design and wanted to wear it daily, not worry about banging it up a bit/gettinging it wet the 15300ST was perfect. (Screw down crown + more modern movement) 15202 has a finer movement from a horological history point of view but isn't really the most practical with no quickset date and no screw down crown meant you worried a at times getting it into the water (even though it should be fine most of the times maybe). Most likely the 15300 was eating up potential 15202 sales, but more importantly when faced with the waitlist of the 15202 many would be go for a 15300 and that would be it. This creates two problems for AP, first it decreases the demand on the 15202, reduces the wait times, and thus makes the 15202 seem less desirable. Additionally, if you have the 15300 it becomes harder to justify buying another RO or ROO since the watch is almost too wearable and fits almost any occasion (formal, business, business casual, casual). By removing the 15300 from the product line, and introducing the 15400, a great watch but a bigger watch, AP can now sell you two watches instead of one. The 15400 has more chunky bracelet compared to the 15300 and weighs 20% more, it wears great for casual attire events. So with the current product line if you want ROs, you would need 2 a 15202 for formal/business and a 15400 or ROO for casual. In short the 15300 was a too perfect product for the client that was able to fill too many niches, especially the 15300ST blue dial. It was less expensive than a 15202, wearable at all occasions, which makes a bad product for AP product line as it hurt the 15202 demand/desirability and probably ate in a bit of smaller ROO demand. And like many cases when a product is too perfect, companies will try to split the product into differentiated products to extract maximum value. Thus no more 15300 :( There is an article by Fratello watches sums up pretty well about how many felt about the 15300 vs 15202. fratellowatches (.) com/ap-15300-vs-15202-continued The author did trade the 15300 for a 15202 in the end but bought the 15300 originally and would have been happy with the 15300. In short, the 15300 is the watch you would buy with your own money (better value) even if you really like the 15202's 1:1 representation of the original RO in the watch industry. (Btw I have a 15300 so I'm biased and since I got it has gotten way more wrist time(work, weekends, events) than my other pieces) |
|
21 April 2018, 08:06 PM | #14 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Asia
Posts: 409
|
Quote:
|
|
22 April 2018, 02:13 AM | #15 | |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Jul 2013
Real Name: Brian (TBone)
Location: canada
Watch: es make me smile
Posts: 74,816
|
Quote:
|
|
21 April 2018, 02:10 PM | #16 |
Banned
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: somewhere
Posts: 350
|
15400 looks perfect on you. Better than the 15202.
|
21 April 2018, 11:54 PM | #17 |
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Bi coastal
Watch: Ok...Watching
Posts: 937
|
OP Your pics looked like mine when I was trying them on a few weeks ago. I want to try on the 15300 before deciding trying to get on some 15202 list. I also have time.
|
22 April 2018, 01:13 AM | #18 |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Los Angeles
Watch: Plenty
Posts: 257
|
Looks good on you. 44 May to much though.
|
22 April 2018, 01:35 AM | #19 |
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Bi coastal
Watch: Ok...Watching
Posts: 937
|
|
22 April 2018, 02:07 AM | #20 |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Los Angeles
Watch: Plenty
Posts: 257
|
|
22 April 2018, 03:18 AM | #21 |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Feb 2010
Real Name: Neil
Location: UK
Watch: ing ships roll in
Posts: 59,305
|
I think you can make them all work, these are APs after all.
|
22 April 2018, 03:32 AM | #22 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: USA
Posts: 136
|
15400 looks great on your wrist. I like the wrist presence.
|
22 April 2018, 07:55 AM | #23 |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: California
Posts: 1,250
|
It looks too big. I had a 15400 and I have a 7" wrist. I found it wore too large. As another poster has stated it has a huge dial which also adds to the size perception.
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|
*Banners
Of The Month*
This space is provided to horological resources.