The Rolex Forums   The Rolex Watch

ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

Old 14 January 2019, 08:48 PM   #61
Cru Jones
2024 Pledge Member
 
Cru Jones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Paris, France
Posts: 34,376
Quote:
Originally Posted by lhawli View Post
One of my issues with the Nautilus 5711 was the date window smack against the edge of the dial. Still want one tho!

My opinion about the 15500 are:

Positives:
1. Increased power reserve (10h)
2. Bigger AP logo

Neutral:
1. 4Hz instead of 3Hz
2. Removed automatic script
3. Hour markers are shorter and thicker

Negatives:
1. More expensive!
2. Date window to close to the case edge and no half marker
3. Minute track cheapens the look and breaks up the dial creating an imbalance
4. Thicker case
5. Awkward dial with all that space after the shortening the markers and pushing out the date and removing automatic
6. Still 50 M water resistance

Aren’t I glad I picked up my 15400 few month back at MSRP. Overall I would say the 15400 is more elegant.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

I agree with almost all, but I would say the shorter/thicker hour markers are a "negative" instead of "neutral".

In theory, I want to love the new one as I thought the date was a little too close to the center, but now it's too far to the right....plus removing "automatic" and shortening the hour markers makes the dial feel "empty", while the black ring is less elegant. The new date font also is less elegant.

Oh well, I guess I don't have to dream about dropping 20k .
Cru Jones is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14 January 2019, 09:43 PM   #62
AK797
2024 Pledge Member
 
AK797's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Real Name: Neil
Location: UK
Watch: ing ships roll in
Posts: 59,066
Quote:
Originally Posted by Etschell View Post
The 15500 is just more modern and substantial looking face on. They copied rolex with the maxi markers i guess....
No it's more going back to the 15300, which is why I like them, my first AP love, but AP logo in the right place now.
AK797 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14 January 2019, 10:14 PM   #63
Etschell
"TRF" Member
 
Etschell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: FL
Watch: platinum sub
Posts: 15,861
Quote:
Originally Posted by AK797 View Post
No it's more going back to the 15300, which is why I like them, my first AP love, but AP logo in the right place now.
The last part was sort of a joke. But I stick by the first part.
__________________
If you wind it, they will run.

25 or 6 to 4.
Etschell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14 January 2019, 10:57 PM   #64
ct79
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: Germany
Posts: 56
I have to say, I like the 15500 better than the 15400 in all details. Possibly the price is one negative. What I am surprised is the 50m depth rating. Would anyone know when concretely looking at the build of the RO what could be the driving technical factors to increase the depth rating? Or also interesting why it can only be 50m, because of feature A,B and C? Is it only seals or screws or is there something more substantial needed such as a different crystal or more thickness? A Patek Aquanaut or Nautilus, which is very slim, achieves 120m. Often mentioned for sure. But just imagining: If AP wanted to increase the depth rating, would they have to change the substance of the watch (case thickness, crystal) or simply some invisible things inside which would not even change the appearance of the 15500?
Christian
ct79 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14 January 2019, 11:15 PM   #65
Chaokhun
"TRF" Member
 
Chaokhun's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by ct79 View Post
I have to say, I like the 15500 better than the 15400 in all details. Possibly the price is one negative. What I am surprised is the 50m depth rating. Would anyone know when concretely looking at the build of the RO what could be the driving technical factors to increase the depth rating? Or also interesting why it can only be 50m, because of feature A,B and C? Is it only seals or screws or is there something more substantial needed such as a different crystal or more thickness? A Patek Aquanaut or Nautilus, which is very slim, achieves 120m. Often mentioned for sure. But just imagining: If AP wanted to increase the depth rating, would they have to change the substance of the watch (case thickness, crystal) or simply some invisible things inside which would not even change the appearance of the 15500?
Christian
RO is sport watch but not a dive watch so 50m. is good enough for water resistant from normal wear. If they make it 10 bar it is still useless under water because the lume is very thin. I don't know about technical but ROO use 3120 movement like 15400 and it has 300m. water resistant.
Chaokhun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15 January 2019, 12:29 AM   #66
lhawli
"TRF" Member
 
lhawli's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Montreal, QC
Posts: 1,256
AP 15400 vs 15500

Just thought it was a perfect time to post a pic! Happy Monday y'all...

__________________
AP Royal Oak [15400ST.01]
Rolex DateJust 41 [126334]
Rolex Submariner Date [116610LV]
Rolex GMT Master II [116710BLNR]
Rolex Cosmograph Daytona [116500LN]
lhawli is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16 January 2019, 04:40 PM   #67
prabg
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: New Delhi
Posts: 1
Is it just me or has AP with their 15500 tried to copy the Patek 5711.
prabg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16 January 2019, 05:15 PM   #68
Donnyal
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: London
Watch: Submariner 116610
Posts: 175
Quote:
Originally Posted by lhawli View Post
Just thought it was a perfect time to post a pic! Happy Monday y'all...

Lol, what a beauty!
Donnyal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17 January 2019, 01:28 AM   #69
GeraldGentaFan
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Real Name: Mark
Location: Europe
Posts: 641
Tried the 15500 on today, and I like it more than the 15400 (which I own). The changes in hour markers, date and thinkness improve the proportions in my opinion. It looks a bit smaller on the wrist than the 15400 and that is a positive for me.
GeraldGentaFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17 January 2019, 01:46 AM   #70
lhawli
"TRF" Member
 
lhawli's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Montreal, QC
Posts: 1,256
Quote:
Originally Posted by GeraldGentaFan View Post
Tried the 15500 on today, and I like it more than the 15400 (which I own). The changes in hour markers, date and thinkness improve the proportions in my opinion. It looks a bit smaller on the wrist than the 15400 and that is a positive for me.

It’s already at ADs? Could you please share pictures - I’m sure you must have snapped a few while trying it / comparing them.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
__________________
AP Royal Oak [15400ST.01]
Rolex DateJust 41 [126334]
Rolex Submariner Date [116610LV]
Rolex GMT Master II [116710BLNR]
Rolex Cosmograph Daytona [116500LN]
lhawli is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17 January 2019, 02:12 AM   #71
AK797
2024 Pledge Member
 
AK797's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Real Name: Neil
Location: UK
Watch: ing ships roll in
Posts: 59,066
Quote:
Originally Posted by GeraldGentaFan View Post
Tried the 15500 on today, and I like it more than the 15400 (which I own). The changes in hour markers, date and thinkness improve the proportions in my opinion. It looks a bit smaller on the wrist than the 15400 and that is a positive for me.
It's what I suspected from thicker markers and minute track, if it does wear smaller that is a big plus.
AK797 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17 January 2019, 02:17 AM   #72
V25V
2024 Pledge Member
 
V25V's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: USA
Posts: 4,331
Quote:
Originally Posted by GeraldGentaFan View Post
Tried the 15500 on today, and I like it more than the 15400 (which I own). The changes in hour markers, date and thinkness improve the proportions in my opinion. It looks a bit smaller on the wrist than the 15400 and that is a positive for me.
I think AP corporate is just trolling watch forums at this point trying to promote their new garbage.
V25V is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17 January 2019, 02:58 AM   #73
HarryLime
"TRF" Member
 
HarryLime's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2018
Location: NY
Posts: 676
Quote:
Originally Posted by V25V View Post
I think AP corporate is just trolling watch forums at this point trying to promote their new garbage.
lol, are you really suggesting that this poster is a shill?
HarryLime is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17 January 2019, 03:05 AM   #74
singe89
"TRF" Member
 
singe89's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Real Name: Jim
Location: Orange County, CA
Watch: Rolex, AP & Patek
Posts: 3,721
Quote:
Originally Posted by V25V View Post
I think AP corporate is just trolling watch forums at this point trying to promote their new garbage.
singe89 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17 January 2019, 03:11 AM   #75
GeraldGentaFan
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Real Name: Mark
Location: Europe
Posts: 641
Quote:
Originally Posted by HarryLime View Post
lol, are you really suggesting that this poster is a shill?
I wish I got paid by AP for my posts...

They did invite me to SIHH and that is where I saw the 15500. My favorite new AP is the white gold 15202BC with salmon dial (or whatever the colour is called).
GeraldGentaFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17 January 2019, 03:45 AM   #76
Carry The Interest
"TRF" Member
 
Carry The Interest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: LA
Watch: RLX, ALS
Posts: 3,410
Quote:
Originally Posted by GeraldGentaFan View Post
...It looks a bit smaller on the wrist than the 15400 and that is a positive for me.
Care to elaborate on this. I am curious.

Mainly because I cannot see myself wearing anything larger than the current 15400. I am a bit concerned the increased in thickness of the 15500 will result in the watch just feeling larger on the wrist overall.
Carry The Interest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17 January 2019, 04:03 AM   #77
lhawli
"TRF" Member
 
lhawli's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Montreal, QC
Posts: 1,256
Quote:
Originally Posted by GeraldGentaFan View Post
I wish I got paid by AP for my posts...

They did invite me to SIHH and that is where I saw the 15500. My favorite new AP is the white gold 15202BC with salmon dial (or whatever the colour is called).
Care to share some photos comparing the 15500 on your wrist vs your existing 15400?
__________________
AP Royal Oak [15400ST.01]
Rolex DateJust 41 [126334]
Rolex Submariner Date [116610LV]
Rolex GMT Master II [116710BLNR]
Rolex Cosmograph Daytona [116500LN]
lhawli is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17 January 2019, 04:03 AM   #78
GeraldGentaFan
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Real Name: Mark
Location: Europe
Posts: 641
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carry The Interest View Post
Care to elaborate on this. I am curious.

Mainly because I cannot see myself wearing anything larger than the current 15400. I am a bit concerned the increased in thickness of the 15500 will result in the watch just feeling larger on the wrist overall.
It wasn’t wearing my 15400 so I could not compare like for like. But the increased thickness didn’t make the watch feel larger. I liked it more than my 15400. But after trying on so many watches, I might have suffered from watch fatigue and got it wrong. The differences are small....
GeraldGentaFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17 January 2019, 04:42 AM   #79
Carry The Interest
"TRF" Member
 
Carry The Interest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: LA
Watch: RLX, ALS
Posts: 3,410
Quote:
Originally Posted by GeraldGentaFan View Post
It wasn’t wearing my 15400 so I could not compare like for like. But the increased thickness didn’t make the watch feel larger. I liked it more than my 15400. But after trying on so many watches, I might have suffered from watch fatigue and got it wrong. The differences are small....
Totally understand - and good problem to have!

Appreciate the response. This is helpful to know!
Carry The Interest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17 January 2019, 02:04 PM   #80
VICI
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Real Name: Alex
Location: Gotham City
Watch: IG: Mr_Right_NYC
Posts: 5,672
AP 15400 vs 15500

I think the 15400 was meant to portray an elegant design. The thinner & shorter hour markers and the dials looks more balanced on it than the 15500.

I do not like the thicker markers, date pushed to edge of the dial and the emptiness of the bottom area of the dial.



VICI is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17 January 2019, 03:24 PM   #81
ericksakti
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: indonesia
Posts: 77
judging from the photo I'm liking the 15500st a lot, look a lot more elegant with the clean dial, if I want busy dial I will choose chronograph instead. The royal oak is supposed to be more dressy and I think the cleaner dial does exactly that.
ericksakti is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17 January 2019, 03:46 PM   #82
HarryLime
"TRF" Member
 
HarryLime's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2018
Location: NY
Posts: 676
I totally agree, now I'm really preferring the 15500.
HarryLime is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17 January 2019, 04:03 PM   #83
Kamen
"TRF" Member
 
Kamen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 265
Probably because I still love my 15400 I feel the 15500 is lacking a little something. Less classy but seems more robust.
Kamen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17 January 2019, 05:11 PM   #84
CoveWatch
"TRF" Member
 
CoveWatch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: SoCal
Watch: Rolex & AP
Posts: 4,535
As a 15400 owner, I like both mine and the newer one.. to me, seems there’s some nice updates as well as some things I wish they didn’t change on the 500.. will have to see it in person to really know!
CoveWatch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17 January 2019, 06:57 PM   #85
ericksakti
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: indonesia
Posts: 77
based on the side by side photo I am glad that they make the date window larger, the date on the 15400 always feel a bit hard to read
ericksakti is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17 January 2019, 08:16 PM   #86
Tschyvon
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Location: Switzerland
Watch: RO41, BLNR, LV,...
Posts: 60
Definitely do not like what they have done to the minute tracker. It looks cheap in my opinion. Looks like a "value engineering" evolution to decrease loss factor in the manufacturing process of the dial.
Besides, I do not know whether it is the picture but it seems like 15500 is looking larger than the 15400 with the shorter hour markers and cleaner dial. Not good for the smaller wrist.
Tschyvon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17 January 2019, 10:08 PM   #87
lhawli
"TRF" Member
 
lhawli's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Montreal, QC
Posts: 1,256
AP 15400 vs 15500

Quote:
Originally Posted by ericksakti View Post
judging from the photo I'm liking the 15500st a lot, look a lot more elegant with the clean dial, if I want busy dial I will choose chronograph instead. The royal oak is supposed to be more dressy and I think the cleaner dial does exactly that.

So wait, they shortened the hour markers a little and remove a 1 liner text and that now makes the 15400 a busy dial?

Funny how now one ever mentioned that about the 15400 before the 15500 came out. You may prefer the 15500 more but to go as far as to claim the 15400 is soo busy you would opt to go for a chrono is plain silly.

Despite a “cleaner” dial of the 15500 the 15400 still looks more elegant. The new 15500 looks more robust and sporty especially with the minute track.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
__________________
AP Royal Oak [15400ST.01]
Rolex DateJust 41 [126334]
Rolex Submariner Date [116610LV]
Rolex GMT Master II [116710BLNR]
Rolex Cosmograph Daytona [116500LN]
lhawli is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17 January 2019, 10:36 PM   #88
lhawli
"TRF" Member
 
lhawli's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Montreal, QC
Posts: 1,256
AP 15400 vs 15500

Take a closer look!

1. Minute track breaks up the dial and gives it a cheap appearance. I much prefer the minute track on the 15400 which almost feels suspended and gives a harmonious look.

2. What’s up with the date window? Looks unfinished and gives the dial a PAC-MAN look. As if they ran out of space on the dial. Much prefer the half marker and a more balanced and subtle date window on the 15400.

3. Bottom half too empty. Funny all of a sudden everyone is complain about 1 line text but we all love the 4 line paragraph on Subs.

4. Also much prefer the gloss finish blue on the 15400 vs the mat finish on the 15500. This will be apparent also on all 3 colors.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
__________________
AP Royal Oak [15400ST.01]
Rolex DateJust 41 [126334]
Rolex Submariner Date [116610LV]
Rolex GMT Master II [116710BLNR]
Rolex Cosmograph Daytona [116500LN]
lhawli is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17 January 2019, 11:38 PM   #89
ts3
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: Europe
Posts: 3,199
My take is as follows:

1. Agree, change may have been dictated by the new version being cheaper in production.
2. Disagree, old date has been too small for my taste and I prefer the new larger movement. Had they kept the old minute track they wouldn't have run out of dial space with the new date.
3. Indifferent
4. Undecided, need to compare irl.

The 15400 suddenly looks slightly vintage but it would be a tough call for me to pick one over the other.
ts3 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 18 January 2019, 01:31 AM   #90
redsubby
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Real Name: Henry
Location: TW/SoCal
Posts: 1,632
Does anyone have photos of the display case back of the new 15500?
redsubby is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Takuya Watches

Bobs Watches

Asset Appeal

My Watch LLC

OCWatches

DavidSW Watches

Coronet


*Banners Of The Month*
This space is provided to horological resources.





Copyright ©2004-2024, The Rolex Forums. All Rights Reserved.

ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

Rolex is a registered trademark of ROLEX USA. The Rolex Forums is not affiliated with ROLEX USA in any way.