Who finds the offshore bracelet nicer than the ro bracelet?

[whatching]

I know they are 2 completely different things (sporty vs elegant, finish, size etc).

Anyone who prefers the offshore’s, I would like to hear reasons. I’m assuming consensus would go to the royal oak.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[lianghee]

I used to own ref 26470 grey and I had purchased a bracelet from the boutique. Personally I prefer the offshore bracelet as I feel that it has less sharp edges as compared to the bracelet on my ROC. On the other hand, the roc bracelet sits better on my wrist.

I miss my 26470!


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

[singe89]

Prefer the look and feel of the RO bracelet. However I really like the look, comfort and weight of the Ti ROO bracelet.

[benlee]

For me, RO should be on bracelet and ROO should be on strap.

[HauteHorlogerie]

Originally Posted by benlee

For me, RO should be on bracelet and ROO should be on strap.

+1

The offshore bracelet doesn't really do anything for me.

[KBM]

Originally Posted by benlee

For me, RO should be on bracelet and ROO should be on strap.

[AK797]

Originally Posted by benlee

For me, RO should be on bracelet and ROO should be on strap.

Strange but they really do work better this way round, same with Aqua on strap and Naut on bracelet, these watchmakers just might know a thing or two, but not three, about their product.

[AshAP]

Originally Posted by benlee

For me, RO should be on bracelet and ROO should be on strap.

Exactly this.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[whatching]

Thanks for all the responses! This has got me wondering what it is about the bracelet that makes it less desirable and a seemingly far second to a roo on strap?

Or probably I should have asked - what don’t you like about the offshore bracelet.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[tyler1980]

noooo. RO bracelet is about as good as it gets


Ro bracelet by a mile. Maybe get a ROO on a bracelet to put on occasionally to compliment what its made to go on which is rubber. I dont even like ROO on leather. Its for rubber.

I really dont like RO's on straps at all

[huncho]

Originally Posted by benlee

For me, RO should be on bracelet and ROO should be on strap.

agreed, although the brick really is nice as well

[tyler1980]

Originally Posted by huncho

agreed, although the brick really is nice as well

PM ROO bracelets get a pass because its just awesome

Plus it makes sense in a way.... its made for rubber but how about i put a giant chunk of platinum or gold on it instead. In the irrational world of watches that makes more sense than putting a SS ROO on a SS bracelet

[leisen]

Originally Posted by benlee

For me, RO should be on bracelet and ROO should be on strap.

Same to me.

[AK797]

Originally Posted by whatching

Thanks for all the responses! This has got me wondering what it is about the bracelet that makes it less desirable and a seemingly far second to a roo on strap?

Or probably I should have asked - what don’t you like about the offshore bracelet.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It's not a quality issue more a size issue, the 42 ROOs are already pretty formidable watches on strap and with a matching chunky bracelet as well it makes them tough for most to wear, they don't even make a bracelet for the 44s.

[Jp28]

I really like the bracelet on the 42ROO. It fit well despite no micro adjustment and the quality of the fit and finish is great. However the links are relatively thick to match the case so when compared to the RO bracelet it is a different world really !

[bruinmd]

Originally Posted by benlee

For me, RO should be on bracelet and ROO should be on strap.

Agreed

[systematic.entropy]

Currently have a ROO bracelet on order, and I am stoked as hell to get it. Thoughts;

ROO on bracelet, it's an entirely different execution than the RO on bracelet. ROO is imposing and has significant presence. When on a bracelet, it turns that approach up to 11. Maybe that's a little gaudy for some. But, for others (with certain proportions) I think it works well.

ROO Diver on bracelet, I think this is awesome all day. Traditionally, people think dive watches on bracelets. However, high horology and upper tier lux brands have been pushing them on rubber. An AP Diver on a bracelet is just unique, rare, and cool, IMHO.

But, to get back to the OP question, which is "nicer". They are just too different. Yes both sports watches in theory. But the RO bracelet hails from a different era of style and design, and it shows. The ROO bracelet is more contemporary. Can't do wrong in either case though. You do you!

[tyler1980]

Originally Posted by systematic.entropy

Traditionally, people think dive watches on bracelets. However, high horology and upper tier lux brands have been pushing them on rubber.

i think its the opposite. a dive watch is on rubber because you have to be able to adjust it for wetsuits etc. Glidelocks etc are pretty new to the scene as far as making a steel bracelet dive watch more functional


I always dive with a rubber strapped watch. even before i had actual high end watches , my battery powered diving watch was on rubber and imminently more useful as well, but thats another topic

[systematic.entropy]

Originally Posted by tyler1980

i think its the opposite. a dive watch is on rubber because you have to be able to adjust it for wetsuits etc. ...

At the risk of hijacking the thread, even old Rolex ads show Oyster bracelets. And Fliplock has been around for nearly 50 years.