The Rolex Forums   The Rolex Watch

ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

Old 16 February 2019, 05:18 PM   #31
dlhussain
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: London
Posts: 184
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChipWong View Post
15202 overrated. I would take a blue 15300 over the 15202. The 15202 fanboys dont realize the watch was fairly easy to obtain at retail less than 3 yrs ago.
Someone is getting very upset and someone sound like they’ve never handled a 15202.. FYI this fanboy bought a 15202 for £15k new in 2015! Food for thought, when a new 15202 could be had at a discount the 15300/15400/15450 could be had for an even bigger discounts.
__________________
Current: Rolex 116610LV, AP 15202ST, PP 5170P, PP 5712A
Grail: PP 5208P
dlhussain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16 February 2019, 05:22 PM   #32
dlhussain
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: London
Posts: 184
Quote:
Originally Posted by ppalasthira View Post
A very good thread indeed. Here to gather some wisdom.

I have very small wrists. Was considering the ROO Diver. But still shopping around. I would love to have the 15202 one day. But my budget doesn’t allow for it atm.
If your wrists are smaller than 6.5” then 15202 is likely to be too big for you. But try them all out, the 15400/15500 might be a better option if you wish to something more recent as the lugs are turned down more. If you’re wrist is less than 6” opt for the 15450.
__________________
Current: Rolex 116610LV, AP 15202ST, PP 5170P, PP 5712A
Grail: PP 5208P
dlhussain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16 February 2019, 05:27 PM   #33
dlhussain
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: London
Posts: 184
Quote:
Originally Posted by wisguy View Post
I don't believe, I know.

The 15202 spans 52.3mm and the 15300 52.7mm, a small but noticeable difference.

The proportions are very different as well, you may not notice if you've only experienced te 15300 but once you hold a 15202 you really notice how much better the overall look is.

I've owned a 15300, 15400, 26300 and 15202. Hands down the 15202 is my favorite, I only sold it because the non quickset date drove me crazy (the crown feels like you're going to break it every time you manipulate it).
The 15300 May span wider on the outside but due its thickness the inside span is smaller on 15300 and the lugs are slightly turned in more.

Agreed re 15202, sadly back then I didn’t believe in using winders but now I’ve finally got one as adjusting date on 5712 annoyed me but I wasn’t going to sell that... I’m now on wait list for another 15202!
__________________
Current: Rolex 116610LV, AP 15202ST, PP 5170P, PP 5712A
Grail: PP 5208P
dlhussain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17 February 2019, 11:21 AM   #34
ChipWong
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 111
Quote:
Originally Posted by dlhussain View Post
Someone is getting very upset and someone sound like they’ve never handled a 15202.. FYI this fanboy bought a 15202 for £15k new in 2015! Food for thought, when a new 15202 could be had at a discount the 15300/15400/15450 could be had for an even bigger discounts.
I actually passed on it but I do regret not paying able to flip it. Paying over 40k for a 15202 right now is absurd
ChipWong is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17 February 2019, 02:02 PM   #35
mineral
"TRF" Member
 
mineral's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 3,670
I manage to take out the 15202 jumbo and compare to its bigger brother the white dial 15400.

The case size is different, 39mm vs 41mm.

I own the 15300 and sealed in the service box and never opened. Thus can’t take it out to take the photo. But I remember the 15300 is definitely thicker both in term of case and bracelet. They wear very differently.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
__________________
Watching date changes every midnight
mineral is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17 February 2019, 03:49 PM   #36
Gaphle
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Japan
Posts: 31
Hi guys, im owner of 15300st, never owned the “Jumbo.” From what I know about the differences is.

1 thickness 9.4mm to 8.1mm
2 the dial design. One not mentioned is the tapestry pattern. 300 has bigger less squares to 502
3 although 300 has scew down crown, the crown hole is not drilled (its cut out) on 300 case which doesnt seem to look or feel better resisting water.
4 for slimmer or small and round wrist, 15202 may fit real nicely, 15300 has larger and thicker lugs on the case that makes the bracelets flair out.

My take on why i own 15300st to 15202st.

15300st is modern take on original 5402, just like naulilus 5711 takes on 3700st.
People like to compare 5711 to 15202 but i dont get it, it shoul be 15300st. 5711 is way too modern from original “jumbo.” So... when i read 15202 vs 5711, on forums and columns i felt some what discomforting, only simulariy was the msrp. Then i thought, well for the half of the price(back in 2013) of true to original as it can get 15202, and thrird of the price of 5711, you get just as good as 5711, its a bargain. I bought 15300st white dial, H series original paper sold on April 2011, and lately went to overhaul and had the dial AND DATE DISC swapped to Blue.

Back to the topic about 15202 vs 15300, 202 is homage piece, classic, one that is most closest survivor of 70s genta era... 15300st is modern, robust, just like 5711, perfect interpretation of genta magic(sorry if im putting too much 5711 relevancy). Buttt if i were to choose The 15202 for being the only True genta, and thats what i really want, I would buy 5402st A series if money was not an issue, or b or c series, which 15202 premium price is closing in on, if originality or exclusively is the choices I comprehend.

Sorry if my post isnt making sense. Enlish is not my first language. But i wanted to share my thoughts and my values about 15300, 15202 and 5711, and also 5402s.
Gaphle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17 February 2019, 04:09 PM   #37
Gaphle
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Japan
Posts: 31
My 15300st

My 15300st All Blue
Attached Images
File Type: jpeg 8AF4F108-4D36-45D8-9F57-370C3D1FAB4D.jpeg (262.8 KB, 529 views)
Gaphle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17 February 2019, 05:16 PM   #38
dlhussain
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: London
Posts: 184
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChipWong View Post
I actually passed on it but I do regret not paying able to flip it. Paying over 40k for a 15202 right now is absurd
That makes two of us ie not being able to flip it for a profit. Supply and demand, all the hot pieces are going for crazy prices. That’s capitalism.
__________________
Current: Rolex 116610LV, AP 15202ST, PP 5170P, PP 5712A
Grail: PP 5208P
dlhussain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17 February 2019, 08:58 PM   #39
ppalasthira
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: ASK
Watch: SubC.5711.D500
Posts: 2,236
Quote:
Originally Posted by dlhussain View Post
If your wrists are smaller than 6.5” then 15202 is likely to be too big for you. But try them all out, the 15400/15500 might be a better option if you wish to something more recent as the lugs are turned down more. If you’re wrist is less than 6” opt for the 15450.
Thanks! I’ve kinda almost given up on AP due to the wide spacing between the outer most rigid link.

I tried the 15450 last week and felt that it wore a bit small. The AP salerperson told me to wait for the 38mm chronograph. We’ll see.
ppalasthira is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17 February 2019, 10:05 PM   #40
korneevy
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Real Name: Yev
Location: SG/GVA/NYC/MEL ->
Watch: AP, VC, RLX, BP
Posts: 171
15202 for me is the only RO worth owning - but then I have another 12 mid to high tier pieces of various brands to fill the void - such as when I want to swim with the watch (Blancpain or AP Diver), travel (Rolex GMT), cycle (Vacheron Overseas chrono), wear to work every day without being feeling too self-conscious (IWC Portuguese chrono), an all-around beater (Speedy), a dress watch for special occasions (VC Patrimony)...and then it comes to hanging on a terrace of beach club, hosting a small cocktail party at my backyard or going out for a few overpriced drinks to a classy bar - I'd reach out for the Jumbo and it just does the trick. Yes the quick set is a bit of pain (but i've got a 24-piece huge watch winder and the AP date set tool, so no issue), the seconds hand is missing (which I actually prefer for a change - i am not in a rush to finish that Negroni when I wear the Jumbo), its water resistance is crap (but then I am not planning on swimming at a 5 star hotel bar, am I?) so all these "issues" are really non-issues for me.

The watch is so awesome even the non watch people think so when they see it in all of its shimmering glory, its thin profile, curved lugs and gorgeous blue dial reflecting off those dusty 40 year cognac bottles, down lights or massive crystal chandeliers or the warm ocean, be it in morning, evening, mid day does not matter...why buy anything else? :) I guess what I am trying to say is that the Jumbo (for me) is definitely not an everyday watch but it does fill the gap and serves its purpose (the way I define it) extremely well.
korneevy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17 February 2019, 10:14 PM   #41
Atlantic
"TRF" Member
 
Atlantic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: At Sea
Posts: 394
Quote:
Originally Posted by cascavel View Post
The 15300 is taller than the 15202 and I think the bracelet is thicker so that it matches the lug size of the case. If you are thinking of acquiring one of these two watches I would get the 15300, and I own the 15202. The 202 is an extremely elegant but highly impractical watch.
I’m curious as to why you say that? I’ve been considering a 15202.
Atlantic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18 February 2019, 01:16 AM   #42
subtona
"TRF" Member
 
subtona's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Real Name: gus
Location: East Coast
Watch: APK & sometimes Y
Posts: 25,958
The practical experience regarding the difference between these watches on the wrist could be an education in and of itself

When I was shopping for an AP I had the opportunity to try them all on in a single visit to the boutique.
300/400/202


The 15202 was miles away from the other two in fit. For me it was miles in the direction I would travel others might prefer the other direction.

My point is for all of the back and forth conversations, these watches benefit from a moment of wrist time more than any other comparisons I could think of. Don’t decide without trying them on.

All said however the 5711 ultimately wins the comparison for me with the 15202.
__________________
subtona is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18 February 2019, 11:59 AM   #43
brockburst
2024 Pledge Member
 
brockburst's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Chicago
Posts: 792
Quote:
Originally Posted by subtona View Post
The practical experience regarding the difference between these watches on the wrist could be an education in and of itself

When I was shopping for an AP I had the opportunity to try them all on in a single visit to the boutique.
300/400/202


The 15202 was miles away from the other two in fit. For me it was miles in the direction I would travel others might prefer the other direction.

My point is for all of the back and forth conversations, these watches benefit from a moment of wrist time more than any other comparisons I could think of. Don’t decide without trying them on.

All said however the 5711 ultimately wins the comparison for me with the 15202.
Good idea in theory, although in reality about impossible to try on two discontinued models and a hard to source model all at once....
brockburst is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19 February 2019, 03:53 AM   #44
steve k
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Orange County, CA
Watch: 116515LN OF
Posts: 75
I have tried all 202/300/400 and the biggest two differences have to be the thickness and the dial color. the 0.5mm thickness is something you can see and feel. The 300 dial color is not as rich of a blue as the 202/400 which can make it hard to read in the direct sunlight or low light.
steve k is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19 February 2019, 03:59 AM   #45
subtona
"TRF" Member
 
subtona's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Real Name: gus
Location: East Coast
Watch: APK & sometimes Y
Posts: 25,958
Quote:
Originally Posted by brockburst View Post
Good idea in theory, although in reality about impossible to try on two discontinued models and a hard to source model all at once....


For the cost of the investment, it is worth being a bit resourceful and finding a way try them on. Agree it may not be possible all at once however local watch gatherings and meetups can offer an opportunity to get a watch on your wrist for enough time to get valuable insight to its fit and wrist presence. Storefront Grey dealers are also likely to have all of the options available at once. I would expect 47st in manhattan to be one such place.


Alternatively you could trust my opinion and choose the 15202 out of the group or leave the group and choose the imho the superior 5711... however with current prices, this is just absurd... so would you consider a nice submariner? Ultimately I found the 5711 & the 15202 competed directly with my submariner for wrist time. In the end, I like the submariner better than both of them.
__________________
subtona is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19 February 2019, 04:03 AM   #46
mbalmz
2024 Pledge Member
 
mbalmz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Real Name: marc
Location: nyc
Posts: 1,350
I haven't owned either but have tried on both and actually found the 15202 to wear a bit larger on my wrist. The cases are the same but I think something about the thinness of the 15202 makes it feel larger--the bracelet is quite thin which makes it feel like it flares out a bit more with a small wrist (like mine is). For reference, I often wear a subC and/or a gmtC and for a royal oak my choice for my wrist is a 15450.
mbalmz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19 February 2019, 05:32 AM   #47
cascavel
2024 Pledge Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Location: Santa Fe
Posts: 1,845
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atlantic View Post
I’m curious as to why you say that? I’ve been considering a 15202.
The 15202 is a beautiful watch, I have one and I love it for it's terrific design and elegant fit. When I bought mine I was actually looking for a 15300 but had difficulty finding one in the condition I wanted and, at the time, the 15202 was readily available at the A/P boutique. What I have come to realize is that the movement is an anachronism, a relic of bygone days. If you do not keep it wound and decide to wear it but need to advance the date it is a nightmare. My own experience is that it takes about one minute to advance one day. Sometimes the date wheel doesn't advance and I have to knock the watch to get it to turn. Setting the time is no piece of cake, either, since the crown tends to pop back in rather easily.
I don't think the 15202 is suitable as an "only" watch but it makes a great stainless dress watch. Hope that helps with your decision.
cascavel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19 February 2019, 06:30 AM   #48
wisguy
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Earth
Posts: 2,406
Quote:
Originally Posted by cascavel View Post
The 15202 is a beautiful watch, I have one and I love it for it's terrific design and elegant fit. When I bought mine I was actually looking for a 15300 but had difficulty finding one in the condition I wanted and, at the time, the 15202 was readily available at the A/P boutique. What I have come to realize is that the movement is an anachronism, a relic of bygone days. If you do not keep it wound and decide to wear it but need to advance the date it is a nightmare. My own experience is that it takes about one minute to advance one day. Sometimes the date wheel doesn't advance and I have to knock the watch to get it to turn. Setting the time is no piece of cake, either, since the crown tends to pop back in rather easily.
I don't think the 15202 is suitable as an "only" watch but it makes a great stainless dress watch. Hope that helps with your decision.
Agree with most of your comments, the crown and date setting on the 15202 drove me crazy.

On the other hand I think it works better as an only watch, that way you don't need to worry about setting the time and date.

It can take everyday life except for water sports.
__________________
5230G / 5146G / 124060 / BB58 / '59 Constellation
wisguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19 February 2019, 06:53 AM   #49
cascavel
2024 Pledge Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Location: Santa Fe
Posts: 1,845
Quote:
Originally Posted by wisguy View Post
Agree with most of your comments, the crown and date setting on the 15202 drove me crazy.

On the other hand I think it works better as an only watch, that way you don't need to worry about setting the time and date.

It can take everyday life except for water sports.
Point taken about it being an "only" watch. But would you rather have the 15202 or your 5711 as an "only" watch? I find the 5711 to be the perfect 3 hand watch and have a difficult time wearing anything else.
cascavel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19 February 2019, 09:34 AM   #50
wisguy
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Earth
Posts: 2,406
Quote:
Originally Posted by cascavel View Post
Point taken about it being an "only" watch. But would you rather have the 15202 or your 5711 as an "only" watch? I find the 5711 to be the perfect 3 hand watch and have a difficult time wearing anything else.
Well... I did sell the 15202 to fund a 5711 so you know where I stand!
__________________
5230G / 5146G / 124060 / BB58 / '59 Constellation
wisguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19 February 2019, 09:43 AM   #51
dlhussain
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: London
Posts: 184
Quote:
Originally Posted by cascavel View Post
The 15202 is a beautiful watch, I have one and I love it for it's terrific design and elegant fit. When I bought mine I was actually looking for a 15300 but had difficulty finding one in the condition I wanted and, at the time, the 15202 was readily available at the A/P boutique. What I have come to realize is that the movement is an anachronism, a relic of bygone days. If you do not keep it wound and decide to wear it but need to advance the date it is a nightmare. My own experience is that it takes about one minute to advance one day. Sometimes the date wheel doesn't advance and I have to knock the watch to get it to turn. Setting the time is no piece of cake, either, since the crown tends to pop back in rather easily.
I don't think the 15202 is suitable as an "only" watch but it makes a great stainless dress watch. Hope that helps with your decision.
You don’t go back and forth through midnight? Gotta use a winder on this. Pleasure and pain my friend. Can’t wait to get another 15202!!
__________________
Current: Rolex 116610LV, AP 15202ST, PP 5170P, PP 5712A
Grail: PP 5208P
dlhussain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19 February 2019, 09:45 AM   #52
dlhussain
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: London
Posts: 184
The original Genta design is a far superior watch in terms of dial, case and bracelet finish. I won’t mention the more subjective aspects as everyone has different tastes. I vote for the 15202 if I could only own one watch for the rest of my days
__________________
Current: Rolex 116610LV, AP 15202ST, PP 5170P, PP 5712A
Grail: PP 5208P
dlhussain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19 February 2019, 10:42 AM   #53
AK797
2024 Pledge Member
 
AK797's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Real Name: Neil
Location: UK
Watch: ing ships roll in
Posts: 59,066
I'm another 5711/12 preferer.
AK797 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19 February 2019, 10:50 AM   #54
dlhussain
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: London
Posts: 184
This is a 15300 v 15202 thread....
__________________
Current: Rolex 116610LV, AP 15202ST, PP 5170P, PP 5712A
Grail: PP 5208P
dlhussain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21 February 2019, 04:27 PM   #55
pyceasyas123
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Toronto
Posts: 68
15300 vs 15202

Here is a side by side for you. The 15202 feels much lighter on the wrist. I wouldn’t say the 15300 wears bigger but it definitely feels bulkier. The petite tapisserie dial is what pushes me to the 15202. The beveled hour markers are the 15300 (similar on the 15400) catch so much light - it’s a cool effect on the dial that the 15202 doesn’t have.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
pyceasyas123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1 March 2019, 11:49 PM   #56
inxs777
"TRF" Member
 
inxs777's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Europe
Watch: 15202or
Posts: 42
I prefer the 15202 over the 15300, to me it looks much more classy and refined. The 15202 is pure magic. I think the 5711 looks very boring and dated in comparison to the 15202. The 15202 looks much more masculin with the sharp edges.. don‘t forget the 5711 was originally planned to be a women‘s watch ;)
inxs777 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7 March 2019, 10:08 PM   #57
Horolojust
"TRF" Member
 
Horolojust's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Australia
Posts: 259
Quote:
Originally Posted by brockburst View Post
Would it be a fair assessment to say the 15300 wears 'bigger' than a 15202? Not having the ability to try on both at the same time just curious the honest thoughts between both references if someone has had the opportunity to spend meaningful time with them.

Comparatively, I have always thought a 15400 wears much bigger than a Submariner for example, curious on the thoughts on that too.

Thanks in advance for the responses and TRF for the space.
I think 15300 wears similar to pre ceramic sub and smaller than ceramic subs.

IMG_5576.jpg



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Horolojust is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7 March 2019, 10:10 PM   #58
Horolojust
"TRF" Member
 
Horolojust's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Australia
Posts: 259
Quote:
Originally Posted by pyceasyas123 View Post
Here is a side by side for you. The 15202 feels much lighter on the wrist. I wouldn’t say the 15300 wears bigger but it definitely feels bulkier. The petite tapisserie dial is what pushes me to the 15202. The beveled hour markers are the 15300 (similar on the 15400) catch so much light - it’s a cool effect on the dial that the 15202 doesn’t have.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Oh wow. I never knew until now that 15202 didn’t have beveled ends on the hour markers? Are you sure?
That’s one attribute I absolutely love on my 15400 and 15300


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Horolojust is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7 March 2019, 10:19 PM   #59
jay_kay
"TRF" Member
 
jay_kay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Barrowford
Watch: Tudor Black Bay 54
Posts: 1,699
I used to have a 15300 blue dial and it was very nice. Last year I decided I needed another RotalOak in my life and was set on the 15300 again. The 15202 was too much of a stretch at the time but I did have the opportunity to handle it next to the 15300 and if I had to choose between the 2 the 15202 would be my money no object 39mm AP. That said, the 36mm 14790 is nicer on my wrist than either and it's considerably less money too.

__________________
Rolex Explorer 214270, Omega Speedmaster '1957 Relaunch' 3594.50.00, Panerai Luminor 1950 PAM00127-E, Panerai Radiomir 1936 PAM00249-I, Panerai Mare Nostrum PAM00716-T, Panerai PAM00785-Q Set, Panerai Luminor Black Seal PAM00594-Q, Panerai Luminor Daylight PAM00604-Q, Tudor Black Bay 54 79000N, Heuer Carrera Re-Edition CS3113, Hamilton Military W10 & TAG Heuer F1
jay_kay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7 March 2019, 10:54 PM   #60
mineral
"TRF" Member
 
mineral's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 3,670
15300 vs 15202

Quote:
Originally Posted by jay_kay View Post
I used to have a 15300 blue dial and it was very nice. Last year I decided I needed another RotalOak in my life and was set on the 15300 again. The 15202 was too much of a stretch at the time but I did have the opportunity to handle it next to the 15300 and if I had to choose between the 2 the 15202 would be my money no object 39mm AP. That said, the 36mm 14790 is nicer on my wrist than either and it's considerably less money too.



This is nice and 36mm RO is perfect! I own the 39mm and can foresee that the slightly smaller diameter will wear even more comfortable. Good choice!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
__________________
Watching date changes every midnight
mineral 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

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.