Royal Oak "Jumbo" Extra Thin ?

[WatchTimes]

Prices are finally starting to come down and I've been wanting one for a while.
One thing that I am kinda unsure of is that it doesn't have a seconds hand, part of the appeal of watches to me is the motion and sweeping of the seconds hand.
I honestly don't think I've ever owned a watch without a seconds hand.
Of course I know it wouldn't be able to be so thin with a second hand but did this stop anyone or make anyone think twice before getting the Extra Thin?

[7sins]

I had a similar concern years ago before my first jumbo and TBH you get used to it after awhile, also, subjectively makes the dial a bit cleaner. Unless you are staring at your watch for a long time, it won't bother you and the design of the case, bracelet and dial will keep you mesmerized for years. If you can swing it in PM, it becomes even more special.

[fsprow]

Originally Posted by WatchTimes

Prices are finally starting to come down and I've been wanting one for a while.
One thing that I am kinda unsure of is that it doesn't have a seconds hand, part of the appeal of watches to me is the motion and sweeping of the seconds hand.
I honestly don't think I've ever owned a watch without a seconds hand.
Of course I know it wouldn't be able to be so thin with a second hand but did this stop anyone or make anyone think twice before getting the Extra Thin?

I actually prefer not having a second hand — keeps you from checking the timekeeping more often than reasonable.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[sasuke]

lack of second hand did not sway my decision to pick up a jumbo. The ease of adjusting date and more pliable bracelet made me chose 16202 over 15202.

[turfmanjon]

Same here. Never had a watch with no seconds hand. I love it this way on the Jumbo as don’t obsess over timekeeping and dial is very clean and legible.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[s14roller]

Many years ago I wanted it to have more things to look at. As I’ve gotten older I have appreciated the simple dial and thinness. Great piece, go for it

[WatchTimes]

I appreciate simple and have come to appreciate No Dates as of recent.
If this had no date I think Id have already pulled the trigger LOL!
I thought prices had dropped and they did somewhat but not as much as I thought as I just realized I was looking at the 15202 not the 16202.
I really think Id go for the 16202 due to the movement more than the date improvement.

[rjohnston713]

Originally Posted by WatchTimes

I appreciate simple and have come to appreciate No Dates as of recent.
If this had no date I think Id have already pulled the trigger LOL!
I thought prices had dropped and they did somewhat but not as much as I thought as I just realized I was looking at the 15202 not the 16202.
I really think Id go for the 16202 due to the movement more than the date improvement.

If we could get rid of the date window on most watches I would like so many references more than I do across all brands

[JettyOne]

15202 or 16202 practically the same watch. Date window is so small, I don’t bother to set it.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Il-Re]

I don't worry about the seconds hand. To me it is THE Royal Oak.

[In-N-Out]

Agree with others here. It’s nice not having the seconds hand so I don’t obsess over the +10sec/day

[APhound]

It’s not an issue on this. Don’t let it stop you it’s so nice.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[srvrf]

I bought my first watch without a second hand (VC Overseas Retrograde) and you would get used to it. I think with the jumbo, you'll just stare at it amazement.

[scottmlew]

I do miss seeing "movement" on my Jumbo, and every once in a while I want to time something at second resolution and can't, but I still love the watch and would highly recommend getting one. I came to appreciate the clean dial, and it lets you focus on the craftsmanship there. And of course, if you insist on seeing some "action", you can gaze at the beautiful movement.

[CarForHire]

I've been watching jumbo prices closely for months now. I'm surprised the premium on the 16202 isn't that much compared to the 15202. They're still holding strong

[huncho]

Originally Posted by CarForHire

I've been watching jumbo prices closely for months now. I'm surprised the premium on the 16202 isn't that much compared to the 15202. They're still holding strong

there's a pretty big gap between the two, 15202s are like 15-20k cheaper than 16202s depending on how old they are

[SN2354]

15202 seems almost like a bargain compared to 16202!

50th anniversary models aside, I rather set the date than pay 15-20k more for a 16202!!

[CarForHire]

Since the the 16202 has the updated bracelet too, would a 15202 fit similar if you had the watch on very tight?

[911cz]

Absolute best size RO! The time is coming to grab one at a better price.

[WatchingAustin]

if you want the seconds hand get the 15500 or 15400 and save some money. Not having the second hands is part of the extra thin movement charm, which if that doesn't matter for you then no point in a jumbo.

[Apdl]

I need my big seconds however, there is not real practical implication

[WatchTimes]

The Gray premium is what's killing me here....
I get why there is the premium, simply supply and demand but I just have such a hard time paying double MSRP.
Almost makes me want to buy a Patek 5172 but as much as I want one I just have never really liked a watch on a strap...

[Policylimits_]

Unless you want to go on the journey with the brand paying the current asking prices will be far less spend. I went with 15202 after going back and forth between 16202 and 15202. Perfect size watch. I owned the 15500 and found it to wear very large on my 6.75 inch wrist. This wears perfect

[salnuaimi]

Originally Posted by Policylimits_

Unless you want to go on the journey with the brand paying the current asking prices will be far less spend. I went with 15202 after going back and forth between 16202 and 15202. Perfect size watch. I owned the 15500 and found it to wear very large on my 6.75 inch wrist. This wears perfect

any notable diffrences between the 16 and 15 beside the date

[arnage]

Originally Posted by salnuaimi

any notable diffrences between the 16 and 15 beside the date

Earlier 15202s (was a mid-cycle change during the i series) still retain the monobloc case. I presume all of the 16202s are three-piece cases

[CarForHire]

Originally Posted by salnuaimi

any notable diffrences between the 16 and 15 beside the date

The biggest change other than the quick set date function is the bracelet. I remember hearing from a comparison that because of the way the 16202 bracelet is made it wears a little smaller. I haven’t compared side by side though. Also of course the new movement.

[turfmanjon]

Originally Posted by CarForHire

The biggest change other than the quick set date function is the bracelet. I remember hearing from a comparison that because of the way the 16202 bracelet is made it wears a little smaller. I haven’t compared side by side though. Also of course the new movement.

I don’t know if 16202 actually wears smaller, but that due to the slightly tweaked bracelet, it’s able to wear better on smaller wrists as able to drape down more than 15202. For normal sized wrists, shouldn’t make a difference.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[WatchTimes]

Originally Posted by salnuaimi

any notable diffrences between the 16 and 15 beside the date

16202 is a new movement, also an article I read says it has a new dial design.

[Octagon Guy]

Originally Posted by WatchTimes

16202 is a new movement, also an article I read says it has a new dial design.

There's no new dial design. Only movement and bracelet is different.

[VogelPhoenix]

Originally Posted by Octagon Guy

There's no new dial design. Only movement and bracelet is different.

Technically, the date window has moved by a fraction of a tapisserie square, so it is a new dial, with otherwise identical design.