ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

hitman23 · 17 April 2013, 11:39 PM

So I just received a new 2201.51 with 2500D movement. It feels a bit smaller than my ExpII 42mm. It wears more like a 40mm to me. Love the case shape and proportions. The new 8500 PO felt too thick for a 42mm. I'm a sucker for matte dials as it just looks more classy too me. The orange numbers pop off this dial. My only complaint would be the bracelet. Not really impressed with this one. The newer Rolex bracelets just feel and fit better than this one. Even the older rolex bracelets fit perfect with the micro-adjustments. I may just order an isofrane to go with this one. As for the 2500D, I guess time will tell how durable and reliable it will be. Overall, a great value at it's street price.

JP Chestnut · 18 April 2013, 12:09 AM

Omegas wear smaller than their listed size. The 42mm PO is definitely smaller than the 42mm Explorer 2.

wingku · 18 April 2013, 01:36 AM

I have the exact same one. Very happy with it.

jmsrolls · 18 April 2013, 03:57 AM

I put my trusty micrometer to the cases of (L-R) my PO LM LE (cal. 2500C), 216750 EXPII, and Speedy Pro:

All three are within hundredths of a mm being the same size.

The PO and the Speedy Pro wear smaller due to the black bezels.

JP Chestnut · 18 April 2013, 07:04 AM

^^ would you measure the "height" of each watch? This would be the distance from the tip of one lug to the tip of the opposite lug. That's actually the critical measurement on any watch.

WJGESQ · 22 April 2013, 11:39 AM

All three are within hundredths of a mm being the same size.

The PO and the Speedy Pro wear smaller due to the black bezels.[/QUOTE]

No more Ploprof?

psv · 26 April 2013, 10:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jmsrolls

I put my trusty micrometer to the cases of (L-R) my PO LM LE (cal. 2500C), 216750 EXPII, and Speedy Pro:

All three are within hundredths of a mm being the same size.

The PO and the Speedy Pro wear smaller due to the black bezels.

That is fine, fine trio, Father John!

zeroshiki · 22 April 2013, 03:37 PM

The PO 42 actually is more like a 40mm watch mainly because the case on the crown side tapers wider functioning as crown guard.

cedargrove · 23 April 2013, 01:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zeroshiki

The PO 42 actually is more like a 40mm watch mainly because the case on the crown side tapers wider functioning as crown guard.

Yes, this is the reason many Omegas wear smaller. If you measure the width of the bezel instead of the case they are around 1.5mm smaller.

AbqRolexFan · 22 April 2013, 10:26 PM

I have to agree. I bought a Planet Ocean 42mm recently and couldn't get over the feeling that it looked small on my wrist. I ended up giving it to my wife and buying the 45mm version.

17 April 2013, 11:39 PM	#1
hitman23 "TRF" Member Join Date: Feb 2012 Location: ny Posts: 765	Planet Ocean first impressions So I just received a new 2201.51 with 2500D movement. It feels a bit smaller than my ExpII 42mm. It wears more like a 40mm to me. Love the case shape and proportions. The new 8500 PO felt too thick for a 42mm. I'm a sucker for matte dials as it just looks more classy too me. The orange numbers pop off this dial. My only complaint would be the bracelet. Not really impressed with this one. The newer Rolex bracelets just feel and fit better than this one. Even the older rolex bracelets fit perfect with the micro-adjustments. I may just order an isofrane to go with this one. As for the 2500D, I guess time will tell how durable and reliable it will be. Overall, a great value at it's street price.

22 April 2013, 10:26 PM	#10
AbqRolexFan "TRF" Member Join Date: Aug 2011 Location: Albuquerque, NM Posts: 244	I have to agree. I bought a Planet Ocean 42mm recently and couldn't get over the feeling that it looked small on my wrist. I ended up giving it to my wife and buying the 45mm version. __________________ 126610LV, 126710BLNR, 126600, 126334, Omega Black & Orange Planet Ocean 600M, Omega Black Ceramic 300M

18 April 2013, 12:09 AM	#2
JP Chestnut Banned Join Date: May 2012 Location: Ann Arbor MI Watch: Rolex Ref 16600 Posts: 3,908	Omegas wear smaller than their listed size. The 42mm PO is definitely smaller than the 42mm Explorer 2.

18 April 2013, 01:36 AM	#3
wingku "TRF" Member Join Date: Nov 2010 Real Name: Wing Location: Calgary,AB,Canada Watch: the World unfold Posts: 1,019	I have the exact same one. Very happy with it.

18 April 2013, 03:57 AM	#4
jmsrolls Banned Join Date: May 2008 Location: USA Posts: 3,185	I put my trusty micrometer to the cases of (L-R) my PO LM LE (cal. 2500C), 216750 EXPII, and Speedy Pro: All three are within hundredths of a mm being the same size. The PO and the Speedy Pro wear smaller due to the black bezels.

18 April 2013, 07:04 AM	#5
JP Chestnut Banned Join Date: May 2012 Location: Ann Arbor MI Watch: Rolex Ref 16600 Posts: 3,908	^^ would you measure the "height" of each watch? This would be the distance from the tip of one lug to the tip of the opposite lug. That's actually the critical measurement on any watch.

22 April 2013, 11:39 AM	#6
WJGESQ Banned Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Florida Posts: 3,753	All three are within hundredths of a mm being the same size. The PO and the Speedy Pro wear smaller due to the black bezels.[/QUOTE] No more Ploprof?

22 April 2013, 03:37 PM	#8
zeroshiki "TRF" Member Join Date: Apr 2010 Real Name: paul Location: surabaya Posts: 321	The PO 42 actually is more like a 40mm watch mainly because the case on the crown side tapers wider functioning as crown guard.

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