ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

Dan2010 · 26 February 2012, 06:18 AM

HDNTER and I checked out a couple places today including a new Omega boutique and the owner had the new PO 8500 with black bezel and silver numbers in 45.5MM as well as the orange bezel with orange numbers in 42MM.

I never had an interest in an orange bezel watch and still don't. I do like the ceramic bezel on the black and silver PO but just as I feared, I did not like how the numbers "black out" in certain light. I do like the shade of black of the dial on the 8500 better than my 2500 PO. The clear case back was a nice addition as well. One thing that was noticeable to me was the increased thickness of the case needed for the 8500 movement. I did not find this a good thing and it begins to make the watch a bit top heavy.

And if I am honest, the changes did not wow me enough to part with my PO 2500. I do think it is nice though but it's just not for me.

psv · 26 February 2012, 06:28 AM

The display back and Cal 8500 made the PO too thick for my tastes.

TuonoRider · 26 February 2012, 07:28 AM

were the 45.5 and the 42 in 8500 the same thickness? I would assume yes...

I need to look at one again...unfortunately, Tourneau, my closest AD, only had the 45.5 in stock when I was looking.

xjeeunitx · 26 February 2012, 08:16 AM

A reason why I didn't get the 42mm 8500 PO is because the date window is not beveled. 2500 POs and 45.5mm 8500 POs have the beveled dates. I guess someone screwed up at the factory or it was intentional hence a very bad idea. And, the 45.5mm is way to big for my taste...

warrior · 26 February 2012, 09:24 AM

I was at a boutique today as well. The PO 8500 thickness is the ONLY reason why I am hesitating to get one. It really exudes quality. I love the Black Bezel/Orange Numerals version.

On another note, I also saw the Blue Bond ceramic, which was unbelievably good looking. The blue is really vibrant and eye catching. The dial is just so freaking sharp.

warrior · 26 February 2012, 10:07 AM

They are different in terms of thickness. The 45.5, I believe, is 16.5 MM thick and the 42MM is 15.7MM thick.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TuonoRider

were the 45.5 and the 42 in 8500 the same thickness? I would assume yes...

I need to look at one again...unfortunately, Tourneau, my closest AD, only had the 45.5 in stock when I was looking.

clarencek · 26 February 2012, 10:33 AM

Don't worry about the thickness. You get used to it and it's totally worth it.

warrior · 26 February 2012, 10:37 AM

AH...the 9300 movement! That PO Chrono is a BEAST! Your post gives me hope that my wrist can handle the much thinner PO 8500 : ) : )

Quote:

Originally Posted by clarencek

Don't worry about the thickness. You get used to it and it's totally worth it.

warren G. · 1 March 2012, 02:04 PM

I really like the new PO 8500. If it wasn't too thick, I would of bought that over the Sub-C no doubt. The new POC is a really really nice piece, but once again..just too thick for my taste.

moby33 · 2 March 2012, 02:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by clarencek

Don't worry about the thickness. You get used to it and it's totally worth it.

8500 may not be "improved" enough over the 2500 (from a cosmetics standpoint) for some...but no question for me the new 2 subdial 9300 is an AMAZING improvement over the previous POC! Bravo Zulu to Omega for the 9300!

Wisconsin Proud · 2 March 2012, 06:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by clarencek

Don't worry about the thickness. You get used to it and it's totally worth it.

^^

Appears too big on your wrist

00Seven · 2 March 2012, 07:24 AM

I'm with you. I don't like the added thickness and the silver #'s disappear in certain light conditions.

26 February 2012, 06:18 AM	#1
Dan2010 "TRF" Member Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: South Carolina Watch: Panerai 914 Posts: 6,540	Saw the new PO 8500 today HDNTER and I checked out a couple places today including a new Omega boutique and the owner had the new PO 8500 with black bezel and silver numbers in 45.5MM as well as the orange bezel with orange numbers in 42MM. I never had an interest in an orange bezel watch and still don't. I do like the ceramic bezel on the black and silver PO but just as I feared, I did not like how the numbers "black out" in certain light. I do like the shade of black of the dial on the 8500 better than my 2500 PO. The clear case back was a nice addition as well. One thing that was noticeable to me was the increased thickness of the case needed for the 8500 movement. I did not find this a good thing and it begins to make the watch a bit top heavy. And if I am honest, the changes did not wow me enough to part with my PO 2500. I do think it is nice though but it's just not for me.

26 February 2012, 10:33 AM	#7
clarencek "TRF" Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: New York Posts: 400	Don't worry about the thickness. You get used to it and it's totally worth it. __________________ Citizen AQ4020-54X, NB6005-05L, NB6006-02X, Casio GMW-B5000TFC, MRG-B5000B, MTG-B1000XB, Hamilton Field Khaki H70605731, IWC IW356501, IWC387902, Longines Spirit L3.810.4.93.0, MKII PMWF Graywater GMT, Project 300, Omega 210.92.42.20.01.001, 304.33.44.52.03.001, Rolex 116400GV, 116520, 116610LV, 126600, 326933, Seiko SBGA001, SLA019, Sinn U1-ST

1 March 2012, 02:04 PM	#9
warren G. "TRF" Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Real Name: Duy Location: New Orleans, LA Watch: Speedmaster 3861 Posts: 1,925	I really like the new PO 8500. If it wasn't too thick, I would of bought that over the Sub-C no doubt. The new POC is a really really nice piece, but once again..just too thick for my taste. __________________ De gustibus non est disputandum.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

26 February 2012, 06:28 AM	#2
psv 2024 Pledge Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: USA & France Posts: 11,078	The display back and Cal 8500 made the PO too thick for my tastes.

26 February 2012, 07:28 AM	#3
TuonoRider "TRF" Member Join Date: Nov 2011 Real Name: John Location: Lancaster Co., PA Watch: Omega Speedmaster Posts: 268	were the 45.5 and the 42 in 8500 the same thickness? I would assume yes... I need to look at one again...unfortunately, Tourneau, my closest AD, only had the 45.5 in stock when I was looking.

26 February 2012, 08:16 AM	#4
xjeeunitx 2024 Pledge Member Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 5,471	A reason why I didn't get the 42mm 8500 PO is because the date window is not beveled. 2500 POs and 45.5mm 8500 POs have the beveled dates. I guess someone screwed up at the factory or it was intentional hence a very bad idea. And, the 45.5mm is way to big for my taste...

26 February 2012, 09:24 AM	#5
warrior "TRF" Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: massachusetts Watch: Explorer Posts: 1,692	I was at a boutique today as well. The PO 8500 thickness is the ONLY reason why I am hesitating to get one. It really exudes quality. I love the Black Bezel/Orange Numerals version. On another note, I also saw the Blue Bond ceramic, which was unbelievably good looking. The blue is really vibrant and eye catching. The dial is just so freaking sharp.

2 March 2012, 07:24 AM	#12
00Seven "TRF" Member Join Date: Oct 2010 Real Name: Nick Location: Kennesaw, GA Watch: Omega Posts: 825	I'm with you. I don't like the added thickness and the silver #'s disappear in certain light conditions.

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