ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

earl of huntingdon · 1 July 2009, 04:26 AM

my choice would be 312

TswaneNguni · 1 July 2009, 04:41 AM

312 > 88

GBJIV · 3 July 2009, 05:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TswaneNguni

312 > 88

I think I agree here. I have hte 88 and love it. I have the 233 and really love it.

Tought call but, I think I would lean toward 312. Hard to go wrong.

Best,

Cool Hand Luke · 4 July 2009, 04:41 AM

312 for me but i might be a little biased :)

At the end of the day just go for the one that 'speaks' to you most

VazLube · 4 July 2009, 03:54 PM

312 no question.

Never liked 88 because it's bit too showy and that dreaded silver seconds dial. Different strokes for different folks. I'm in simplicity camp.

If there was a model with clean dail with those thick skeleton hands like this 88, then I would be over it.

1 July 2009, 04:26 AM	#31
earl of huntingdon Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Real Name: petrie Location: Bangkok, thailand Watch: rolex and pam Posts: 106	my choice would be 312

1 July 2009, 04:41 AM	#32
TswaneNguni "TRF" Member Join Date: Feb 2008 Real Name: Chris Location: . Watch: Daytonas/Subs/GMTs Posts: 12,609	312 > 88

4 July 2009, 04:41 AM	#34
Cool Hand Luke Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: UK Posts: 45	312 for me but i might be a little biased :) At the end of the day just go for the one that 'speaks' to you most

4 July 2009, 03:54 PM	#35
VazLube Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: South of Equator Posts: 278	312 no question. Never liked 88 because it's bit too showy and that dreaded silver seconds dial. Different strokes for different folks. I'm in simplicity camp. If there was a model with clean dail with those thick skeleton hands like this 88, then I would be over it.

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