ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

mike · 23 December 2007, 11:56 AM

For those that wonder,

stewie · 23 December 2007, 12:15 PM

interesting, thanks man

Paulie · 23 December 2007, 12:16 PM

Cool! Where would the 16750 fit in the stack?

mike · 23 December 2007, 12:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paulie

Cool! Where would the 16750 fit in the stack?

Bout here.

Letsgodiving · 23 December 2007, 12:44 PM

It's difficult to tell from the pics but it looks like the Milgauss is giving the SD a run for its money. Say it ain't so!

Paulie · 23 December 2007, 01:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mike

Bout here.

LoL. Awesome Mike.

Funny, the 1675 and 16750 are still monsters even compared to the "supercase".

sharif · 23 December 2007, 03:09 PM

Notice how the crystals are installed less and less "prouder", for lack of a better word, as time goes on. The new GMTIIc crystal sits nearly flush with the bezel. One thing I wish they didnt do.

Texsubmariner · 23 December 2007, 05:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sharif@forged

Notice how the crystals are installed less and less "prouder", for lack of a better word, as time goes on. The new GMTIIc crystal sits nearly flush with the bezel. One thing I wish they didnt do.

Actually, I like the way the GMT IIc crystal sits, mainly because the watch fits under my cuff. With the supercase already "super" as it is, if the GMT's crystal is set like the SD, It would be a tight fit for me under the cuff. Of course, the "thinner" case back also helps. Either way, I am still thinking of getting the SD

.

Lol-x · 23 December 2007, 07:12 PM

So is the Milgauss the thickest case Mike. I'm surprised it is even thicker than the Sea-Dweller.
One thing is for sure the Milgauss isn't thicker than the Tudor "Big Block" 79180

The "Big Block" is stamped on the caseback that it is an oyster case manufactured by Rolex.
Here is a thickness comparison of the Tudor Chronograph (with Rolex case) and a 1665 Sea-Dweller.

23 December 2007, 11:56 AM	#1
mike "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 22,683	Thickness For those that wonder,

23 December 2007, 12:16 PM	#3
Paulie "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Chicagoland Watch: GMTII and OP! Posts: 1,272	Cool! Where would the 16750 fit in the stack? __________________

23 December 2007, 12:15 PM	#2
stewie Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: USA Posts: 323	interesting, thanks man

23 December 2007, 12:44 PM	#5
Letsgodiving "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Real Name: Mike Location: Virginia, US Watch: SD 16600 Posts: 4,318	It's difficult to tell from the pics but it looks like the Milgauss is giving the SD a run for its money. Say it ain't so!

23 December 2007, 03:09 PM	#7
sharif Member Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: South East USA Posts: 671	Notice how the crystals are installed less and less "prouder", for lack of a better word, as time goes on. The new GMTIIc crystal sits nearly flush with the bezel. One thing I wish they didnt do.

23 December 2007, 07:12 PM	#9
Lol-x Facilitator Join Date: Nov 2005 Real Name: Steve Location: Omnipresent Posts: 33,553	So is the Milgauss the thickest case Mike. I'm surprised it is even thicker than the Sea-Dweller. One thing is for sure the Milgauss isn't thicker than the Tudor "Big Block" 79180 The "Big Block" is stamped on the caseback that it is an oyster case manufactured by Rolex. Here is a thickness comparison of the Tudor Chronograph (with Rolex case) and a 1665 Sea-Dweller.

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