ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

GTS Dean · 15 December 2014, 02:56 PM

Practically all the 8500/9300 Co-Ax watches appear to suffer from the common complaint of being too thick for many people. (myself included) Don't they all come with a display caseback, and isn't this a significant contributor to the thickness? I've never had a watch with a display back, and frankly don't care much what the insides look like as long as they work.

Perhaps it's more due to the 300 & 600m case rating because I don't think I've ever heard the complaint about an 8500 AT 150. My GMT II-C has a very flat, comfortable case back and wears about like my Speedy. The big dial/fat case designs don't do much for me.
____________________________
TT OysterQuartz
SS/Black "U" Daytona
TT GMT II-C
DD OysterQuartz
Breitling Aero
Omega Speedmaster Pro

15 December 2014, 02:56 PM	#1
GTS Dean "TRF" Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: NB, TX Watch: 3570.50 Posts: 1,012	Thick watches Practically all the 8500/9300 Co-Ax watches appear to suffer from the common complaint of being too thick for many people. (myself included) Don't they all come with a display caseback, and isn't this a significant contributor to the thickness? I've never had a watch with a display back, and frankly don't care much what the insides look like as long as they work. Perhaps it's more due to the 300 & 600m case rating because I don't think I've ever heard the complaint about an 8500 AT 150. My GMT II-C has a very flat, comfortable case back and wears about like my Speedy. The big dial/fat case designs don't do much for me. ____________________________ TT OysterQuartz SS/Black "U" Daytona TT GMT II-C DD OysterQuartz Breitling Aero Omega Speedmaster Pro

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