The Rolex Forums   The Rolex Watch

ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX


Go Back   Rolex Forums - Rolex Watch Forum > Other (non-Rolex) Watch Topics > Audemars Piguet Discussion Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 30 September 2014, 02:22 AM   #1
tuang
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: thailand
Posts: 24
Royal oak chrono vs 15202 extra thin

Royal oak chronograph 41mm ss vs extra thin 39 mm, which one will you choose? Reason why will be very appreciate , thank you for every comment.
Cheers
tuang is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 September 2014, 02:38 AM   #2
sebastien1975
"TRF" Member
 
sebastien1975's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Real Name: Sebastien
Location: South East Asia
Posts: 788
Both great. I don't like chrono as i think it clutters the dial - one of the greatest thing on the Royal Oak. So Jumbo for me.
sebastien1975 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 September 2014, 02:39 AM   #3
Manofsteelpt
"TRF" Member
 
Manofsteelpt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Real Name: Mike
Location: Buffalo, NY
Posts: 3,971
I would choose the ROC being a hair larger and having the Chrono function is useful to me... Most will choose the iconic Jumbo, which I also like... I would def have it in my collection too.
Manofsteelpt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 September 2014, 02:52 AM   #4
JorgeCCW
"TRF" Member
 
JorgeCCW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Real Name: Jorge
Location: Ohio, USA
Watch: Rolex,Patek and AP
Posts: 4,674
Royal oak chrono vs 15202 extra thin

For me the AP Chrono, I think it will stick to the collection longer than the Jumbo, unless you have a big collection. But if the Jumbo is your grail, I think is a hell of a daily wear. It also has to be seen in the context of what you have. If you have a Daytona, then without a shadow of a doubt I would go Jumbo. So its relative.
And let's face it for Average WIS the only choice is the iconic Jumbo, but more important is the smile on your face.

Good luck !
__________________
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Nothing happens until something moves "
Albert Einstein
JorgeCCW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 September 2014, 02:59 AM   #5
GB-man
2024 Pledge Member
 
GB-man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: USA
Watch: addiction issues
Posts: 36,815
If your wrist is sub 7 inches I would go jumbo, over 7 and I would go ROC. I found the jumbo to be too small on my 7.5 wrist.
GB-man is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 September 2014, 03:06 AM   #6
Presa canary
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Real Name: Justin
Location: Pa
Watch: Explorer ii
Posts: 3,148
15202, for sure
Presa canary is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 September 2014, 03:33 AM   #7
srvrf
2024 Pledge Member
 
srvrf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Real Name: Steve
Location: Indiana
Watch: PP/AP
Posts: 2,068
Quote:
Originally Posted by tuang View Post
Royal oak chronograph 41mm ss vs extra thin 39 mm, which one will you choose? Reason why will be very appreciate , thank you for every comment.
Cheers
I'll second the comment about wrist size and say that if you have a smaller wrist (like under 7") then the 26320 ROCs will probably be a little too big. So one of the older 25860 or 26300's will look better. But in the end, it will depend on what you like best and what fits into your current collection. Can't really go wrong.
srvrf is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 30 September 2014, 03:37 AM   #8
subtona
"TRF" Member
 
subtona's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Real Name: gus
Location: East Coast
Watch: APK & sometimes Y
Posts: 25,958
202 in a different league IMHO
subtona is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 September 2014, 04:39 AM   #9
AK797
2024 Pledge Member
 
AK797's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Real Name: Neil
Location: UK
Watch: ing ships roll in
Posts: 59,066
Quote:
Originally Posted by GB-man View Post
If your wrist is sub 7 inches I would go jumbo, over 7 and I would go ROC. I found the jumbo to be too small on my 7.5 wrist.
AK797 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 September 2014, 05:59 AM   #10
texex91
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: .
Posts: 17,898
You need to try them both on as they fit completely different depending upon your wrist. Need to know more about your lifestyle and what you like to comment on which my be better suited. Best way is to try on...it will be very clear.
texex91 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 September 2014, 06:09 AM   #11
subtona
"TRF" Member
 
subtona's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Real Name: gus
Location: East Coast
Watch: APK & sometimes Y
Posts: 25,958
Quote:
Originally Posted by texex91 View Post
You need to try them both on as they fit completely different depending upon your wrist. Need to know more about your lifestyle and what you like to comment on which my be better suited. Best way is to try on...it will be very clear.
Agree 100%. Nothing beats trying them on for yourself.
subtona is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 September 2014, 06:38 AM   #12
kilyung
2024 Pledge Member
 
kilyung's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Cave
Watch: Sundial
Posts: 33,848
I'm not the biggest chrono fan so I'd vote 15202.
kilyung is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 September 2014, 07:10 AM   #13
mps354
2024 Pledge Member
 
mps354's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Real Name: Mike
Location: CT
Posts: 8,969
id go 15202...I don't particularly like thick watches
mps354 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 September 2014, 07:13 AM   #14
dysondiver
"TRF" Member
 
dysondiver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Real Name: tom
Location: northern ireland
Watch: my fins
Posts: 10,063
15202 ,,,, didnt even have to think ,,, simple and stylish.
dysondiver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 September 2014, 08:11 AM   #15
B. Doggy
"TRF" Member
 
B. Doggy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Real Name: Bryan
Location: Oregon
Posts: 7,399
Depends on your collection and wrist size IMO.
__________________
Rolex / Panerai / Omega
B. Doggy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 September 2014, 09:40 AM   #16
Lrlx
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: ny
Posts: 292
15202, a grail for most.
Lrlx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 September 2014, 11:54 AM   #17
tuang
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: thailand
Posts: 24
Thank you for every comments really appreciate your opinions, for further detail my wrist is about 7 inches and my current collection are rolex daytona 116520 black and white, omega speedmaster moonwatch, grand seiko, rolex explorer2 and rolex submariner. Please help me more thank you ^^
tuang is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 September 2014, 11:57 AM   #18
texex91
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: .
Posts: 17,898
7" get the 26320 (seems you like sportier watches).
texex91 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 September 2014, 12:10 PM   #19
Hairdude1
"TRF" Member
 
Hairdude1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Real Name: Alex
Location: Chicago
Watch: AP,PP, Rolex
Posts: 37,156
The ROC 41"mm is a stunner
__________________
Instagram: @Hairdude
Watches in Collection 5070R, 5522A, 214270 MK1, 228238

16750, 26401, 5711, 116718, 116710LN, 116300, 16710"Coke", 372, 15300, 15703 (All Flipped)
Official Member "Perpetual 30" Las Vegas GTG 2016
Official Member "WIS-CON" Las Vegas International GTG 2017
Official Member 'WIS-CON' Las Vegas Int'l GTG 2018
Hairdude1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 September 2014, 01:47 PM   #20
kilyung
2024 Pledge Member
 
kilyung's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Cave
Watch: Sundial
Posts: 33,848
No pics?!

kilyung is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 September 2014, 01:55 PM   #21
lipjin
"TRF" Member
 
lipjin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: HK
Watch: AP ROC, Nautilus
Posts: 1,657
I'm a big chrono fan so 26320 for me. That said, why either or? Get both!

__________________
"We must use time wisely and forever realize that the time is always ripe to do right" -Nelson Mandela

"It is not our abilities that show what we truly are. It is our choices" -Dumbledore

Instagram: horolj_
lipjin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 September 2014, 04:49 PM   #22
Shawnnyang
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Planet
Posts: 256
Ultra thin.
Shawnnyang is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 September 2014, 08:19 PM   #23
travisb
"TRF" Member
 
travisb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Real Name: Travis
Location: FL / NYC
Watch: Yes..
Posts: 32,031
The Jumbo is king of AP in my book.
If you like a sportier / bigger timepiece that still has the AP heritage, go with the ROC.
The 15202 will wear smaller with a more elegant feel but still retains that sport / dress feel. Good luck!
travisb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1 October 2014, 06:51 AM   #24
AK797
2024 Pledge Member
 
AK797's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Real Name: Neil
Location: UK
Watch: ing ships roll in
Posts: 59,066
Quote:
Originally Posted by lipjin View Post
I'm a big chrono fan so 26320 for me. That said, why either or? Get both!

AK797 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1 October 2014, 09:33 AM   #25
orangedial
"TRF" Member
 
orangedial's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Real Name: Wayne
Location: Singapore
Watch: AP, PP, Rolex
Posts: 1,791
Quote:
Originally Posted by lipjin View Post
I'm a big chrono fan so 26320 for me. That said, why either or? Get both!

Superb
orangedial is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1 October 2014, 09:50 AM   #26
h999r
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2011
Real Name: HR
Location: Planet Earth
Watch: -ing Barts.
Posts: 4,244
15202 for me
h999r is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1 October 2014, 10:53 AM   #27
JUSTROLEXES
⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐
2024 Boutique Seller
 
JUSTROLEXES's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Real Name: Tony Geha
Location: San Diego, CA
Watch: Yacht-Master
Posts: 49,026
Quote:
Originally Posted by h999r View Post
15202 for me
I second that Heru
__________________
Instagram @JustRolexes
2FA security active
JUSTROLEXES is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1 October 2014, 01:34 PM   #28
lapince
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Mars
Watch: 5712
Posts: 11,509
I would get the Jumbo in blue, the new model which is almost exactly as the original is a perfect beauty, plus I'm not a big fan of chronos, had a few, still have a Daytona 116515, in ivory dial, and I never ever use the function, ok maybe 3-4 times a year to boil an egg, so really without a doubt the 15202...
lapince is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2 October 2014, 02:53 AM   #29
kb24
"TRF" Member
 
kb24's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Philippines
Watch: AP ROC 26320 Black
Posts: 280
both watches are stunning..

15202 AP RO - simple, classy and a stunning blue dial. this watch is extra thin so it makes a really nice dress watch.

26320 AP ROC - sporty yet classy and has options for black, white or blue dial as well. this watch is also dressy but can be worn casually too. dress up or down, both ways it has awesome wrist presence.

im not much of a believer with wrist size because i have a 6.25" wrist and went for the ROC.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg IMG_20140829_140636.jpg (115.7 KB, 355 views)
kb24 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 October 2014, 12:13 AM   #30
blcblc
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Somewhere
Posts: 2,275
15202
blcblc is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


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

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Takuya Watches

Bobs Watches

My Watch LLC

OCWatches

DavidSW Watches

Coronet


*Banners Of The Month*
This space is provided to horological resources.





Copyright ©2004-2024, The Rolex Forums. All Rights Reserved.

ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

Rolex is a registered trademark of ROLEX USA. The Rolex Forums is not affiliated with ROLEX USA in any way.