WatchUSeek Watch Forums banner

1 - 15 of 15 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
128 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Arabic or roman numerals! I'm so torn! Looking at the Marine Original and just cannot decide.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
406 Posts
If you want it for more formal occasions, Roman. If casual, Arabic. If both, I would lean towards Arabic.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
51 Posts
I have a marine klassic is not exactly the same but I like the Arabic because I tend to dress it down way more than I dress it up.
 

·
Moderator at Large
Joined
·
52,758 Posts
If you want to be historically accurate: arabic. As on the original deck watch that the MO is based on.
Marine chronometers of 1735 or 1763, 1772 had roman numerals. The Earnshaw chronometer as well. So, both, arabic and roman, are historically correct. The Stowa Marine goes back to a observer‘s pocket watch of the 1940s.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
239 Posts
Marine chronometers of 1735 or 1763, 1772 had roman numerals. The Earnshaw chronometer as well. So, both, arabic and roman, are historically correct. The Stowa Marine goes back to a observer‘s pocket watch of the 1940s.
I meant to say historically accurate to the Stowa original the MO is based upon. I used the term deck watch, not marine chronometer. Stowa also uses the term deck watch on their website.
 

·
Moderator at Large
Joined
·
52,758 Posts
Anyway, the Stowa deck watch (Marine observation watch) clearly was inspired by Marine chronometers. So both are historically correct, arabic and roman.
 
1 - 15 of 15 Posts
Top