WatchUSeek Watch Forums banner

281 - 300 of 1238 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
11,902 Posts
Per my erroneous post above, are you sure the case thickness is less than the 2201.50? How is that possible with the new movement? My biggest complaint with the new models is the case thickness and I'd definitely consider a 40mm if it is around the same thickness as the 2201.50.
The cal. 8800 in the PO395 is the same diameter as the cal. 2500 and only a half-millimeter thicker. It obviously is intended to replace the cal. 2500 in the SMPc and other watches that use the 2500 as updates are made in the next year or so.

The 2201.50 was 14.5mm with a solid caseback. The PO395 is 14.37mm with an alveol display back. If you want even thinner, buy the 18k PO395 with solid caseback. It is only 14.17mm.

The cal. 8900 is simply the master chronometer version of the cal. 8500. It has all of the same features found on the 8500, including quickset hour changes (which is to say, NON-quickset date change).

The cal. 8800 is a brand new movement. It has a single barrel, but delivers 92% of the power reserve of the double barrel cal. 8900. It has the quickset date (a plus to me, since I don't think changing back and forth to DST twice a year makes the quickset hour feature all that attractive). And it is spooky accurate. My PO395 gains about a second each week ... or less than a minute per year!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
222 Posts
Only wear mine a couple of days a month but when I do, I wonder why I don't wear it more often. 42mm is a perfect size for me. Looks great on bracelet or strap. Gave the orange leather strap and deployant a try but went back to the bracelet. Although maybe time for the rubber strap.
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,150 Posts
Hey Rob, congrats on the 10k and the new PO. I haven't looked at them for a while so this is a bit of a leap for me to see that they went back to some level of sensible thickness. Will have a look for wristies of your piece now. Still sticking with my 45.5 2500, but that's not to say I can't eventually add one is it? ;-)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,352 Posts
'
New strap on my old 2901.50.91 is taking a bit of getting used to,
Just smaller & slimmer enough to make watch head appear bigger.

So back on its original 'Jeremy Clarkson' rubber again today, & all's right with the world... :-!

View attachment 9885706
With the 2254 SMP I couldn't get a good fit with this strap so I sold it. Wonder if it's good with the PO XL.


Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,134 Posts
'
Hi mjoranga,

I'm no expert, but I understand that a different version of this strap is needed to fit the 45mm PO XL, & yet another for the GMT.

Mine fits perfectly.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,352 Posts
'
Hi mjoranga,

I'm no expert, but I understand that a different version of this strap is needed to fit the 45mm PO XL, & yet another for the GMT.

Mine fits perfectly.
I was trying to reply using my laptop and there's no space bar.😂 anyway Yeah, they are definitely different as my SMP 2254 20mm lug and the PO XL is 22mm. I think the deployant is the better choice, thou it cost an arm and a leg😂😂😂
I prefer deployant for safety purpose as at times when we strap it on our wrist with the normal tongue and buckle. It can easily slip away and might end up falling.
Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,352 Posts
Anyone here uses dangerous9strap for their PO XL? Preferably with curve to fill in the lug gap.

Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk
 
281 - 300 of 1238 Posts
Top