[Galaga]

The 2500.

 

[Galaga]

 

[MikeCfromLI]

I will just leave that here

 

[pdaigle]

I have been fixated on the METAS PO 8900 43.5, and I finally got to an Omega AD to check one out in person. Beautiful piece, just brilliant. Question for you owners out there......Coming from a Tudor Pelagos, I was hoping for something slimmer than the Pelagos, this PO is over 16mm I believe. Did you get used to it? I also tried on the wave dial Seamaster and while its nice, the bracelet doesn't do much for me and I like the rectangular indices of the PO's. Is there a different PO that might work better?

Cheers

This particular thread is full of owners that run the 2500 movement PO instead of the 8900. That said, I don't speak for everyone here, but that is one of the reasons I went with the older PO - the newer ones are just way too thick, in my opinion. My wrist is already 8" and I don't like having another thick watch protruding beyond that. These older PO's are slimmer cases than the newer ones. And for me, I like the older movement too...but that's just me. I know you cannot go to the AD and try an older PO on, but given your comments and concerns, I think you might be pleased with one.

Cheers!

 

[VicLeChic]

I have been fixated on the METAS PO 8900 43.5, and I finally got to an Omega AD to check one out in person. Beautiful piece, just brilliant. Question for you owners out there......Coming from a Tudor Pelagos, I was hoping for something slimmer than the Pelagos, this PO is over 16mm I believe. Did you get used to it? I also tried on the wave dial Seamaster and while its nice, the bracelet doesn't do much for me and I like the rectangular indices of the PO's. Is there a different PO that might work better?

Cheers

All POs are thick, hovering around the 15mm mark for the three handers (more for chronos) which I find acceptable for a 600m rated diver. The 2500s were the thinnest in relation to case size.

PO2500 42mm: 14.2mm
PO2500 45.5mm: 15mm
PO8500 42mm: 15.7mm
PO8500 45mm: 16.5mm
PO8900 39.5mm: 14.16mm
PO8900 43.5mm: 16.04mm

 

[pdaigle]

All POs are thick, hovering around the 15mm mark for the three handers (more for chronos) which I find acceptable for a 600m rated diver. The 2500s were the thinnest in relation to case size.

PO2500 42mm: 14.2mm
PO2500 45.5mm: 15mm
PO8500 42mm: 15.7mm
PO8500 45mm: 16.5mm
PO8900 39.5mm: 14.16mm
PO8900 43.5mm: 16.04mm

Very interesting how that PO 8900 39.5mm was almost the same thickness as the 2500 42mm. Without measuring, I would have obviously believed it was the thinner of the 8900, but would not have thought it close to the 2500 42mm. Thanks for sharing this...great comparison and a great way for people to see range of thicknesses of the 600m divers.

 

[DaveandStu]

Never tire of this old girl...they are such a piece that fits anywhere imho...
All the best guys
Dave

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

 

[ProjectQuattro]

This particular thread is full of owners that run the 2500 movement PO instead of the 8900. That said, I don't speak for everyone here, but that is one of the reasons I went with the older PO - the newer ones are just way too thick, in my opinion. My wrist is already 8" and I don't like having another thick watch protruding beyond that. These older PO's are slimmer cases than the newer ones. And for me, I like the older movement too...but that's just me. I know you cannot go to the AD and try an older PO on, but given your comments and concerns, I think you might be pleased with one.

Cheers!

Same.

All POs are thick, hovering around the 15mm mark for the three handers (more for chronos) which I find acceptable for a 600m rated diver. The 2500s were the thinnest in relation to case size.

PO2500 42mm: 14.2mm
PO2500 45.5mm: 15mm
PO8500 42mm: 15.7mm
PO8500 45mm: 16.5mm
PO8900 39.5mm: 14.16mm
PO8900 43.5mm: 16.04mm

That ~1.5mm difference between the 2500 and 8900 doesn't sound like a lot is HUGE in reality. The look and feel (even aside from the blingier new design) is completely changed.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Galaga]

Same.



That ~1.5mm difference between the 2500 and 8900 doesn't sound like a lot is HUGE in reality. The look and feel (even aside from the blingier new design) is completely changed.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Maybe because it’s closer to 2mm.

 

[ProjectQuattro]

Maybe because it’s closer to 2mm.

42 to 42 is exactly 1.5, which is what I was referencing

But I should have said 8500. That was a typo. So fair point.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Galaga]

 

[ProjectQuattro]

Let's take you home, little buddy. First class EWR>ZRH

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[DaveandStu]

They are a bloody versatile piece...
Dave

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

 

[iuprof]

Loving the OEM rubber

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

 

[pdaigle]

Loving the OEM rubber

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

That does look great! I just got mine back from service at Omega (same reference) and while it looks fantastic on the cleaned up bracelet I might have to get a rubber strap for it too. Thanks for sharing what it looks like!

 

[iuprof]

That does look great! I just got mine back from service at Omega (same reference) and while it looks fantastic on the cleaned up bracelet I might have to get a rubber strap for it too. Thanks for sharing what it looks like!

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

 

[Helson_hyped]

Excellent choice today

SM-N960U

 

[VicLeChic]

14 years of flawless ticking, and counting..

 

[joseph80]

 

[joseph80]

Dp