WatchUSeek Watch Forums banner

1 - 4 of 4 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
922 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
For those that have both, does the PAW1500 seem whimpy compared to the Frogman ( i have a frog 1000)? I looked at the 1500T at JCPenny's today and it seemed thin (i know mathematically it is thinner). I have a PAG40 and it does not even compare. Is it a let-down compared to the thickness of a frog? Your thoughts, please. I dont want to spend $300 for a let-down. Thanks

Mike:)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
569 Posts
the PAG40 is a lot bigger and thicker from 1500!!!!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
543 Posts
Well, if the thickness difference between the Frog (roughly 1.7 cm) and the 1500 (about 1.5 cm) is a let down for you then yes, you'll be let down. I never though that. The 1500 is a really great looking watch and l kinda like the lesser thickness for a change from the Frog.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,016 Posts
I agree with Blue. Also, what stands out more to me than the difference in thickness is the difference in display - both the total size and the size of the digits. The Dawn Black Frogman is more a close-up so the numbers look very large, but check the proportion of the size of the numbers to the size of the case and the 1500 is more legible.

Both watches are great, and both can show the current time during the STW or dive time, which is a must for me.

Because there is some kind of mysterious coolness about Frogmen, I tend to wear them more than the Protreks.....









 
1 - 4 of 4 Posts
Top