Stuck between a Royal Oak chrono and a patek aquanaut

[Cmmatthews]

I just sold my Daytona and I'm a bit conflicted on what to buy next.

I'm torn between an aquanaut or a royal oak chrono. The royal oak I can get a bit cheaper, and is a more substantial watch, which I like. It's also a chrono.

The Patek is a Patek and I'd probably be getting it on the strap and not the bracelet. It's also a bit harder to find, and I worry about Patek service being god awful slow.

Thoughts? I think the Patek is probably the better investment but not sure about some of the other factors here...

[lindstd]

What else is in your collection? Or was the Daytona the only watch?

[Cmmatthews]

Originally Posted by lindstd

What else is in your collection? Or was the Daytona the only watch?

I've got a gmt master and a speedmaster as well.

Both watches would be used. The 15202 is another piece that's pretty interesting as well. Right now leaning towards AP.

[lig]

AP all the way vs. Aquanaut

[Soly20]

Forget about "investment", both watches that you are looking at will lose value after you buy them and both are not "investment grade" so get what you really like.

[tom2517]

Originally Posted by Soly20

Forget about "investment", both watches that you are looking at will lose value after you buy them and both are not "investment grade" so get what you really like.

Ditto here, Aquanaut is not a investment grade watch, very few modern Pateks are.

And more people will recognise the RO than the Aquanaut, if you care that sort of things.

[benlee]

ROC over Aquanault for sure. But if it's a Nautilus, the pictures gets complicated. Regardless, follow your heart and choose one that sings most to you.

[Passionata]

Love Pp but rather roc

[bparone]

ROC for me. I can't get over paying so much for something on a rubber strap. Love it on a bracelet though.

[travisb]

5167 for me.
The thin streamlined profile with the super comfy rubber strap is sporty elegance at it's best.
Plus, it's a Patek.

[GB-man]

I was in your shoes not long ago and picked the aquanaut. Mostly because the RO bracelet is very shiny and I wanted something more under the radar than my gmt2c. I didn't think the RO qualified in that regard.

Works perfectly because I daily my gmt and wear the patek sporadically and on weekends, where I'm more likely to be places I do not want the attention my gmt brings. Win win

[p_mcgee]

Aquanaut for me...I flipped my royal oak because it was too flashy. Aquanaut is more under the radar.

I prefer the aquanaut on a bracelet.

[B. Doggy]

The RO. Love PP, but the aquanaut doesn't do anything for me.

[srvrf]

Originally Posted by Cmmatthews

I just sold my Daytona and I'm a bit conflicted on what to buy next.

I'm torn between an aquanaut or a royal oak chrono. The royal oak I can get a bit cheaper, and is a more substantial watch, which I like. It's also a chrono.

The Patek is a Patek and I'd probably be getting it on the strap and not the bracelet. It's also a bit harder to find, and I worry about Patek service being god awful slow.

Thoughts? I think the Patek is probably the better investment but not sure about some of the other factors here...

I recently traded my Daytona for a ROC and for me it was absolutely the right move. And with your GMT Master and Speedy, to me a non-black (maybe a Panda, blue or white dial) ROC would round out your collection nicely.

To me the Aquanaut is more of a sporty watch on a rubber strap. So I guess when and where you'd like to wear the new watch will play a role in deciding.

Obviously go with what looks best on your wrist and what you like the most. But my vote between these two watches would be the AP. And to echo previous comments, I'd think both would lose some value, but as good as can be expected if bought pre-owned.

[DreambreaX]

Royal Oak.

Royal Oak is higher level imo

[kilyung]

I spend a lot of time around water so the 5167 for me.

[stockjock1975]

Clearly will be a personal choice, but I went through the same dilemma and decided on the Aquanaut. For what it's worth I have never regretted the decision.

[SearChart]

Royal Oak white dial on a brown alligator strap.

[capote]

The Roc is hot

[AK797]

Originally Posted by SearChart

Royal Oak white dial on a brown alligator strap.

Originally Posted by capote

The Roc is hot

I agree, however if you prefer a Patek I would go for the 5164 or Nautilus.

[dysondiver]

it has to be the pp ... sleek simple and stylish. but i dont think theres a wrong answer .

[DECR]

Of the ones you mentioned I would go 15202 first, ROC second, Aquanaut third.

[HL65]

Originally Posted by DECR

Of the ones you mentioned I would go 15202 first, ROC second, Aquanaut third.

X2

[Cmmatthews]

Originally Posted by DECR

Of the ones you mentioned I would go 15202 first, ROC second, Aquanaut third.

The 15202 is really tempting me but the lack of a seconds hand and the non quick set date are the strikes against it.

My main concern on the ROC is the size of my wrist...I've got a 6.5" wrist (flat at that) so I sort of worry that it will look too big on me. I've tried on a 15400 and it seemed OK so maybe not a big concern.

[HL65]

Originally Posted by Cmmatthews

The 15202 is really tempting me but the lack of a seconds hand and the non quick set date are the strikes against it.

My main concern on the ROC is the size of my wrist...I've got a 6.5" wrist (flat at that) so I sort of worry that it will look too big on me. I've tried on a 15400 and it seemed OK so maybe not a big concern.

Actually the non quick set easy as all you do is move hands back before 12:00 and then forward to 1:00 and then back before 12:00 etc etc and date changes. You don't have to go around clock two times like non quick set Rolex. As for no second hand wish my 5711 Patek didn't have one either...Love that clean look myself!

[AK797]

Originally Posted by Cmmatthews

My main concern on the ROC is the size of my wrist...I've got a 6.5" wrist (flat at that) so I sort of worry that it will look too big on me. I've tried on a 15400 and it seemed OK so maybe not a big concern.

It should be OK on you as the ROC wears slightly smaller than the 400 as the subdials fill up the dial.

[nick c]

AP

[MrJ320]

Originally Posted by Cmmatthews

The 15202 is really tempting me but the lack of a seconds hand and the non quick set date are the strikes against it.

My main concern on the ROC is the size of my wrist...I've got a 6.5" wrist (flat at that) so I sort of worry that it will look too big on me. I've tried on a 15400 and it seemed OK so maybe not a big concern.

I have a 6.5" wrist and had the 39mm ROC and it fit perfectly. 41mm ROC will wear bigger but should be okay as well. I recently sold my ROC for the 15202 and although I miss the ROC I have no regrets at all. The 15202 is the first watch I owned without a second hand and I can say that I do not miss it at all. Like others have said I have come to appreciate the 2 hand design of the 15202.

Can't go wrong with any of the 3 and my choice would be 15202, ROC, aquanaut as well.

[locutus49]

I'd go for the WG Sub with the blue dial and bezel. But I'm biased towards Subs.

[CWIN]

5167