ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

improviz · 18 August 2009, 08:14 PM

To my eyes, the steel on the previous-gen GMTs seems to be brighter, more silvery in appearance, than the new ones, or the SS sub for that matter, and I've verified this by inspection in person and via photos (OP's photos are a great example of this). Is either the composition or the brushing different on this watch?

Beautiful piece, though....

IT-guy · 18 August 2009, 09:52 PM

The new GMT has a more luxurious look.

18 August 2009, 08:14 PM	#31
improviz "TRF" Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Tejas Watch: your step Posts: 2,806	Question for the experts: To my eyes, the steel on the previous-gen GMTs seems to be brighter, more silvery in appearance, than the new ones, or the SS sub for that matter, and I've verified this by inspection in person and via photos (OP's photos are a great example of this). Is either the composition or the brushing different on this watch? Beautiful piece, though.... __________________ 116520 white; 16613 black; 116710; 16570 polar; 16600. AP 15400; 15703. Blancpain Fifty Fathoms. Glashutte Sport Evo GMT. Omega Planet Ocean 2907.50.91; Planet Ocean Liquidmetal LE 222.30.42.20.01.001; Seamaster 2255.80.00. Breitling Crosswind, white. Panerai PAM 005. VC Overseas Chrono, black.

18 August 2009, 09:52 PM	#32
IT-guy "TRF" Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: DC Watch: SD 126600 Posts: 195	The new GMT has a more luxurious look.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)