ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX
|
View Poll Results: 15305 vs 15407 | |||
15305OR | 11 | 25.00% | |
15407OR | 33 | 75.00% | |
Voters: 44. You may not vote on this poll |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
21 September 2019, 08:25 AM | #1 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Egypt
Posts: 62
|
15305 vs 15407
Lucky enough to decide between these 2 magnificent pieces,
We've had this debate before but this time with actual wrist pics. Looking for opinions regarding which piece looks better, Much appreciated |
21 September 2019, 08:37 AM | #3 |
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: USA
Watch: addiction issues
Posts: 37,355
|
Both excellent. The 15305 looks to be a better fit and I am guessing the price is better too. Win Win for you.
__________________
|
21 September 2019, 08:50 AM | #4 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Egypt
Posts: 62
|
Something about the fit of different royal oak cases gives me a different look for each reference.
For example, I'm lucky enough to own several iterations of the 15202 which i feel are an absolute slam dunk perfect fit. Equal to the 5711 on my 17cm wrist. The 41mm royal oak perpetual calendar and chrono also fit very well.. The 41mm skeleton seems a bit wide from 9-3 if that makes any sense.. The 39mm has a smaller case and arguably doesn't show off the open working like the 41 which is exaggerated because the gold bridge reflects the light well off the rest of the black polished surfaces. Its really even so thats why I'm leaving it up to the forum to decide , PS consider price about equal. |
21 September 2019, 09:54 AM | #5 |
Banned
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: Florida, USA
Watch: Rolex/AP/Vin Omega
Posts: 1,972
|
Go with what you love and not what the forum says brother
|
21 September 2019, 11:51 AM | #6 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Boston
Watch: 16610LV
Posts: 1,051
|
15407. That gold balance bridge FTW!
|
21 September 2019, 11:57 AM | #7 |
Banned
Join Date: May 2014
Real Name: John
Location: La Jolla, CA
Watch: Platona
Posts: 12,194
|
I like the top one.
|
21 September 2019, 12:15 PM | #8 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: California
Watch: PP,AP,Rolex,IWC
Posts: 578
|
Better watch: 15407
Better fit: 15305 |
21 September 2019, 07:52 PM | #9 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jul 2019
Location: Helsinki
Posts: 37
|
As for looks, I would go with 15305. Looks definitely better on your wrist.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
21 September 2019, 08:08 PM | #10 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: London
Watch: AP 15400
Posts: 104
|
15305 would be my choice if I were lucky enough to be able to be in a position to choose!!
|
21 September 2019, 11:43 PM | #11 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: CA
Watch: VC Toledo 1952
Posts: 1,063
|
Interesting, although the gold balance looks cool on the 407, the 305 looks cleaner and more balanced symmetrically.
Also agree 39mm seems to fit better (for me as well). Sent from my Zeitwerk |
21 September 2019, 11:52 PM | #12 |
TRF Moderator & 2024 SubLV41 Patron
Join Date: Dec 2007
Real Name: Ken
Location: SW Florida
Watch: One on my wrist.
Posts: 64,006
|
15305
__________________
SPEM SUCCESSUS ALIT |
22 September 2019, 05:36 AM | #13 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Egypt
Posts: 62
|
Most seem to vote for the 407. In a comparison of the 41mm 15400/15500 vs the 39mm 15202 most seem to gravitate towards the jumbo. Is it the case size or just that the larger dial gives the skeleton more "room" to be seen?
|
22 September 2019, 06:08 AM | #14 |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: nyc
Posts: 6,719
|
i think its the dial itself. i prefer the dial on the 15407 more because of the gold balance bridge and because the dial seems to have more color
|
22 September 2019, 06:54 AM | #15 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Oct 2011
Real Name: Jim
Location: Orange County, CA
Watch: Rolex, AP & Patek
Posts: 3,747
|
Just don’t like the gold balance bridge. Makes the dial look unbalanced.
Any side by side pics of the case backs? People always complain the movement is too small for a 41mm case in the 15400. How are the proportions there? With the attention to detail in the skeleton movement I would want perfect proportions everywhere. |
22 September 2019, 05:03 PM | #16 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: UK
Watch: AP │ ALS
Posts: 159
|
The 15305 looks better on your wrist IMO.
|
22 September 2019, 05:16 PM | #17 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2012
Real Name: Ben
Location: SIN & JKT
Watch: Rolex, AP, PP
Posts: 9,874
|
Size wise 15305OR suits better.
__________________
Follow me on Instagram : benlee789 |
22 September 2019, 06:20 PM | #18 |
Banned
Join Date: May 2019
Location: London
Posts: 265
|
15407or
|
22 September 2019, 10:44 PM | #19 |
Banned
Join Date: May 2018
Real Name: Jonathan
Location: USA
Watch: P-01
Posts: 11,772
|
Buy both
|
22 September 2019, 10:49 PM | #20 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jul 2011
Real Name: Serg
Location: US of A
Watch: AP
Posts: 7,437
|
I prefer the 407. Both are great.
__________________
How can you have any pudding if you don't eat yer meat???? |
23 September 2019, 09:48 PM | #21 |
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Real Name: K.
Location: 780
Posts: 10,460
|
No doubt 15407
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
*Banners
Of The Month*
This space is provided to horological resources.