Royal Oak 4100 vs 14790

[hgb4529]

[QUOTE=donald83;12627278]The 15300 is around the same price as the 14790, and also at 39mm which is the "ideal" size. So why do people still go for 14790?


I've worn both the 15300, 15202, and 14790. The 15300 has a larger lug-to-lug size and is much thicker than the other two. It wears more like the 41mm RO to be honest. I imagine people would choose the 14790 because it is more of a classical RO fit.

[dh1]

Originally Posted by hgb4529

I've worn both the 15300, 15202, and 14790. The 15300 has a larger lug-to-lug size and is much thicker than the other two. It wears more like the 41mm RO to be honest. I imagine people would choose the 14790 because it is more of a classical RO fit.

Yep, agreed. 15300 is a very "chunky" watch because of the case / lug angles and the way it connects to the bracelet.

On my wrist the 15300 could actually exceed its width while the 15202 and 15450 fit better. See some overhang at the top:

[GuiltunderGlass]

4100 owner here. I had been pining over a 14790 since they were around 10K back in the day, but always put off getting one. They shot up and I gave up on ROs, until I ended up stumbling upon this 4100. Price was right, so I went for it.
Having tried both, I am a convert to the 4100. You very rarely see them, they have the folding clasp bracelet, small font dial, and its just much more comfortable on the wrist.
Having said that, they are both very nice and like others have said, find a good example and you can't go wrong... so long as you don't get the short index version

[watch_my_six]

Has anyone had a 4100 serviced recently from AP or an independent watchmaker and have any insights on the price and or difficulty?

[nazarian]

I was quoted to service a 14886 and it was around 1500 up or down. I imagine it’ll be the same but they might replace the movement entirely if parts are needed.

[SN2354]

[QUOTE=hgb4529;12627546]

Originally Posted by donald83

The 15300 is around the same price as the 14790, and also at 39mm which is the "ideal" size. So why do people still go for 14790?


I've worn both the 15300, 15202, and 14790. The 15300 has a larger lug-to-lug size and is much thicker than the other two. It wears more like the 41mm RO to be honest. I imagine people would choose the 14790 because it is more of a classical RO fit.

No way the 15300 wears like a 41mm. I have tried the 15500 and my 15300 wears like a dream by comparison. You can say the 15202 wears similarly, but we are not talking about the dial size which is MUCH larger on the 15500 41mm and makes the watch seem massive.

I really feel 39mm is the sweet spot, but the 14790 is also a classic like you said.