Gus7
493
I tried this
Feb 12, 2019,23:12 PM
on at AP House in HK on Monday when previewing the new Code and other releases.
It is titanium so very light and I'm a fan of the square pushers but less so of the date window (hence having bought the ROO 44mm ceramic last year with the date at 3pm where it should be!). It also uses the modular chronology movement - I think, reasonably so, they are using inventory in new designs to phase out the old chrono movement before extending the new one across the range.
A good watch though.
Comments:
view entire thread
I love AP RO, ROO a bit less.
By: Ivan5 : February 12th, 2019-14:29
To me, the pushers are somewhat incompatible with the case, almost forcefully contrived. The beast had it right, this is an overkill, but maybe it's just me...
All good with this one.
By: M4 : February 12th, 2019-18:19
I wonder if this version becomes the standard 42mm Offshore? It has a lot of pluses. M4
I tried this
By: Gus7 : February 12th, 2019-23:12
on at AP House in HK on Monday when previewing the new Code and other releases. It is titanium so very light and I'm a fan of the square pushers but less so of the date window (hence having bought the ROO 44mm ceramic last year with the date at 3pm where ...
Makes you think..
By: HorologyMiami : February 13th, 2019-07:30
To me it seems like this oddly placed reference is a way for AP to get rid of a surplus they have of the F Piguet movements before they start using the caliber 4401 across the Royal Oak and Royal Oak Offshore lines in the coming years. Just not a good loo...
thickness
By: shafran : February 13th, 2019-16:20
My biggest roo complaint was thickness, this is under 13mm, almost as thin as my daytona. I could wear this.
I agree with you a hundred fold!
By: MichaelC : February 20th, 2019-15:59
I have never warmed up to the 41mm ROCs. Even if I had, this new Royal Oak Offshore stimulates me a good bit more. I very much hope to add one.