gives some objective consistence to the very subjective feeling I had that the new regular 1860 is a little too dark. When trying it on I wasn't fully convinced, but couldn't really say why. Now I know better. Thanks!
And, of course, one can only regret that the OG doesn't exist in a no-date version...
Had a chance to photograph these three side-by-side today. The lighting was challenging, but we can see the difference. Left: Steel, "Revolution" (limited) edition with golden dial. Center: White gold, original 1860/2 (c.1998) with salmon dial and date Ri...
gives some objective consistence to the very subjective feeling I had that the new regular 1860 is a little too dark. When trying it on I wasn't fully convinced, but couldn't really say why. Now I know better. Thanks! And, of course, one can only regret t...
While I'd prefer no date I think just dropping the date w/o adding a 6 o'clock stub marker leaves a lot of empty space below the subdial.. And I am not a fan of the new asymmetric gulloche pattern that is centered on the Chopard logo. Much prefer the orig...
I'd been thinking the same thing about the new no-date dials but I hadn't previously noticed the case difference. The current one looks a little blocky, doesn't it?
I tend to like the Revolution edition though...not sure I'll change my mind when I see in metal. The salmon is nice but I feel the Revolution edition is a tad dynamic. Best, mahesh.,