Audemars Piguet

Hi Team,




Or the controversial TAG Tourbillon

He never swims with his watches so I have no idea about this specific question.

Regarding the back, I would have preferred a solid one instead of a display back. The movement seems lost in the case and, aesthetically speaking, that makes no sense for me (but clients want to see the calibers).

Nevertheless, if I had to choose among the three, my choice would definitely be the ROO.

Best wishes

Alkiro

No message body

And never had an issue.

The previous Safari has been high on my "wish list" for several years. I personally like it more than the current model. While I'm the biggest fan of the new TAG Carreras (including the 02T), I personally can't see choosing the 02T or IWC over a Safari.

No message body

I have the IWC and a similar version of the AP(Trulli, which is also in 42mm with the display case back). However, I haven’t had any experience with the TAG, so it will be unfair for me to comment on the Tag. From here on, I will only compare the user experience of the IWC and AP. As for the movement and finishing, I will leave that to all the experts here.

Size and style.
First off, the IWC(46mm) is and wear a lot bigger than the AP (42mm). Dare I say, big watches are not as fashionable as it once used to be. Especially in today’s vintage, tribute, re-issue day and age. The AP is definitely a lot more iconic and essentially has the same design as the first one 25 years ago. So in terms of classic design that will age well, the AP is hard to beat. On the other hand the IWC is a much more modern looking watch but doesn’t tend to age well IMO. Perhaps it is due to IWC’s practice of drastically changing the entire line of their watches every few years (with the exception of the pilot line and the Portofino line).

User experience.
Out of the 2, I tend to wear the IWC more, purely because it has a lot more going on. It’s a joy to watch and feel the Perpetual digital month/ date calendar discs jumping behind the smoked semi-transparent dial. The 12 hour fly back chronograph is fun to play with and occasionally I will use it as a 2nd time zone. The crocodile strap has the benefit of a rubber inlay which is perfect for the hot and humid climate where I live. Apart from it being little too big and thick for my small wrist, my other 2 complaints about the IWC are the chronograph scales and the way you adjust the perpetual calendar. The chronograph second scale disappears between 10-20 second and between 40-50 second which is a little ironic for a chronograph instrument. I guess style has override the functionality of the watch in this case. The way you adjust the perpetual calendar is by the crown. You turn once and the date jump once. You cannot independently adjust the month or the year, so If you want to adjust for a few months or years, you will need to turn your crown many many times “slowly” so that the Digital months date discs will not dissynchronize.

The AP I tend not use the chronograph function at all. Most of the time I spent gazing at the incredible fit and finish of the watch. The perfectly polished hexagonal screws that are slightly lower than the bezel, the vertical hair line polished bezel on the dial side, yet perfectly shiny on its 8 edges. Royal Oaks’ bezels are simply stunning. The tapestry dial reminds me of Cadbury dairy milk chocolate bars that I used to eat when I was young. In short, it’s delicious! I even enjoy looking into the deep date wheel. It’s almost like a miniaturised well, where you will find your reward right at the bottom. The hexagon crown it’s a bit hard to use. It’s a tad small and doesn’t provide as much grip to wind the watch, but luckily there aren’t too many things to do via the crown compare to the IWC.

All in all, I love them both. If I can only keep one, the AP would win. The IWC is fun to have for a few years until you fed up with its size and cumbersome setting of the watch. Where as the AP, I can just grab and go and set the watch on the fly. And I’m sure in another 25 years time the AP would still be as timeless as its today.

David

P.S. I have not swam with either of the watches. The risk of any water damage prevents me from enjoying the watches while swimming.

No message body

A soft iron antimagnetic inner back.
If recently checked, swimming with the Offshore is not a problem but as JToddH notes, not with the hornback strap.

= )

Seems like you would want to avoid swimming with the Hornback Croc strap, regardless. Sure, the croc wore it for years in water, but he died. My point is that I would assume exposing it to chlorine or salt water would affect the condition of the strap.
Great comparison on the two models!

No message body

Best wishes

Alkiro

I hope it helps Velociphile to decide. Do let us know which one you choose in the end.

David

Best wishes

Alkiro

it's all very helpful. Of course, somewhat biased posting on the AP forum.
Are the 3120 base movements proving to be reliable and durable now after 15 years?
Velociphile

I really liked and still like the Safari.  The newer model with ceramic push buttons, crown and display back were big improvements in my humble opinion.  The beige dial is also was great which added to the classic feel of the watch. The size states 42mm but I think the watch really feels more like 44mm due to the extended lugs.  I swapped the leather with AP rubber for more sporty feel and daily wear and tear.  After the Safari, I was able to acquire the AP dual time 26124 (blue dial boutique version) and thought having 2 AP Royal Oaks were a bit much.  Since I never use the chrono function, I wanted to trade the Safari for a perpetual calendar.  So gone went Safari and came the IWC PPP 5023-07.