Comments:
Two 3 bridge bros, which one do you prefer?
Interestingly, though very similar from the 1st glance many details are different, including:
- case shapes and metals (Pt and WG)
- hand shapes, colours and metals
- movements (manual and auto)
- while case sizes are similar, dial width is different due to rather different bezel
- shape of bridges.
Considering all these differences I so far cannot decide which I like better 
I can see your conundrum, there are very attractive elements in both, the ideal would be an Amalgam of the both. In the absence of that my vote goes for the second
I like the bridge design, the micro rotor decoration and crown of the first...
On the second I like the blued hands.....on second thought I like the first more sans the lack of blued hands.
Honestly would be lucky to enjoy any one of them 😊
I don't envy your situation, it's a tough choice regardless you'll enjoy one of the Best Watches Ever Made which is highly underrated 😊👍
Honestly would be lucky to enjoy any one of them 😊
I don't envy your situation, it's a tough choice regardless you'll enjoy one of the Best Watches Ever Made which is highly underrated 😊👍
Second one, as the larger decoration pattern of the first seems to... while the finer dial pattern of the second seems to be less 'distracting' as other elements are visually featured.
jmho
Or you could buy both
Number 2, I can see the time better with the blue hands.
And I like the more refined, smaller guilloche pattern and the hour markers around the dial.
You can see, that I have a clear favorite.
You can see, that I have a clear favorite.
Thanks for you comments!
I have been wearing both for some time and should say 4 most obvious differences when wearing them are:
1 Dial width. First watch feels smaller because of smaller dial.
2 Hands shape and colors. Both options are nice, but strikingly different.
3 Decoration of bridges. On the first one bridges are more narrow and refined, why on the second - more rough and masculine.
4 Winding crown size and shape.
Other differences like auto vs manual, dial pattern, etc. are a lot less obvious.
1 Dial width. First watch feels smaller because of smaller dial.
2 Hands shape and colors. Both options are nice, but strikingly different.
3 Decoration of bridges. On the first one bridges are more narrow and refined, why on the second - more rough and masculine.
4 Winding crown size and shape.
Other differences like auto vs manual, dial pattern, etc. are a lot less obvious.
Like the first. A slightly different type of guilloche not often seen. Although seems a bit less readable than the blued hands of the second one.
The second one
due to the following reasons:
1, The smaller bezel makes the watch more attractive and it also mean there is less of the watch susceptible to being scratched.
2, The Roman numerals in the second one.
3. The more curved case design of the second one.
I like the dial of the first one, but the too-wide bezel really detracts from the piece
Now this is a proper first world problem 😁👍🏻
First of all huge congratulations 🎈🎊🎉 Whichever one you choose you will not go wrong - both are sublime. I personally have a slight preference for the first but like the crown and the hour ring on the second a tad better.
Both beautiful but i tend to like the first a bit more by esthetic.
I pref it without the outer ring . But wouldn’t say no to either of these 😉👌🏻
Would be perfect, agree
By the way, noone has commented on different finishing of bridges, looks like this point is less important than I expected
I mainly focused on the gold bridges. Now the background is a bit less important to me. If I had to chose the bridges of the first one are more my taste, more modern.
Could you share more on the
different finishing of the bridges between the two models?
Thanks
Thanks
I guess finishing is similar
It is the shape that differs. The central part is thinner on one, and thicker on another.
Both are nice, just different.
Both are nice, just different.