How much thicker is the 42mm PO 8500 vs the PO 2500 ?

Posts

381

Likes

654

machamp6650

·Feb 3, 2022

Blackdog

What the title says...

Just curious if I maybe should consider "upgrading"(?) from the 2500...

Thanks for the info.

I was in that exact position a few years ago. Had a gen 1 PO with 2500 movement, loved it, so set my sights on a gen 2 8500 (the one with the charcoal ceramic dial). My advice is if you like the width and weight of the 2500 already, stick with it. I ended up selling the 8500 specifically because of relative wearability issues. Still own the 2500 now 👍

 

Posts

2,523

Likes

2,791

texasmade

·Feb 3, 2022

After watching Skyfall, I really wanted to get the PO in 42mm. I went to the OB to try it on and was pretty disappointed in it. The watch was way too thick for me. The original 2500 42mm is still the best PO made.

 

Posts

9,965

Likes

15,643

padders

·Feb 4, 2022·Oooo subtitles!

Personally I find even the 2500 PO too thick. When you swap between an SMP and a PO you really feel the difference. The 8500 versions are like boat anchors in comparison with the early SMP, though those too have grown over the years. There is in fact a middle ground. The Trilogy Seamaster has a similar look to the PO but is noticeably thinner also.

Edited: Feb 4, 2022

 

Posts

273

Likes

423

Blackdog

·Feb 4, 2022

Well, you have been abundantly clear...

Not necessarily an upgrade when I already own the best version there is...

Well, maybe the PO LMLE would be an upgrade, but I simply can't stomach the prices being asked...

Thanks for all the feedback. Even objectively speaking, 1.5mm thicker is quite significant when the original already has a solid wrist presence.

 

Posts

2,460

Likes

6,952

hen

·Feb 4, 2022

Its not fat it just have a solid wrist presence.😉

Good one blackdog!

 

Posts

273

Likes

423

Blackdog

·Feb 4, 2022

hen

Its not fat it just have a solid wrist presence.😉

Good one blackdog!

Just like myself ! I happen to have a solid presence ! 😎

 

T

Posts

83

Likes

79

tjs1295

·Feb 4, 2022

The 39.5 mm 8800 might be worth looking at. I had the original 42 mm 2500. I’ll take my 39.5 mm any day over the original version. Numbers only tell part of the story. I didn’t like the numbers of the 39.5 mm PO or the numbers on the newer 300M diver. After trying both of them on, I now own both.

 

Posts

55

Likes

301

Missions

·Feb 4, 2022

I owned both.....loved to 2500 series.....the 8500 was as thick as a hamburger.....Sold both, should have kept my orange 45.5mm 2500. Great watch.....

 

Posts

7

Likes

2

GMPHK

·Feb 4, 2022

I have the 43.5 version. Yes it’s thick but I can pull it off on my 7-7.25 wrist. It actually wears smaller than 43.5. Wears better than my SMP 300 white dial if you can handle the girth. Yes it is heavier. Pics above show the girth but on the wrist without stretching the thickness out, the rear of the watch disappears on the wrist. To each his own.