- Posts
- 34
- Likes
- 47
himmelblau
·The new Omega Seamaster stainless steel bracelet, part number: OME-020ST1610930 arrived yesterday:
My first observation, compared to the "Bond" Seamaster stainless steel bracelet, part number: OME-020ST1503825:
Is that it is a lot lighter. Also, I did not realise because I have only seen the OME-020ST1610930 in photographs that it tapers from the 20mm end-links to approximately 18mm at the clasp, the shape being somewhat similar to that on the PO bracelet. Unlike the “Bond” bracelet which is 20mm wide over its full length.
Another reason that the “Bond” is heavier is that the links are thicker giving a Seamaster Professional using this bracelet a more rugged yet dressy look.
The OME-020ST1610930 which can be found on models like the 2254.50.00, “Electric Blue” and the 2230.50.00 Non-Americas Cup (Non-AC) has a more refined elegant look which actually makes the watch wear smaller, again a similar characteristic of the PO.
Unlike the PO bracelet which is all brushed, the OME-020ST1610930 bracelet shares the same appearance as that used on the Speedmaster Professional 3750.50.00, in that both the outer and middle sections are brushed and the three sections are separated by two thin highly polished dividers.
Initially, the watch head feels heavier on the OME-020ST1610930 bracelet that compared to the “Bond” bracelet which has a more balance feel overall. However, this small difference is soon negated when you have been wearing the watch for a few hours, as you hardly notice you are wearing a watch until you look at your wrist, unlike the “Bond” which you know is there due to the weight tugging on your arm.
I was rather surprised when I fitted the bracelet on the watch as I was expecting it to fit snugly, but the OME-020ST1610930 is longer in length than the “Bond” bracelet. Where it does fall down against the “Bond”, is by having only one half link, as opposed to two half links on the “Bond”.
I had the bracelet sized by a jeweller in the small Borders town close to where I live, and kick myself for not having the tool to size the bracelet myself. And believe it or not, but for the first time in my life I was rather impressed by the Rolex Submariner that he wears which unlike in the past did not look as small when compared to my converted 2531.800.00.
Below is a photo taken when I received my watch back from the watchmaker who did the conversion for me and on the “Bond” bracelet, as I was waiting on the rubber deployment strap coming from America. Later when it is daylight, I will take a photo of my watch now, so that you can compare the differences between both bracelets for your selves.
On the “Bond”:
My first observation, compared to the "Bond" Seamaster stainless steel bracelet, part number: OME-020ST1503825:
Is that it is a lot lighter. Also, I did not realise because I have only seen the OME-020ST1610930 in photographs that it tapers from the 20mm end-links to approximately 18mm at the clasp, the shape being somewhat similar to that on the PO bracelet. Unlike the “Bond” bracelet which is 20mm wide over its full length.
Another reason that the “Bond” is heavier is that the links are thicker giving a Seamaster Professional using this bracelet a more rugged yet dressy look.
The OME-020ST1610930 which can be found on models like the 2254.50.00, “Electric Blue” and the 2230.50.00 Non-Americas Cup (Non-AC) has a more refined elegant look which actually makes the watch wear smaller, again a similar characteristic of the PO.
Unlike the PO bracelet which is all brushed, the OME-020ST1610930 bracelet shares the same appearance as that used on the Speedmaster Professional 3750.50.00, in that both the outer and middle sections are brushed and the three sections are separated by two thin highly polished dividers.
Initially, the watch head feels heavier on the OME-020ST1610930 bracelet that compared to the “Bond” bracelet which has a more balance feel overall. However, this small difference is soon negated when you have been wearing the watch for a few hours, as you hardly notice you are wearing a watch until you look at your wrist, unlike the “Bond” which you know is there due to the weight tugging on your arm.
I was rather surprised when I fitted the bracelet on the watch as I was expecting it to fit snugly, but the OME-020ST1610930 is longer in length than the “Bond” bracelet. Where it does fall down against the “Bond”, is by having only one half link, as opposed to two half links on the “Bond”.
I had the bracelet sized by a jeweller in the small Borders town close to where I live, and kick myself for not having the tool to size the bracelet myself. And believe it or not, but for the first time in my life I was rather impressed by the Rolex Submariner that he wears which unlike in the past did not look as small when compared to my converted 2531.800.00.
Below is a photo taken when I received my watch back from the watchmaker who did the conversion for me and on the “Bond” bracelet, as I was waiting on the rubber deployment strap coming from America. Later when it is daylight, I will take a photo of my watch now, so that you can compare the differences between both bracelets for your selves.
On the “Bond”:
