Planet Ocean Thickness - Not so bad

Posts
103
Likes
265
I recently purchased a PO 8500 42mm Titanium. At first I was concerned that it would be too thick. Especially because the case back adds a few mm of height. However, what I didn’t realize until after wearing for a while, is that the thicker case back elevates the crown a touch. And this provides additional clearance so that the crown doesn’t jam into the wrist when the hand is flexed upward. I have slimmer watches where the crown jabs into my hand when raised upward. Certainly there are many additional factors that contribute to a good fit, but I was pleasantly surprised that this allowed a larger diameter watch to wear smaller.
 
Posts
24
Likes
22
I agree your description of the thickness but doesn't make it worse. When I switch to my 116710LN I notice the same thing about the crown. I have the same Titanium 42mm and love it. I did change out the clasp to the new micro adjustable one and now it's perfect.
 
Posts
103
Likes
265
I agree your description of the thickness but doesn't make it worse. When I switch to my 116710LN I notice the same thing about the crown. I have the same Titanium 42mm and love it. I did change out the clasp to the new micro adjustable one and now it's perfect.

I have a 39.5, and I’ve tried the 43.5 but it was too top heavy. I was willing to forego the METAS because the 42mm Ti is just such a good fit and feel. I’m all in on the 8500 Ti.
 
Posts
223
Likes
190
A friend of mine has a PO in steel and doesn't wear it due to the height. I tried to get him into a Speedy as his everyday watch, but he opted for a Rolex GMT. 🙁
 
Posts
35
Likes
98
I wear my PO 39.5 relatively tight in my wrist (I like a well fitted sport’s watch, quite similar to your pictures above) and find the case back disappears into my wrist, which make it look a couple of mm thinner as opposed to wearing it loosely fit.
 
Posts
420
Likes
490
The thickness of (almost) all modern Omegas kills it for me. I didn't really care until I got a 2531.80 and Rolex, the difference in conform and wearability was so huge that I sold all my pieces.

I don't care about METAS and the supposedly superior tech of the new co-axial movements as long as they don't manage to put them in a reasonably sized package. Some of the watches such as the new PO or automatic speedmasters are simply ridiculous and imo unacceptable.
Edited:
 
Posts
152
Likes
411
My large PO chrono is absurdly thick. 15mm, I believe. I love the watch but don't wear it as much as I would like due to its propensity to catch on cuffs and snag on stuff.

With the bracelet tight,, the caseback snugs up pretty well into my wrist and its not so bad, but with daily changes in the weather and my wrist, sometimes it hangs a little more loosely and causes problems. I need to get a clasp with micro adjustments.so I can more finely tune the fit. Adding and subtracting half links is cumbersome and a PITA.
 
Posts
103
Likes
265
Yes, I also have the 39.5 too and the thickness is a non-issue especially for this size.
 
Posts
106
Likes
184
43.5mm 8900 Planet Ocean. I like the balance/proportions of it on my wrist, gives good presence. I alternate between this and the Seamaster 300 Master-Coaxial on a NATO.

 
Posts
223
Likes
190
My large PO chrono is absurdly thick. 15mm, I believe. I love the watch but don't wear it as much as I would like due to its propensity to catch on cuffs and snag on stuff.

With the bracelet tight,, the caseback snugs up pretty well into my wrist and its not so bad, but with daily changes in the weather and my wrist, sometimes it hangs a little more loosely and causes problems. I need to get a clasp with micro adjustments.so I can more finely tune the fit. Adding and subtracting half links is cumbersome and a PITA.

Adam Savage wear a PO chrono on his youtube channel and it's pretty loose. But he wears it almost every video but he wears tee shirts a lot.
 
Posts
98
Likes
493
43.5mm 8900 Planet Ocean. I like the balance/proportions of it on my wrist, gives good presence. I alternate between this and the Seamaster 300 Master-Coaxial on a NATO.

I love the looks of this watch and the 8900 is a great calibre, but I sold mine as it was just way too thick for my 16.5mm wrist. Found a very good compromise in the 42mm Liquidmetal LE with the 2500C calibre. Good balance between size and thickness. Will miss the METAS certified precision though...

Edited:
 
Posts
129
Likes
642
I owned the 8500 calibre PO in 42 from 2013 to 2016. Loved the looks, but sold it because I found it top heavy.
Had I known there would be an adjustable clasp, then maybe I would have kept it.
Still a great looking watch (especially the 2500 and 8500 PO's since they are less "shiney").
 
Posts
17
Likes
10
my 8900 definitely felt heftier than my 2500, but i got used to it and i actually think it fits me better cause of the female end links. Every so often i put it on the leather strap and absolutely love the combination.
 
Posts
214
Likes
363
The thickness of (almost) all modern Omegas kills it for me. I didn't really care until I got a 2531.80 and Rolex, the difference in conform and wearability was so huge that I sold all my pieces.

I don't care about METAS and the supposedly superior tech of the new co-axial movements as long as they don't manage to put them in a reasonably sized package. Some of the watches such as the new PO or automatic speedmasters are simply ridiculous and imo unacceptable.

Another with little girls wrists
 
Posts
897
Likes
2,821
If I only owned one watch I may have issue with my SM 300MC thickness of just under 15MM, but since it’s in rotation I don’t mind having a thicker watch. Switches it up.
 
Posts
420
Likes
490
Another with little girls wrists
Another one who needs to compensate for his insecurities and small c**k...

Really, if you don't have anything worthwhile to add to the discussion it would be better to not write anything instead of throwing insults around. 🤨