padders
··Oooo subtitles!I've owned both. There are a couple of other cons on the part of the SM300 vs the trilogy watch. The SM300 has a well finished and advanced movement but it is a bit of beast and as a consequence the SM300 wears very big and deep. The double spring barrels thing was a bit of development dead end IMO and makes for an over chunky piece. The display back makes this even worse. The Trilogy SM OTOH is pretty thin but equally advanced with it's single barrel movement, also featuring silicon, free sprung balance, triple layer co-ax escapement etc.
The other thing is the bracelets. Some complain that the Trilogy bracelets are a bit too chunky for the watches, well this is even worse with the SM300, being 21mm lug width it is even bigger. The crystal on the Trilogy watch is very pleasingly curved but more conventional on the SM300. Both are sapphire. You could argue the ceramic bezel on the SM300 trumps the Trilogy Alu insert, it is difficult to argue against that to be fair.
For me, the Trilogy is the better watch but of course YMMV and it is hard to look past the extra ~$1500 the Trilogy SM300 commands. On a $ for $ basis the 41mm SM300 is the smart buy vs the 39mm Trilogy SM300, but what do I know, I sold both and kept the Railmaster Trilogy watch!
The other thing is the bracelets. Some complain that the Trilogy bracelets are a bit too chunky for the watches, well this is even worse with the SM300, being 21mm lug width it is even bigger. The crystal on the Trilogy watch is very pleasingly curved but more conventional on the SM300. Both are sapphire. You could argue the ceramic bezel on the SM300 trumps the Trilogy Alu insert, it is difficult to argue against that to be fair.
For me, the Trilogy is the better watch but of course YMMV and it is hard to look past the extra ~$1500 the Trilogy SM300 commands. On a $ for $ basis the 41mm SM300 is the smart buy vs the 39mm Trilogy SM300, but what do I know, I sold both and kept the Railmaster Trilogy watch!



