albionphoto wrote: ↑Tue Jul 02, 2024 12:44 pm The 600 is the Richard III of the CW line and the 300 is Richard VII after Bosworth.

Lovely historical analogy, but what happened to IV, V & VI? I’m assuming you didn’t buy a Tudor?

And thank you for not pointing out that I should have said Henry VII... (now fixed)
Well I already had the Omega 300SMP in blue so no Tudor's for me. I always liked Tudor better when they used the Tudor Rose. I guess the other Henry's are part of the "perfidious albion" tradition where a British brand fought the Helvetians.

JAFO wrote: ↑Tue Jul 02, 2024 9:30 am Yes, I can see a big depth diver might complete a range, but 42mm,x 14mm for a tool watch is surely not going to sell to the masses nowadays, in competition against even the 300, never mind other brands. I wear 42mm, but I don't think I have 14mm thick watches other than chronographs..

I think there is a couple of things going on here.

First there is a lot of what I'll call 'comment bias' going on. I am not certain that smaller watches are the overwhelming seller that the watch internet would have you believe. I don't see it in the real world circles I frequent. I am not saying I see only larger watches either. I see what you would assume. A healthy mix of smaller and larger watches and everything in between. I think the small case brigade is very vocal and suck up a lot of oxygen in the room. I was listening to a discussion recently where someone said when they run a poll, if you just read the comments, you would come to a different conclusion than what the poll results actually showed.

There is some self fulfilling prophecy going on here as well. CW made a decision not to update the 600 when introducing the 300. This caused the 600 to look dated and out of step. They can say that people only want the 300 but if you aren't making anything else how do you really know? You don't. I find this troubling with a lot of CWs strategy as they 'chase the sellers' without investing in areas/models that different markets might want.

Tudor does a great job of recognizing this (for the most part). When you look at the diver lineup they have 37, 39, 41, and 42. In the bezel-less Black Bay line they have 31, 36, 39 and 41. Pretty much covers the span of most wrists.

Finally, I would say that really it is all about proportions. 13.6mm (the Ombré's actual dimensions) sits really well on a 42mm case. My PO is 15mm by 45.5mm and doesn't wear large (although I would consider it a big watch). Partially this is because there are no distinct crown guards on the case. The lyre lugs are also visually slimming. Having my 45.5mm next to the 42mm variant they are really hard to tell apart.

Which is 45.5mm and which is 42?
Measuring my Ombré at the crown guard results in 43mm. I would argue that 15mm on a 43mm watch wears quite well.

I have argued in the past that 36mm isn't too small. I don't think that 44-45mm is too big either as long as the proportions are good. One of the things that makes my 1675 wear so well is the 39mm case (40 at the bezel) with a 12-12.5 mm height. Those proportions are great.

A counter point though is the classic Sea-Dweller 16600/16660. This watch is 40mm by 14mm and feels a tad top heavy. The newer Sea-Dweller 116600 was 40mm x 15mm and also felt top heavy. When they switched to 43mm x 15mm in the 126600 the top heavy feeling went away.

There is always going to be a give and take when spec'ing a diver. Increased depth brings with it thicker crystals and casebacks etc. As in the Tudor example, not every watch should be offered in every size. It might make sense to kill the 42mm 300 and go with a 42mm 600 range instead where the proportions are better. Just like in the old days, I suspect the 38 mm 600s didn't sell like hotcakes. The proportions would make it feel top heavy and not right. Spec'ing 300 and slimming it down makes a lot of sense for those size proportions.

As I said in my writeup on my PO I don't have any confidence that CW will be making the watch I want so I put my money elsewhere. I am sure I am not the only one. How big that market is we won't know any time soon. That isn't to say that they never will but right now I think CW is a little too deep in their spreadsheets to see what is on the other side of the trees. Just my opinion.

@rkovars

I see what you mean. Good points, well made. I thought you had seen it from both sides within the thread actually, on reflection.