The overriding feeling is..."use the 60:60 to your advantage!".So that's what I'm gonna do. The 360 has obliterated any chance the Hamilton had (well...unless Ernest Jones have a half price Christmas sale ).
My feeling of the C5A MKII was that it was the 'safe' option out of the three and the responses in this thread suggest this too. I have no doubt it's the kind of watch that would suit just about everyone in a different way, but I feel like buying something a little different-- the coin bezel and strangely oversized crown on the Hamilton; the GMT ring, tan strap and difficult-to-read-nature of the C9 GMT, makes these two options a little more distinct.
So I'm going with my initial instinct, helped by the last two posters, Dancematt and jmarchitect, and going for the C9 GMT. Hopefully I wont look like I'm wearing a frying pan but at least I'll be able to rule it out!
You've kinda summed up how I feel.jmarchitect wrote:Welcome to the forum. You have set yourself a rare task there, no doubt about it. The Hamilton has the more striking features in the coin edge bezel and the cathedral hands and the C9 GMT and C5 are positively plain in comparison. That is until you take a closer look.
The C9 GMT has silvered numerals, marker detail on the chapter ring, smaller crown compared to the Hamilton and the hands, whilst not as striking as the cathedral hands on the Hamilton, are clear and elegant. 1mm difference in diameter is not enough to make the C9 wear any larger. If you have a close look at the lug design, the C9 appears to wrap around more than the Hamilton, which should make it more comfortable to wear for your smaller wrist. You will never really know until you have tried them on.
My choice, if these were the only three watches available, would be the C9 GMT. Biased? Possibly!
Best of luck with your decision.
I didn't notice the curved lugs though. Well spotted. Going for the GMT for sure.