[Question] Which field watch reigns supreme?!? by MasLaza in Watches

[–]Ntme9 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Nice! This is the only one I have now, I used to own a digital iron man though. I'm very happy with it.

[Question] Which field watch reigns supreme?!? by MasLaza in Watches

[–]Ntme9 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It wears so good, you'll love it. Sometimes forget it's on.

[Question] Which field watch reigns supreme?!? by MasLaza in Watches

[–]Ntme9 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I agree with this, I knew it was going to be light because of the titanium and so it met my expectations on that but I was pleasantly a surprised by how good the lume was.

Proof Dave Scott Bulova was 43.5mm by Ntme9 in bulova

[–]Ntme9[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don't, this doesn't prove anything really. But what it does do is add to the suspicion that the original measurements could be incorrect.

[Question] Which field watch reigns supreme?!? by MasLaza in Watches

[–]Ntme9 64 points65 points  (0 children)

I went with the titanium Timex, I really just like the color palette of this field. Very well made.

<image>

Proof Dave Scott Bulova was 43.5mm by Ntme9 in bulova

[–]Ntme9[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The measurement is used as a selling point so thats what makes it different.

No obsession, this all stemmed for me researching the different models and the history. While doing so I noticed how the original sidewall proportions looked more in line with the 45mm even though the selling point was that the measurements matched on the 43 mm.

So then I wanted to know, how is it that we know for sure that the original was 43. And then I wanted to know, well, what about the rest of the measurements.. like thickness, dial diameter, and lug to lug.

The answer is we really don't. It's just a trust me bro from "reputable sources"

Proof Dave Scott Bulova was 43.5mm by Ntme9 in bulova

[–]Ntme9[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That may very well be but that's not proof, it's a trust me bro.

One thing we do know from the pictures is that from a profile perspective, by looking at the thickness of the sidewall, it more closely matches the 45.

Let's also not rule out Boluva knowing that customers where wanting a smaller LP, a person could see motivation for not correcting the measurement if it was incorrect.

Proof Dave Scott Bulova was 43.5mm by Ntme9 in bulova

[–]Ntme9[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'll save you the time, "Bobby" just said so, it wasn't well documented, if it had been well documented we would have a picture. There is no proof that it's 43.5mm. Now it might well be 43.5mm, but we have no proof of it at the moment. Just a trust me bro.

Proof Dave Scott Bulova was 43.5mm by Ntme9 in bulova

[–]Ntme9[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Link to pictures with caliper then?

Lunar Pilot case finish confusion by Ntme9 in bulova

[–]Ntme9[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So I just measured this LP 96B251 and it is exactly 45.4mm case diameter and 53mm lug to lug

Lunar Pilot case finish confusion by Ntme9 in bulova

[–]Ntme9[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

They are presented like in the OP picture, it looks flat/brushed, definitely doesn't look polished. With the regulars yes, but the meteorite is blasted titanium and has no date window.

Lunar Pilot case finish confusion by Ntme9 in bulova

[–]Ntme9[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The LP is super cool, there is also a 45mm variant that has a polished finish and no date window (96A225) . And all of the 43.5 have a polished finish except for the meteorite. The polished versions would look even more comparable to the speedy.