New member hello and question about PRS-18

Hi all, first post here, and thought I'd say hello share some pics of my collection, an Omega SM300 and CWC quartz diver:

http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y27...0/IMGP2268.jpg
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y27...0/IMGP2267.jpg

I'm thinking about selling the CWC and getting a PRS-18 to replace it, but I'm wondering how high the PRS sits on the wrist. I had a Marathon SAR in the past, and that just sat too high for me and was always getting in the way. However, that watch has very flat lugs, so it sits on top of the wrist. The 18 is almost as thick as the SAR, but the lugs are much curvier, so I'd imagine it sits lower, but how much lower? Any PRS-18 owners out there that have tried the SAR and can comment?

The 18 is over a millimeter thinner and I think you will find it wears much closer to the wrist. Oh, and welcome!

Welcome
A couple of fine watches you have there, I have owned a PRS-18 and did not consider it wore too high on the wrist, I've also owned a SAR at a later date and I believe it wore alot higher. The lack of a date led me to move the PRS-18 on and source a PRS-3, very much like your CWC.

:) welcome i,ve owned an 18 ,thinking of getting another 8) craig

Hello & welcome, cannot help with your question as I not owned either a 18 or SAR. Love that SM300 ..

I have a SAR and had the 18 on the passaround. From memory, I'm pretty sure the 18 wore thinner.

Do not have a SAR, but I had a MMT Blackwater which wore flat -
but it has long gone. What stayed with me is my PRS-18A - it is
actually my most beloved watch: best dial/hands-design, brushed
asymmetric case, proper bezel action and tough as nails. Buy it! :clown:

http://i173.photobucket.com/albums/w...CN4682-1-1.jpg

Frank

Oh just for the sake of it - another pic:

http://i173.photobucket.com/albums/w...RS-18A/18A.jpg

Frank

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by walkuere

Do not have a SAR, but I had a MMT Blackwater which wore flat -
but it has long gone. Frank[/size]

---

How did the PRS18 wear compared to the MMT? Was there a dramatic difference in how tall it wore? It's hard to tell from looking at pictures. My SM300 has a thicker case than my CWC, but the CWC actually wears taller because the SM300's lugs are much curvier.

Well, it is the bezel which makes the difference as it is flat on the
MMT and not ( I do not have the proper English word for it right now) on
the 18. I do not have a wrist shot but the MMT felt a bit too small in the end.

http://i173.photobucket.com/albums/w...18A/18AsiN.jpg

http://i173.photobucket.com/albums/w...T/01240010.jpg

2 points - on the SAR you can stick a bracelet.
BUT I have heard that the SAR has a plastic "movement holder" and the
PRS-18 is properly made with a metal one. That alone is a good point.

Or has somebody a picture with the case opened of the SAR?

Anyhow, I would simply buy one, you won't loose a lot if you would want to sell it again.
It has a much better value-for-money than the SAR/MMT anyhow.

Frank

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pakelika

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by walkuere

Do not have a SAR, but I had a MMT Blackwater which wore flat -
but it has long gone. Frank[/size]

---

How did the PRS18 wear compared to the MMT? Was there a dramatic difference in how tall it wore? It's hard to tell from looking at pictures. My SM300 has a thicker case than my CWC, but the CWC actually wears taller because the SM300's lugs are much curvier.

---

http://www.mkiiwatches.com/images/cd..._swiss_400.jpg

The MMT (later on) also came with a high bezel as people were finding it too small for today's tastes. I must say, I also found the PRS-18 to be small, even with the high bezel. If size is the paramount issue ... don't get the PRS-18.

john

It depends on your wrists of course:

My left has 17,5cm:

http://i173.photobucket.com/albums/w...A/01010002.jpg

So it is big enough for me :clown.

Frank

[quote/]abraxas I must say, I also found the PRS-18 to be small, even with the high bezel. If size is the paramount issue ... don't get the PRS-18.[/quote]

I can deal with some case height (after all, this won't be a dress watch that has to slip under cuffs), but just don't want something so tall that it gets in the way, and for me the SAR reached that level. I'm definitely leaning towards the 18, because it's a better value for the money than the MMT, (and these days that is always a paramount issue!)

I have had all three - SAR, '18 and Blackwater. They sit on the wrist in that order of thickness, with the MMT much thinner than the other two. The '18 is not hugely tall like the SAR, but does sit better if you wear it on something other than a standard NATO. I have it on rubber at the moment and that allows the lugs to wrap around the wrist.

The '18 is one of the best bargains out there IMHO. But the slimness of the MMT is hard to argue with.

I think the 18 looks great, but am not a quartz fan... anyone heard anything on when auto movements might come back?

Eddie says the 18A will be back when he can find movements. That seems to be a common problem these days!

I have a SAR and a Precista Diver '93 (the father of the '18). The bezels are of similar height, but the case of the SAR is taller.

http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e3.../SAR/sSAR4.jpg
http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e3...ge/sLSide1.jpg

I like the look and feel of the Precista much more. Be aware that how a watch lies on your wrist depends a bit on the shape of your wrist. Some have oval wrists, some are more rectangular. My wrists have a slight hollow at the distal radio-ulnar joint which lets round backed watches of modest size lie especially flat.

I wish I hadn't let my PRS-18A go :(

I've just got a Marathon TSAR: it sits higher on my rounded wrist than my 18Q. Both are comfortable though.

I found a used Blackwater with the RN bezel on a forum, so that's how I solved the dilemma! I like the watch a lot, and it sits very low on the wrist. I still have a nagging desire to get an 18Q, but I am holding off on all discretionary purchases while the global financial apocalypse is still unfolding :shock: :(

nice pics, as always, Colin!