# Fell Hard For The Aqua Terra Blue Dial, 41.5mm or 38.5mm?



## joshuagull (Jan 24, 2015)

I've officially decided my next piece will be the blue dialed Aqua Terra 8500 non-Master (for the brushed bracelet and date window surround). Now I have to decide between the 41.5mm or 38.5mm version and which looks best on my flat 7" wrist.









For those who have had to make the same decision, which way did you go and more importantly why did you choose the size you did?

Also, does anyone much prefer the newer Master Co-Axial with the PCLs and borderless date window? Anti-magnetic is a bonus for sure, and I could go either way on the bracelet. Both look great. I don't know if I could get on with borderless date window though. It looks empty, off-balanced and unfinished since it's not beveled. Is that something you get used to or get over for the other advantages? Or has it bothered others enough that they stuck with the non-Master 8500 version instead?


----------



## om3ga_fan (Nov 26, 2014)

I'm also a 7" wrist and went 41.5. Tried the original but returned it then went Master coaxial. Love it!!!










Sent from a Payphone


----------



## joshuagull (Jan 24, 2015)

Did you just prefer the size more? I feel like the 38.5 feels more universal and more dressy whereas the 41.5's size balances things out and makes it feel more sporty. I'm leaning towards the 41.5 for now specifically for that reason, and also because it has 20mm strap width as opposed to the 38.5's 19mm strap width. All my current nice straps are 20mm. 

You had the 8500 before, right? Do you miss the date window surround? Do you find the Master to look a little off-balance without it? Or have you gotten used to it or even grown to prefer it without the date window surround?


----------



## ichaice (Sep 5, 2013)

I went through this process myself before I bought the Skyfall a couple of years ago. I tried both on several times, in the end I went for the 38.5. I've since sold it and regret that.


----------



## ichaice (Sep 5, 2013)

om3ga_fan said:


> I'm also a 7" wrist and went 41.5. Tried the original but returned it then went Master coaxial. Love it!!!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I've had the Skyfall and have a chance of getting the Master for a good price. What made you choose the master?


----------



## Nolander (Feb 11, 2006)

I have the blue 41.5 mm master coaxial. The lack of date surround doesn't bother me a bit. However I never had one with it so I can't really compare. I would imagine the date is easier to read at different angles without the surround, but I haven't ever heard anyone complain about that. 
I got the master coaxial simply due to the movement. At the time that I bought it I never really considered the date window being different between the 2. The PCLs have grown on me also and I like them now. 
I guess my point is that I don't think the watch face looks strange without the date surround, but I wear it every day and am used to it.


----------



## om3ga_fan (Nov 26, 2014)

I felt the 41.5mm struck a better balance on my 7" wrist. I thought the date window on the 'Skyfall' model was cool but haven't missed it at all. And, the absence of the date window is actually more consistent with other Omega models.

For me, it's perfect:

- right size
- love the new master coaxial movement
- display case back is great 
- love the PCL's
- the blue face is stunning
- balances perfectly with my other Omega's
- spot on for most any occasion

I routinely wear it with it suits and dressier attire as much as I do a pair of shorts and a polo or t-shirt.

All-in, it was a great purchase and I love it. 



Sent from a Payphone


----------



## ichaice (Sep 5, 2013)

One thing that I wasn't impressed with on the Skyfall was the lume. Has it been improved on the Master model?


----------



## solesman (Dec 3, 2009)

You can pull off either. Sorry I cannot help further.


----------



## pinmeuphere (Jul 8, 2015)

I fell for the same watch as you and went for the 38.5. Like you I have a flat 7" wrist, I tried on both at the boutique and felt like the 38.5mm size suited the watch better. Of course opinions and styles will vary, but fwiw after 2 years I don't regret the size decision at all and absolutely love the watch. Bottom line is either way you can't go wrong, it's a stunner.


----------



## anaplian (Jan 4, 2014)

I have 6.75" wrists and went with the 38.5 Master Co-ax in black. The PCLs really bothered me so I had them brushed to match the outer links. The borderless date window didn't bother me - in fact I prefer it - especially on the darker dialled ATs. 

Some folks believe that given the thickness of the 8500 ATs means that the 41 mm ATs are more proportionally balanced. However, for me, the 38.5mm looks fine. 

With your wrists either size would work IMO. However the 38.5mm is more classically sized for the type of watch that the AT represents. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## cuts33 (Jan 3, 2011)

I have the 41.5mm but also have a larger wrist. 

I could have gone with the 38.5 but I think the 41.5mm is more versatile in the sense that it comes off as more of a "sports watch" when needed. 

I usually wear the blue OEM croc strap during the week with my work attire and put the bracelet on for the weekends. 

Best of both worlds IMO.


----------



## om3ga_fan (Nov 26, 2014)

ichaice said:


> One thing that I wasn't impressed with on the Skyfall was the lume. Has it been improved on the Master model?






























I think it's better but didn't spend much time with the Skyfall... Including a few photos. I don't the lume is as good as it is with the PO, SMP or SM300 - but I'd rate it as 'ok'.

Sent from a Payphone


----------



## Sloopjohnb (Sep 8, 2014)

I'll answer here and not in the other thread.

First of all I think both look good on you, which doesn't really help you I guess. And it also doesn't help you that some here swear on the 41.5mm size while others have downgraded from 41.5 to 38.5.

But as someone else said in the other thread, the AT is a not a dresser but a sportswatch, even though the dial may look a bit dressy.
The height of the watch underlines the sporty character, and so does the bracelet. So if its pretty thick it doesn't do any harm if its a bit bigger as well.

When I first fell in love with it on the internet it was the 38.5, the original Skyfall. So I tried it on at the boutique - and I was bitterly disappointed. It looked so small and just not right, the dial even looked oval to me and not round. And my wrists are smaller than yours and I had never worn any watch bigger than 39mm.
A few weeks later it dawned on me that I should perhaps try the 41.5mm. That did the trick, I fell in love with it just like I had in the first place via the photos here and in other forums. I have had it for almost a year now, it is my only watch, and I adore it just like on day one.
My attire is as casual as yours and its fantastic with jeans, shorts, t-shirts, shirts, cardigans etc. It didn't look wrong on the beach and spent a fortnight in the Mediterranean. After all, its a SEAmaster. I think the larger size gives it a better balance along with the height and makes it look just perfect.

My choice was the non-Master because I prefer the version with the date window (better balance of the dial) and the brushed centre links (underlines the sporty character). The Master is OK, but not even remotely close to the non-Master.

That's my two cents, now its up to you to decide. But whichever version you chose you will have a fantastic watch, hopefully for the rest of your life.


----------



## Ben.McDonald7 (Aug 31, 2015)

I have a 7-7.25 inch wrist and I chose the 41.5. I didn't try on the 38.5 but I couldn't imagine going below 41.5 as I think the watch wears smaller than it is. The 41.5 is a nice middle ground in between a sports watch and a dress watch I feel and the Aqua Terra can blend into both. Also the larger size really shows off the beautiful dial much better I would think over the 38.5. I have the AT >15,000 Gauss and I really don't notice not having a date window. Maybe if they beveled the window it would be better but when I see one with the date window it looks more cluttered and almost takes away from the dial I feel. I would prefer the fully brushed bracelet but I switched to a canvas Brady Strap so its a non-issue now. Bottom line its what you prefer so go with what you like.


----------



## yuk0nxl1 (Oct 12, 2013)

I'm going to say that the 41.5 proportions look better but the 38.5 looks better on your wrist. 

If you think the 41.5 feels comfortable on your wrist and like it, go for it. I don't think it looks overpowering on your arm, just that the 38.5 looks better in comparison.


----------



## Relo60 (Jun 14, 2015)

I got the Omega SMP on 41.5mm mainly for its sportier looks. But I intend to get the AT at 38.5 for formal events.&#55357;&#56832;


----------



## om3ga_fan (Nov 26, 2014)

It's also worth mentioning that wrists shots are tricky. Try a mirror shot or have someone take your photo from enough distance to compare your frame. Makes a difference. 


Sent from a Payphone


----------



## om3ga_fan (Nov 26, 2014)

joshuagull said:


> I've officially decided my next piece will be the blue dialed Aqua Terra 8500 non-Master (for the brushed bracelet and date window surround). Now I have to decide between the 41.5mm or 38.5mm version and which looks best on my flat 7" wrist.
> 
> View attachment 5282282
> 
> ...


Top left. Money.

Sent from a Payphone


----------



## logan2z (Sep 23, 2012)

I've also got flat 7" wrists and went with the 41.5mm. The 38.5mm wore too small on me but the 41 5mm is just right.


----------



## Ducatiti (Jun 29, 2015)

I was in the same situation. Without hesitation, went with the latest and greatest thinking that the resale value would be better on the long run. Also went with the 41 without even trying the 38 version. Paying this much for a watch, I would like it be seen haha. I'm around 6' 200lbs. I figured that if do change, I will get bigger anyways. Here are pics with an aftermarket strap and deployant.


----------



## oztech (Apr 30, 2015)

I always go by the rule of which one looks and feels the best to me not someone else we all vary in tastes.


----------



## Hutter (Mar 17, 2011)

I'd absolutely pick the 38.5mm for 3 reasons:

- 41.5mm on an Aqua Terra looks too big, too sporty for me. 41.5 is diver watch territory. Take Rolex Explorer I for example, or the latest Oyster Perpetual or even the IWC Ingenieur 39mm as all-around watches with steel bracelets that look great.
- The huge polished center link on the 41.5 bracelet... 
- the date window on the 38.5 is perfectly positioned and has a nice frame.

But this is me!


----------



## dirtvictim (Mar 9, 2006)

You can pull off either that is for sure. But I like the smaller one on your wrist, good balance


----------



## joshuagull (Jan 24, 2015)

I'm going to put my 38mm SARB035 on the bracelet (normally lives on leather) and wear it this week to see how I feel about the size. The 38.5 AT is almost identical in size. Then when I get my PO2500 back from service any day now I'm going to take it and my Speedy Pro in and compare side by side with the Aqua Terra sizes. I'd not want the AT to be any larger looks-wise than my Speedy or PO due to the style of watch. And I'm very familiar with how both of those wear so it'll give me a good idea of the AT sizes when comparing them side by side. 

Right now I lean towards the 41.5 for looks at a distance but up close the 38.5 does seem a slightly better fit and did feel slightly better on wrist from a comfort standpoint (hard to say for sure though since neither bracelet was sized to my wrist). FWIW the lady in sales said the 38.5 looked better and it was the less expensive of the two considering it was non-Master and the 41.5 was Master Co-Axial. So there's that. She was likely being truthful as it didn't benefit her at all to say the 38.5 looked better. 

I do feel like I'd never regret going 41.5 but if I went 38.5 I may regret not going bigger. I'm going to test that theory though. I'll see if that's true after this SARB test and then comparing the two AT sizes to my Speedy and PO.


----------



## mpalmer (Dec 30, 2011)

I think it depends a bit on what else you own or plan to own. If you plan to wear this in formal situations, ai would go with the 38.5. If you have a proper dress watch on leather strap, you might go with the 42mm version.


----------



## joshuagull (Jan 24, 2015)

I have my SARB035 on alligator for dress and my vintage '64 Longines on alligator as well, both for dressier occasions (the former being 38mm and the latter 35mm). I rarely dress up though. A polo or button down is as close to dressed up as I get 90% of the time. I felt like the 38.5 looked better with shorts, boat shoes and a polo and the 41.5 looked better with a t-shirt, shorts, sneakers and a hat. Which makes sense. The "dressier" look (if you can call it that) worked better with the 38.5 and the more casual look better with the 41.5 to my eye. 

Often my concern with smaller watches and casual wear is that with jeans, boots and a button down gingham shirt for instance, the smaller watches will look too small. During the cooler months that's almost exclusively what I wear. But I want something to cover me for that all the way up to swimming trunks if I'm at the pool with the kiddo or just hanging out in jeans or shorts and a t-shirt.


----------



## BigSeikoFan (Feb 15, 2010)

I was in your situation and after trying both at the same time, I decided to get the non-Master 41.5. I also have a flat 7" wrist and while both looked fine, the 41.5 looked better to me. Then again, I'm used to wearing 42mm watches.









It looks smaller on my wrist than it appears in this pic.


----------



## joshuagull (Jan 24, 2015)

Man, that looks great. Any closer up photos of it on your wrist? Do you know if the lug to lug distance is about 48mm or is it larger than that? I know my PO2500 and Speedy Pro are both right around 48mm and wear well on my wrist, while anything much shorter doesn't fill my wrist up as well (46mm or less) and anything more is too long (50+mm). 48mm lug to lug is my sweet spot.


----------



## AlexMachine (Dec 3, 2008)

I thought that after Speedy pros that 38,5mm feel too small. Well it did for 1 or 2 days, after that I am more than happy I took this one. It is balanced, looks great with suit or with shorts and t-shirt.
You could do with 41,5mm I think but in close up photos lugs of that one seem to a little too large.
I have a 6.5" flat wrist and here is a photo.

__
Sensitive content, not recommended for those under 18
Show Content


----------



## Hilly64 (Feb 2, 2014)

same here 7" wrists, 6ft, 95kg. I went 41.5, 8500 non master opaline which in theory should wear slightly bigger than the darker colours. Another deciding factor was that mine was a pre owned and at a good price which was the main deal clincher. To be fair I tried on both sizes and both worked well and there are advantages with both. I agree that the 41.5 appears to me to be better balanced and it is a gorg looking and comfortable watch so you cant go wrong with either. defo go for the long mirror shot when viewing. I have looked and ponder on whether the 41.5 is a touch on the large size but I am sure it isn't and I am also sure I would have looked at the 38 and felt the opposite.....must be an Omega thing.....this is from a guy who made a mistake with at POXL but the 42 does not "sing" to me like the 45.5 did but XL just always felt too big and almost overbearing towards the end of the day.


----------



## BigSeikoFan (Feb 15, 2010)

joshuagull said:


> Man, that looks great. Any closer up photos of it on your wrist? Do you know if the lug to lug distance is about 48mm or is it larger than that? I know my PO2500 and Speedy Pro are both right around 48mm and wear well on my wrist, while anything much shorter doesn't fill my wrist up as well (46mm or less) and anything more is too long (50+mm). 48mm lug to lug is my sweet spot.


Thanks. Not sure about the L2L distance but 48mm sounds right to me.

Here's a closer shot.


----------



## joshuagull (Jan 24, 2015)

It seems to me like the 41.5AT is going to be pretty close in size to my Speedy Pro. Both around 42mm with a dark face and 48mm L2L length--just with a thin polished bezel instead of a thin tachymetre scale. And the 38.5AT is going to wear very similar to my SARB035. Again both around 38mm in diameter with 45mm L2L length. So I put my Speedy and SARB back on their bracelets (which I never wear either like that as I like them both better on leather) and did a back to back comparison.









I'm going to wear the SARB on bracelet for a few days, switch to the Speedy for a few days, then swap back to the SARB and imagine which size I'd rather the AT be. Should give me a general idea. Then when I get my 42mm Planet Ocean back next week I'm taking them all in to check out both AT's in the metal again to see what I think.


----------



## joshuagull (Jan 24, 2015)

One more SARB vs Speedy to simulate the 38 and 41 ATs.

View attachment 5293874


----------



## om3ga_fan (Nov 26, 2014)

Speedy. Size is better. 


Sent from a Payphone


----------



## Sloopjohnb (Sep 8, 2014)

om3ga_fan said:


> Speedy. Size is better.
> 
> Sent from a Payphone


yep


----------



## Sloopjohnb (Sep 8, 2014)

om3ga_fan said:


> Speedy. Size is better.


yep

here is the AT 41.5 next to the Speedy


----------



## joshuagull (Jan 24, 2015)

om3ga_fan said:


> Speedy. Size is better.
> 
> Sent from a Payphone


I think I agree. I feel like I could go either way looking down my wrist from my own first person perspective--both sizes look good just with different personalities (well-rounded size vs more sporty size) but in every mirror shot I think the larger sized watches fill my wrist space better and the smaller size looks undersized.

And I'm trying hard not to let it influence my opinion, but there is something to be said for the 20mm strap width on the 41.5 since all my other straps and natos are 20mm, and the fact that the larger size is going to be more legible in any light including no light since it has a bit more lume. I don't want to let those points sway me too much, but they're definite advantages of the 41.5 over the 38.5.


----------



## Buchmann69 (Aug 7, 2013)

Those are some very nice watches you were considering, some of which I've wrestled with myself, particularly that 2-liner sub, can't get that one out of my head.
Congrats on narrowing it down to the AT. I admire your process, I have been way more impulsive, in the past anyway.
I prefer the border-less date window, looks more refined, less clunky...but either way is nice.


----------



## joshuagull (Jan 24, 2015)

Sloopjohnb said:


> yep
> 
> here is the AT 41.5 next to the Speedy


Oh man, that's exceptionally helpful. I'm going to go back to the AD with my Speedy on bracelet and compare in the metal just to be sure, but based on that photo it looks like the AT's case is the same L2L distance as the Speedy with an ever so slightly smaller case and dial diameter. If the 41.5 AT does indeed wear ever so slightly smaller visually than the Speedy and feels similar in size on wrist then I don't know how I'll be able to bring myself to go with anything else other than the larger size.


----------



## Sloopjohnb (Sep 8, 2014)

joshuagull said:


> Oh man, that's exceptionally helpful. I'm going to go back to the AD with my Speedy on bracelet and compare in the metal just to be sure, but based on that photo it looks like the AT's case is the same L2L distance as the Speedy with an ever so slightly smaller case and dial diameter. If the 41.5 AT does indeed wear ever so slightly smaller visually than the Speedy and feels similar in size on wrist then I don't know how I'll be able to bring myself to go with anything else other than the larger size.


you certainly wouldn't regret it 
the AT dial is actually a little bit bigger because of lack of tachymetre but you hardly notice it. and yes, lug to lug should be the same. But now you have to chose between Master and non Master. If I remember correctly, your dealer only has the 41.5 in Master. If you are interested in the non-Master, i think I saw it on the list of of Jim at Continental which Fr John posted today in the Seamaster 300 Master thread.


----------



## joshuagull (Jan 24, 2015)

I think I'd have to go non-Master. As cool and practical as a anti-magnetic movement would be, the lack of a boxed in date window with no bevel on the edges would drive my OCD bonkers.


----------



## franzy (Jul 18, 2010)

This! Great shot.



om3ga_fan said:


> I'm also a 7" wrist and went 41.5. Tried the original but returned it then went Master coaxial. Love it!!!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## ichaice (Sep 5, 2013)

I'm hopefully receiving my 38.5 blue dial Master AT tomorrow so keep the photos coming


----------



## joshuagull (Jan 24, 2015)

Really narrowing in on the 41.5mm solely for the lug to lug length. Even on my SKX007 it bothers me sometimes that the lugs don't cover enough of my wrist. I think 48mm is the perfect lug to lug length for me and the 41.5mm AT is 48mm lug to lug I think. When I look at my SARB the 38mm diameter seems fine but the 35mm lug to lug bothers me. My Nomos Club was 36mm but I didn't mind it's size because it was 48mm lug to lug.


----------



## spidaman (Dec 24, 2011)

There was no Master when I was looking at the Skyfall two years ago. I went with the 38.5, as I thought the size looked better on my 6.75" flat wrist. My wife was with me and concurred. I am 6'1" and 205 lbs, so I suppose I could have worn the 41.5 without difficulty. Just liked the size of the 38.5 better.

I think the date window is a nice flourish on the face, although if I had never seen it, I think I would have been happy with the non-window on the Master.

I wear my watch in all settings, including formal occasions, and I think the 38.5 size helps stretch the range of use.

Soon I will be swapping out my bracelet for the OEM leather and deployant I showed in my post last winter.

https://www.watchuseek.com/f20/new-shoes-my-skyfall-blue-dial-black-leather-1540826.html

Good luck with your choice!


----------



## joshuagull (Jan 24, 2015)

I know what you mean spidaman. I'm 5' 11" 190 lbs and I think both sizes work. I think it comes down to a personal preference thing. When I look down at a watch with shorter or longer lug to lug than I prefer it bothers me. Anything in the 36-42mm diameter range works for me but the lug to lug has to be right, and it's a revelation I just realized today.


----------



## mesaboogie18 (Jul 18, 2013)

I have small wrists, so I went with the 38.5mm.


----------



## Betterthere (May 23, 2011)

7.25" wrist went with 41.5 non master (as only one available at the time). The only watch that has survived for more than a year. I do not like the non boxed date window.


----------



## Ramblin man (Feb 7, 2011)

I know with 7 inch wrist I would take 38.5 AT, Go Skyfall. But your choice is yours to make.


----------



## AlexMachine (Dec 3, 2008)

joshuagull said:


> I think I'd have to go non-Master. As cool and practical as a anti-magnetic movement would be, the lack of a boxed in date window with no bevel on the edges would drive my OCD bonkers.


But older ones should also have a Si14 balance spring, which is anti-magnetic to about 1000 gauss (vs 15.000 on master), if I remember correct.


----------



## joshuagull (Jan 24, 2015)

That's a good point. I forgot about the Si14 balance spring and 1k gauss is more than enough for me. Can someone confirm that the AT8500 has Si14?


----------



## cuts33 (Jan 3, 2011)

AlexMachine said:


> But older ones should also have a Si14 balance spring, which is anti-magnetic to about 1000 gauss (vs 15.000 on master), if I remember correct.


I do not believe this is accurate at all.

The Si14 balance spring is made of an antimagnetic material, but the watch itself is not antimagnetic to 1000 gauss.

Just going off memory, I recall a lot of people wondering just how anti-magnetic the standard 8500 series watches were and nobody would really find the answer.

However, when the AT, PO, Hour Vision, etc. came out with Si14, if it could withstand 1000 Gauss (the same is the Milgauss) you can bet that Omega would have highly publicized that.



joshuagull said:


> That's a good point. I forgot about the Si14 balance spring and 1k gauss is more than enough for me. Can someone confirm that the AT8500 has Si14?


As to whether the AT 8500 has the Si14 balance spring, if you are after the blue dial, it definitely has it.

The only ones that don't are some early versions with a white or grey dial and you can only tell by looking at the movement.


----------



## joshuagull (Jan 24, 2015)

Roger that. Good to know. I've heard the 1k gauss number before with the Si14 but it's not a big deal to me honestly. I'm never around magnets and never had a watch magnetized. And if I did, it would be cheaper to get the non-Master with boxed in date window for cheaper and demagnetize it if need be if it were ever magentized rather than to go for the Master just for the antimagnetic feature and have to live with the unboxed date window.

Yesterday I was feeling set on the 41.5AT. Today I'm feeling torn. I wore my Speedy most of the day yesterday and today to simulate the 41.5AT, and I swapped to the SARB035 a little while back to simulate the 38.5AT. As comfortable as the Speedy is, the smaller size and lesser weight of the SARB is noticeably more comfortable. I normally wear the Speedy on leather which is considerably lighter than on bracelet. And since I plan to leave the AT on bracelet, having that extra level of comfort from less weight would be nice. SARB035 is around the same listed weight at the 38.5AT (130g) and the Speedy on bracelet is around the same listed weight as the 41.5AT (160g). Amazing how much of a difference 30g can make on the wrist.

Visually I do prefer the 41.5 slightly, but comfort-wise the 38.5 is going to have the edge. Makes for a tough call.









There's a photo of the Skyfall against a SubC. On my wrist the SubC looks blockier than I prefer which is why I was so heavily considering the 39.5mm 14060 Sub for the comfort and ease of wear before I fell for the AT. I think the 38.5 AT may give me more of that same feel like the 14060, whereas the 41.5AT would be very comparable in size to my Planet Ocean and Speedy as far as look and feel on the wrist.

Can't wait to get my Planet Ocean back and take it, the Speedy and the SARB all in to compare to the two AT sizes and finally make a firm decision.


----------



## Sloopjohnb (Sep 8, 2014)

and once you decide and purchase stay away from WUS and other forums, for your own sanity!!!
I KNOW that I prefer the 41.5 over the 38.5 but by spending too much time here I sometimes still wonder about the size...


----------



## joshuagull (Jan 24, 2015)

I do realize this is very subjective. Different people like difference sizes.









For me, that AT could stand to be larger on that wrist size. Others may love it, but I'd like to avoid a fit that small.









Same for this Explorer. I just looks undersized on that size/shape of wrist. I know others feel the updated 39mm Explorer I is too large though and prefer the 36mm even on bigger wrists.









And that Sub, to me, looks proportionally balanced to that wrist. It's not under or oversized, but rather in perfect balance. That's what I'm going for.


----------



## joshuagull (Jan 24, 2015)

Sloopjohnb said:


> and once you decide and purchase stay away from WUS and other forums, for your own sanity!!!
> I KNOW that I prefer the 41.5 over the 38.5 but by spending too much time here I sometimes still wonder about the size...


Amen to that. May have to delete my account so I don't drive myself mad. Haha.

Too bad they don't make a 40mm AT. It would be the perfect difference. I keep asking myself if I go 38.5 and look down at my wrist, will ever regret going small and wishing I went bigger? At times I think the answer is yes. Whereas with the 41.5 I don't think I'd ever look down and wish I went smaller. I may wish the watch was lighter and slightly more comfortable at times but I don't find the Planet Ocean uncomfortable despite it being my heaviest watch, and I could always swap the AT onto leather if I want it to be lighter. No way I can make the 38.5 larger though.


----------



## om3ga_fan (Nov 26, 2014)

joshuagull said:


> Amen to that. May have to delete my account so I don't drive myself mad. Haha.
> 
> Too bad they don't make a 40mm AT. It would be the perfect difference. I keep asking myself if I go 38.5 and look down at my wrist, will ever regret going small and wishing I went bigger? At times I think the answer is yes. Whereas with the 41.5 I don't think I'd ever look down and wish I went smaller. I may wish the watch was lighter and slightly more comfortable at times but I don't find the Planet Ocean uncomfortable despite it being my heaviest watch, and I could always swap the AT onto leather if I want it to be lighter. No way I can make the 38.5 larger though.


Astute analysis. I think you may have found your answer.

Sent from a Payphone


----------



## Sloopjohnb (Sep 8, 2014)

well, in size 40 you could have the blue Ingenieur Laureus edition 2015


----------



## Ben.McDonald7 (Aug 31, 2015)

Whoever said size doesn't matter lied!...

I would personally go with the 41.5 and from your back and forth I think the 41.5 would be a better fit for you. If the Planet Ocean's size doesn't bother you the 41.5 AT shouldn't either. 41.5 still gives you a watch that can be sporty with a strap etc or formal with the bracelet. Personally I think 38.5 is rather small for a sports watch but that's my feelings. Either way the best advise you have gotten is once you pull the trigger stay away from the forums and any discussion on the sizes between the two. Enjoy the watch you get.


----------



## joshuagull (Jan 24, 2015)

I've got another thread running parallel to this one in the general section when I was considering many more options than the AT. I'm keeping both updated but a good point was made there so I'm copying and pasting the quote and my subsequent reply here.



Tugboat1980 said:


> Love the Aqua Terra. I think you can do both but I think the 38.5 looks best. The bigger one has more presence but ends up looking a bit more sporty and casual, maybe stepping on your Speedy's toes a bit too much. The 38.5 hits that sweet spot. Not too sporty, not too dressy, but can do both equally well.


I don't have any full length mirrors at home but I forgot there is one at work I can use in the locker room, so I was able to get in front of a full length mirror from 6-10' away just now with both my Speedy and SARB, and right now I feel like I agree with this. The Speedy is flat out sporty. No question about it. It's not too big but it is sporty through and through.

The SARB on the other hand didn't look too big nor too small. It looked very balanced, like the way a well-tailored suit or perfectly fitting clothing would look.

I think that's why the first time I saw the AT the 38.5AT size called my name, as I was dressed rather classically/preppy (J Crew polo and classic shorts with boat shoes) with everything fitting well. The 41.5 looked too big. But back in a more casual t-shirt, hat and sneakers they both looked good.

That's also a VERY good point about the 41.5AT being so similar in size to my Speedy and 42mm 2201.50 Planet a Ocean that it steps on their toes. My original purpose for this watch purchase--before I even knew what watch I was purchasing--was to get something a little smaller and lighter than the Planet Ocean for more well-rounded daily wear away from work (hence the reason I immediately considered the 14060 as my first choice).

Seeing photos of the Speedy next to the 38.5AT makes me feel like the 38.5AT is more than sufficient in size as well.









The last time I was at the AD I had my Speedy and SARB both on leather. I'm going back in the morning with both on bracelet and comparing to the 38.5 and 41.5ATs. I think it'll be pretty enlightening. I'll probably wait until I have my Planet Ocean back to take it in and compare both the PO2500 and Speedy Pro to both size ATs to make the final decision, and do a few full length mirror tests between now and then just to see if I feel the same way over the next few days, but right now the advantage is to the 38.5.


----------



## joshuagull (Jan 24, 2015)

Basically took the whole watch box in today and spent an hour at the AD comparing sizes. The 41.5AT is more of the same of what I have with my Planet Ocean and Speedy Pro. The 38.5 adds some versatility and for that particular style of watch looks better balanced on my wrist than the 41.5AT. In fact the two watches that looked best on my wrist on bracelet were the 38.5AT and the used Submariner they had (aside from the blue being the wrong shade of blue and the yellow gold being yellow gold). 

I'm going to briefly consider a blue Tudor Submariner as that shade of blue is spot on and the size is best on my wrist, but what I'm really on the hunt for now is a 38.5mm Skyfall AT as the perfect all-around watch. Feels good to have come to a conclusion on this.


----------



## spidaman (Dec 24, 2011)

If you're going for some balance and versatility to your collection, I would think the 38.5 AT would be more likely to do that than the Tudor Sub. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## joshuagull (Jan 24, 2015)

I agree. The 38.5AT is *the* watch. The Speedy Pro and PO2500 2201.50 are the only other watches that have fit my needs and wants as well and the 38.5AT rounds those out nicely.


----------



## Tom vanDal (Jun 29, 2015)

sounds like you "almost" made a decision . My Quest for the AT is currently at the stage white or blue dial 

Gesendet von iPhone mit Tapatalk


----------



## fskywalker (Jul 14, 2014)

I have a round 7 inch wrist and had the 41.5 mm golf and the non master coaxial 38.5 mm skyfall:



















At the end decided 38.5 mm was a better size for me, so kept the Skyfall, which later flipped to the pure white dial version, which appealed to me as a more practical choice in leather bands, as well as different clothing color on more business attire scenarios:










I would suggest you to go 38.5 mm 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## joshuagull (Jan 24, 2015)

Well it's 99% official (not 100% only because I haven't found one to buy yet) but the 38.5 Skyfall is the winner. I cannot wait to get my hands on one. Going to contact a few independent dealers to see if they can round one up for me.


----------



## Guelerct (Mar 13, 2015)

41.5 all day every day


----------



## DocJekl (May 19, 2014)

joshuagull said:


> Well it's 99% official (not 100% only because I haven't found one to buy yet) but the 38.5 Skyfall is the winner. I cannot wait to get my hands on one. Going to contact a few independent dealers to see if they can round one up for me.


Jared in Colorado Springs has one.


----------



## joshuagull (Jan 24, 2015)

My local Jared actually has one too. But they want $5500 for it which isn't happening. I haven't tried to haggle with them but at $5500 they aren't going to come down enough to make it fall where I want it to (and where used prices are when they pop up).


----------



## Ducatiti (Jun 29, 2015)

joshuagull said:


> My local Jared actually has one too. But they want $5500 for it which isn't happening. I haven't tried to haggle with them but at $5500 they aren't going to come down enough to make it fall where I want it to (and where used prices are when they pop up).


Just for reference, I bought mine for $4900 tax inclusive from a local AD here in California.


----------



## joshuagull (Jan 24, 2015)

I'll probably go used. I just have a hard time justifying the hit I'd take if for any reason I wanted to flip it down the road. Used prices seem to be a solid $1000-1500+ less than the best new discounted prices I've seen if you can happen to find one still in stock somewhere.

As I said I'm 99% sure, only because I haven't found one to buy yet. I'm doing my due diligence to consider all other options in the meantime. There is one watch that speaks to me VERY loudly that hasn't been mentioned, and that's the Grand Seiko Snowflake. It's larger and I feel like the smaller size of the Skyfall Aqua Terra is more preferable for me in this particular piece, and I feel like the darker blue dial of the Skyfall Aqua Terra is a better fit for me stylistically than the Snowflake, but the Snowflake is probably the most visually stunning watch I've ever seen in my life. It also has a lot going for it--light weight of titanium, spring drive for unique movement and ultra accuracy, next level finishing, uniqueness and all in a package that flies under the radar. It's a watch that's consistently blown me away, but due to the high cost of entry I've not seriously considered it as it's not a watch I'd wear to work in my blue collar work environment (whereas I could wear a more casual or sporty watch like any of the others I've mentioned). Since I've decided on this acquisition being a watch I "come home to" and don't need it to be something flexible enough to wear to work the Snowflake deserves it's due consideration before I pull the trigger on the Skyfall Aqua Terra. Both are excellent and visually interesting pieces in my book. I feel the Aqua Terra is the better fit size and style wise, and that the Snowflake is a bit too dressy for my style, but I'll weigh that out while I hunt for a deal on a used Skyfall.


----------



## Nokie (Jul 4, 2011)

I vote for the Snowflake


----------



## Stormchaser853 (Sep 15, 2015)

[I think that's why the first time I saw the AT the 38.5AT size called my name, as I was dressed rather classically/preppy (J Crew polo and classic shorts with boat shoes) with everything fitting well. The 41.5 looked too big. But back in a more casual t-shirt, hat and sneakers they both looked good.[/QUOTE]

My wife has said the same thing and she's right (she usually is), it depends on what you're wearing at the time. Figure out what you'll be wearing most of the time with this watch and wear that when you go try it on next time. Personally I think the 38.5 looks great and I like the Skyfall tie-in.


----------



## Sloopjohnb (Sep 8, 2014)

that's exactly why trying a watch on is so important.
I was obsessed with the 38.5 AT - and bitterly disappointed when it was on my wrist. I never thought I could wear anything beyond 39 or 40mm but as it turned out the 41.5 was perfect for me, because my style is always rather casual.


----------



## lxxrr (Jul 25, 2013)

joshuagull said:


> Oh man, that's exceptionally helpful. I'm going to go back to the AD with my Speedy on bracelet and compare in the metal just to be sure, but based on that photo it looks like the AT's case is the same L2L distance as the Speedy with an ever so slightly smaller case and dial diameter. If the 41.5 AT does indeed wear ever so slightly smaller visually than the Speedy and feels similar in size on wrist then I don't know how I'll be able to bring myself to go with anything else other than the larger size.


The 41.1 Aqua Terra Dial appears larger than the Speedmasters, and lug to lug is looks also larger (48.4 vs 48). In my use case, the Speedmaster is my casual option. For a dress/sport watch the 41.5 may not work out for me, since dress/sport usually means a smaller than pure casual options. The 38.5 looks weirdly thick though. As for PCLs, I think they look ridiculous when worn casually, so I'll never ever consider them. That said, get the 41.5 since it fits you and doesn't over hang. To me this combo looks perfect: one pure casual, one dress/casual..


----------



## mesaboogie18 (Jul 18, 2013)

I think the 38.5mm is perfect. 41.5mm is more sport watch territory, while 38.5mm is a good all around size for dressy/sport. I personally think the 38.5mm looks more elegant and it fits my wrist better than the large size. I have a 42mm Planet Ocean, so the 38.5mm AT is a nice change. It's all a matter of personal preference of course, and if you have a large wrist, the 41.5mm may be better suited for you.


----------



## skyblue12 (Aug 14, 2015)

Hello. I agree.


----------



## lxxrr (Jul 25, 2013)

lxxrr said:


> The 41.1 Aqua Terra Dial appears larger than the Speedmasters, and lug to lug is looks also larger (48.4 vs 48). In my use case, the Speedmaster is my casual option. For a dress/sport watch the 41.5 may not work out for me, since dress/sport usually means a smaller than pure casual options. The 38.5 looks weirdly thick though. As for PCLs, I think they look ridiculous when worn casually, so I'll never ever consider them. That said, get the 41.5 since it fits you and doesn't over hang. To me this combo looks perfect: one pure casual, one dress/casual..
> View attachment 5547698


This guy knows what he's talking about. Context in reviewing both your existing collection (comparing size to the casual watch or business watch and attire (use case), make the decision easy. Spot on with PCLs and casual attire. They can look absolutely ridiculous when paired with some distressed clothing such as leather and naturally faded jeans. The same can be said for the blues color (which is a bit shimmery).


----------



## KatieB17 (Oct 5, 2012)

Edit: should have looked at the OP date before responding......

I personally went for the 41.5. I owned both but found the height/width ratio better on the larger size. I also preferred the sportiness of the larger size. At the moment it's my only watch and gets worn for all activities. First watch I truly fell in love with and it has stayed that way for 3 years.

A couple of not very good pictures of the 41.5 on my 6.75 wrist. Looks large from close up but the second picture is more representative of how it wears. Good luck with your decision.










Sent from my D6616 using Tapatalk


----------



## Mtccue12 (Jun 24, 2016)

I have the newer master co axial 41.5mm in blue. It's a great watch but after wearing it for a few months I find it's a little big for my taste. I'm going to sell it and downsize I think. I have a 7 1/4 inch wrist. Personally I'd go with the 38.5 mm


----------



## mesaboogie18 (Jul 18, 2013)

Small wrist here. 38.5mm was the obvious choice.






























I wear a 42mm PO too, but it's a sportier watch, so I don't mind it being larger. I've read the 41mm AT wears even larger b/c it's mostly dial.


----------



## sensui123 (Sep 20, 2015)

My vote is for the 38.5mm for this model....it wears much larger due to the lack of a bezel. 6.6-6.7" wrist size here.


----------



## Braque (Jan 9, 2017)

Hello everyone. Sorry to bring this thread back to life.

I am considering the good old Aqua Terra with vertical pattern, but can't figure out which size. My current lineup consists of a Speedmaster Professional only, and I would want the Aqua Terra to be a sort of "GADA" watch--or at least "beach to boardroom", that is: I would wear it with a suit and with shorts and a t-shirt.

Images were taken for size comparison only (I'm looking at the blue one, not the gold--can't spend that kind of money!). Btw: I'm 6'4'' and 180 lbs.

Sorry about the quality:

38,5 mm:

View attachment 12463159


41,5 mm:

View attachment 12463163


Not much to judge from--and I probably should have tried them both in blue, but the AD didn't have the blue 41,5 in stock, thus the gold one.

I also tried on the 2017 AT (41 mm). I'm not that bothered by the horizontal pattern, but it does seem less refined in my opinion:

View attachment 12463179


----------



## LiquidPZA (Jul 11, 2011)

I tend to go smaller due to thin wrist syndrome, but the case thickness also comes into play. At 38mm, I'm not a huge fan of anything over 13mm thick, I just feel like the proportions start looking a bit chunky.


----------



## Dougiebaby (Jun 21, 2017)

Here is a 38.5mm on my 7.25" wrist - hope this vid helps


----------

