That’s very interesting — I’m basing my views on perception alone, and I’d have been convinced the 16600 dial was marginally smaller. The differences must be minute, but makes for a completely...
Type: Posts; User: demonloop
That’s very interesting — I’m basing my views on perception alone, and I’d have been convinced the 16600 dial was marginally smaller. The differences must be minute, but makes for a completely...
14060 and 16610 are both thinner and the slightly larger dial width makes them appear larger (to my eye anyway)
I much prefer them over the 16600, which I found a little top heavy, but still a...