For pure horological value, the collector will always place more value on the 15202. It certainly is a beautiful movement and the openworked rotor alone is reason enough! However, my reasons for choosing the AP wasn't driven by the need to own the closest RO representation of 40-years ago.
I wanted its updated version featuring what I personally consider 'musts' in any regular wear watch — screw-down crown and quick-set date. The longer power reserve is a nice bonus.
What makes the “Jumbo” so special? Here’s the juicy details thanks to Howard Parr:
It is easier to name the differences than the similarities between these watches. The cases, clasps, bracelets, bezels, thickness, movements…they are dissimilar. They wear completely differently, as you might expect. The 15202 (the current model “Jumbo”) retails for 50% more than the 15300. The 2121 is a very expensive movement to produce. It is extremely reliable, as is the 3120 in the 15300. The 2120 (2121 without the date) base is used in a number of AP’s high-end pieces, and the 3120 can be found in many Offshore and Jules Audemars models.
Some other notable differences: the 15202 does not have a screw-down crown, the 15300 does. They are both rated to 50m. The 15202 does not have a quick-set date function, the 15300 does. The power reserve on the 15202 is 40 hours, whereas the PR for the 15300 is 60 hours. The 15202 does not have a second hand, the 15300 does.
TZ member Scott chipped in with
Howard, although I agree with everything you wrote, it’s funny to read your post and see you characterize them as “completely different”….only on TZ could such a statement pass! 99.999% of the general public would say they’re “the same”, apart from the second hand on the 15300. But the differences you point out are all important considerations for anyone reading TZ.
One thing you didn’t mention is that the 15202 seems to be accepted as having a more interesting pedigree and being a more iconic and historically significant watch. These are all subjective things, but the majority seems to hold this opinion. I think we all agree, although it has never been officially confirmed AFAIK, that AP produces far fewer 15202s each year than 15300s, and the 15202 seems to be harder to find on the secondary market, and nearly impossible to find at many ADs (who are often unable to even order a 15202).
After considering all of these factors, I recently decided to get a 15202. I do not regret my decision at all, and would recommend the 15202 to the OP, as well. Three things that stand out to me now that I have the watch in hand, that I did not appreciate the significance (to me) of before my purchase are: 1) sometimes the lack of obvious movement, due to no second hand, is disappointing…one of my favorite things to do on my Jules Audemars is just watch the seconds subdial spin, and on my other watches, seeing the second hand constantly move is reassuring; 2) although purely psychological, as both watches have equivalent depth ratings, I find the lack of screw down crown somewhat disconcerting on a sporty watch; and 3) if you’ll wear this piece in rotation with others, and if you’ve never had a non-quickset date watch, make sure that you’re up to setting the date before wearing it, and that this won’t diminish the wrist time you give the watch…if it will, go 15300 or plan to buy a winder.
Again, those are all relatively minor things that I was aware of but that I underweighted in my decision. And I reiterate that now that I better understand these issues I would not have changed my decision; however, they are larger negatives to me than I would have originally thought.
No matter what model you go with, you’ll have a wonderful, timeless piece to enjoy
You need to sign in, either via Twitter or Facebook to post a comment.