How about a 2234.50 GMT on NATO?
How about a 2234.50 GMT on NATO?
Photoshopped this for someone else to see. I think it's a winner. What do you think?
WRUW today? dailywristshot.com
Re: How about a 2234.50 GMT on NATO?
all I see is little x's. They look great, though!
VR/
Paul
SI VI PACEM, PARA BELLUM
Paul
SI VI PACEM, PARA BELLUM
- dshap
- Favorite shirt size: Schmedium.
- Posts: 8495
- Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2010 9:28 am
- Name: David
- Location: NY
Re: How about a 2234.50 GMT on NATO?
I think it looks good. It may look even better on a gray real bond nato, since that has some red, which would match well with the red GMT hand.
-David
- moishlashen
- Posts: 16208
- Joined: Wed Dec 02, 2009 5:28 am
- Name: Leu Sanis
- Location: Somewheres paddlin' it.
Re: How about a 2234.50 GMT on NATO?
I think it looks aiight snak. Part of my reasoning is thats one of the few Omega bracelets I don't particularily like though
"I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude."
Re: How about a 2234.50 GMT on NATO?
Clean photoshop job.
I think black/grey works well with that watch. SMP is super comfortable on NATOs too, thanks to the flat caseback and thin case.
I think black/grey works well with that watch. SMP is super comfortable on NATOs too, thanks to the flat caseback and thin case.
Re: How about a 2234.50 GMT on NATO?
And I went seeking a GMT with this particular bracelet Like how comfortable the thickness, heft & rounded edges make it.moishlashen wrote:I think it looks aiight snak. Part of my reasoning is thats one of the few Omega bracelets I don't particularily like though
This photo makes it look particularly busy because you can see me taking the picture reflected in every piece of the links.
I may try the NATO for a while, but it's been hard not to want the bracelet on...
WRUW today? dailywristshot.com
Re: How about a 2234.50 GMT on NATO?
Not sure I get you -this is the correct coloration for a "real" Bond.dshap wrote:I think it looks good. It may look even better on a gray real bond nato, since that has some red, which would match well with the red GMT hand.
Are you thinking of one of these?
How about this?
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
WRUW today? dailywristshot.com
Re: How about a 2234.50 GMT on NATO?
Whats with these nato's lately?
Whats up with you people..
o o i know, let me put a $5k watch on a $15 strap..
Snak - this is not just directed to you, so excuse me for being a bit Abrasive
Whats up with you people..
o o i know, let me put a $5k watch on a $15 strap..
Snak - this is not just directed to you, so excuse me for being a bit Abrasive
Pasquale
NSC
NSC
Re: How about a 2234.50 GMT on NATO?
You never apologize to me....patstarrx wrote:Snak - this is not just directed to you, so excuse me for being a bit Abrasive
- moishlashen
- Posts: 16208
- Joined: Wed Dec 02, 2009 5:28 am
- Name: Leu Sanis
- Location: Somewheres paddlin' it.
Re: How about a 2234.50 GMT on NATO?
I had that braclet at one time and it was comfy for sure. It was thinnish which I didn't realize until I picked up a newer SMP chrono with the updated bracelt on and it was sweet. PO bracelet rocks too. I think all in all Omega makes the best bracelets.
"I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude."
Re: How about a 2234.50 GMT on NATO?
Hey Pat, I'm with you on this. I ask myself this everyday I think of swapping straps. This was in response to another's request (I haven't actually done this) but thought it would be fun to post it. Lotta people love those NATOs. I had one one a 6309 Seiko and it beat the stock diver rubber hands down. A $620+ Omega bracelet? I'd be thinking that too.patstarrx wrote:Whats with these nato's lately?
Whats up with you people..
o o i know, let me put a $5k watch on a $15 strap..
Snak - this is not just directed to you, so excuse me for being a bit Abrasive
Certainly good for the poor saps who bought theirs on EBay and got a cheap leather band with it.
On the other side- for a quick change of pace -the NATO is darn cool.
WRUW today? dailywristshot.com
Re: How about a 2234.50 GMT on NATO?
Those are kiss marks XXXOOO for your crappy internet connection that can't display linked imagesdeepcdvr wrote:all I see is little x's. They look great, though!
WRUW today? dailywristshot.com
Re: How about a 2234.50 GMT on NATO?
I just see the word "image", which is spelled properly. My employer has blocked this sort of "content".deepcdvr wrote:all I see is little x's. They look great, though!
Re: How about a 2234.50 GMT on NATO?
I prefer the ''real'' bond natos. Matt.wu - you need one for that 16800. It would kill with that matte dial.
brad
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 134 guests