MB II vs SM500

Discussion of Bremont watches.
Post Reply
User avatar
kempoman
Posts: 2024
Joined: Sun Jan 17, 2010 10:21 pm
Location: Borneo Island

MB II vs SM500

Post by kempoman » Tue Dec 22, 2015 3:07 pm

I owned a SM500 but overweight for my likings. I am looking at MB II now but seeking the feedback from owners here in wear comfort and price point (close to a SM500). Merry X'mas gents.
Watch collector since 1989

User avatar
rockmastermike
Feedback Virtuoso
Posts: 14817
Joined: Tue May 18, 2010 5:13 pm
Name: WDE

Re: MB II vs SM500

Post by rockmastermike » Tue Dec 22, 2015 3:21 pm

The MBII is not thin but is thinner than the SM500. Also, I think due to the internal vs external bezel added to thickness. Going thru numerous Bremonts, I was immediately struck at how the MBII wore smaller to me.

The Lume is better on the SM500 but The MBII would be more of a daily wearer in my opinion

I love the SM500 but At the end of the day having owned both, I would like to own another MBII
To be in England in the summertime, with my love, close to the edge

User avatar
4pfrench
Posts: 4957
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2012 8:28 am
Name: Paul
Location: DFW

Re: MB II vs SM500

Post by 4pfrench » Tue Dec 22, 2015 4:16 pm

Couple quick shots of SM v. U2, which is the same case

Image

Image

Image

I wear them both quite a bit. The U2/MB is incredibly comfortable.

Agree with Mike on the other points
_____________________
paul

User avatar
streetracer101
Posts: 8134
Joined: Tue Nov 15, 2011 6:41 pm
Name: Mr Shackleford

Re: MB II vs SM500

Post by streetracer101 » Tue Dec 22, 2015 4:27 pm

The MBII wore smaller on my wrist as well, but I always felt it lacked something. Overall, the SM500 was a more attractive watch to me, but I have failed to find any Bremonts with staying power despite numerous failed attempts.

User avatar
mattcantwin
mattcreatestonsofwatchrelateddrama
Posts: 13016
Joined: Wed Dec 02, 2009 3:53 pm

Re: MB II vs SM500

Post by mattcantwin » Tue Dec 22, 2015 5:01 pm

I'm very happy with the fit and size of the MBII, as well as the design.


Image


As sharp as the other versions look, I knew I would not wear those as often as the anthracite.


Down sides, not the strongest lume, as already pointed out, and a shallow lug depth.
Image

User avatar
kempoman
Posts: 2024
Joined: Sun Jan 17, 2010 10:21 pm
Location: Borneo Island

Re: MB II vs SM500

Post by kempoman » Tue Dec 22, 2015 5:20 pm

4pfrench wrote:Couple quick shots of SM v. U2, which is the same case

Image

Image

Image

I wear them both quite a bit. The U2/MB is incredibly comfortable.

Agree with Mike on the other points


Thanks for the pics. I can judge the size comparison. I am thinking more works are done in SM500 (depths, lume, etc) but price point is as competitive as MB II. Is it the anti-shock that command the price point?
Watch collector since 1989

User avatar
Joeprez
Wants to see pics of your wife
Posts: 9916
Joined: Mon Apr 22, 2013 5:36 am
Name: Joe
Location: Puerto Rico

Re: MB II vs SM500

Post by Joeprez » Tue Dec 22, 2015 5:53 pm

mattcantwin wrote:I'm very happy with the fit and size of the MBII, as well as the design.


Image


As sharp as the other versions look, I knew I would not wear those as often as the anthracite.


Down sides, not the strongest lume, as already pointed out, and a shallow lug depth.

I've always liked that combo Matt. :cheers:
Image

Image

Omega / Rolex / Sinn / Oris / Seiko / Citizen / G Shock

User avatar
jimyritz
Masshole
Posts: 22234
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 11:48 am
Name: Mike
Location: Boston

Re: MB II vs SM500

Post by jimyritz » Tue Dec 22, 2015 6:08 pm

I've had the MBII, SM500, and Alt1C...I thought the MBII wore smaller than SM500...

MBII was my favorite. I didn't care for the rubber strap on the SM500 and the lume triangle never seemed to line up...Solid watch maybe a bit overpriced...

Good luck..

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest