Here I go again...

[mlcor]

I know I've raised this before...I've been torn about getting a Doxa 300 or 300T for several years (the orange Pro version either way). I was never able to see one IRL to know if I'd be comfortable size-wise. Well, my favorite AD (not a Doxa AD) got a pre-owned 1200T in, so I went and tried it on, since the case size (other than thickness is the same as the 300/300T.

Unfortunately, it seemed like a perfect fit.

Not surprising, I guess, given my 7.25" flat wrist, but I've never worn anything like that case shape, which of course is part of the attraction.

Topper is now a Doxa dealer, so it would be easy to get one. So the question is 300 vs. 300T. Main differences:

1. 300 is COSC certified--don't care, doesn't matter to me given that I almost never wear the same watch for more than a day in a row.

2. 300 is half a mm thinner than the 300T, which in turn is half a mm thinner than the 1200T I tried on.

3. 300 has a slightly smaller dial, made to look even smaller by the box crystal (300T has a flat crystal).

4. Bracelet on the 300T is (by all accounts) nicer, thicker, and has a better clasp.

5. Because of the bracelet differences, the 300T is heavier.

6. 300 markings are in meters, 300T in feet. Don't care about this one either.

7. 300T has a helium release valve, not important since I am not a diver (and if I were, I'd be using a computer anyway, I would think).

8. 300T is substantially cheaper (like $600 less).

I was surprised that even on the 1200T with the flat crystal and the larger dial, the dial still looked pretty small on my wrist. So I think the 300 would look really small on me. I know the vintage vibe would be cooler, but I just think it's going to be too small. Normally my instinct is to go for the thinner model, but I think that extra .5mm is worth it to get better legibility and to prevent the dial just looking too small in comparison to the rest of the case.

I know @Fantasio as a 300, and @Samanator has either a 1200T or a 1500T. I've also read some excellent comparison review from Ye Olde Place, but I'd love to hear from people here who know me.

So, what does everyone think?

[hayday]

[tribe125]

300 - profile a bit more refined, box crystal preferable to flat crystal.

[mlcor]

[Samanator]

The 300T has more lume area. For this reason I would take the 300T over the 300 for that reason. Add that such a small dial the domed crystal of the 300 distorts too much of the edge of the dial for me.

I have the 1500T in Aquamarine.

[mlcor]

300 - profile a bit more refined, box crystal preferable to flat crystal.

Normally I would prefer the box crystal, but here I agree with Michael.

[rodia77]

Just looking at the pic, 300 for me por favor.

[GlennO]

I much prefer a box crystal over a flat crystal. Love the extra dimension that it provides. But the dial does look quite a bit smaller, you'd have to be happy with that.

[GaryF]

300. If I wanted a more legible or modern-looking diver, they're a much better watches on the market.
If I were buying a Doxa, it would be to get that very specific Doxa look and the 300 just does that better.

[Fantasio]

Which you find more appealing in the long run? Bigger and bulkier size plus legibility, or better wrist comfort and vintage vibe of the original model?

I love the box crystal as it has totally different charm compared to my other divers with flat one (Sub, UX, Promaster. And I’ve never had any problems with distortions affecting legibility, as it’s not an issue in straight angle. Plus I liked the slimmer more comfortable stamped clasp on 300, goes well with beads of rice.

You do you, but you know my stand.