OR?? I checked the abbreviation thing, add it Roff and tell me what it means.

It's one of Breitling's best clasps, if not the best. Why it should be reserved solely for rubber straps is beyond me. It belongs on all of their bracelets, imo.

Not so sure it is sturdy enough to battle a heavy SS bracelet over the long haul. A beefed up version would necessary IMO.

Really though, the Breitling bracelet claps are pretty damn good as Swiss watch companies go. Most many high end manufacturers rely entirely on a half link or just regular links for adjustment and fitting. The current clasp is comfortable, not too bulky, and has good micro adjustment. This is one area I am not inclined to criticize Breitling.

Not so sure it is sturdy enough to battle a heavy SS bracelet over the long haul. A beefed up version would necessary IMO.

Really though, the Breitling bracelet claps are pretty damn good as Swiss watch companies go. Most many high end manufacturers rely entirely on a half link or just regular links for adjustment and fitting. The current clasp is comfortable, not too bulky, and has good micro adjustment. This is one area I am not inclined to criticize Breitling.

I truly wish I could agree but to me anyway my 1000e Longines clasp is ahead in overall quality.

To be fair I have not owned many other brands to compare the clasp with. Its mostly Breitling I have owned so I ll realy have to give that to SM. All i have to go on is the sub c i am trying to get my hands on. All I am saying breitling give us something and they may have it in there OR. . . .

Yes they put a ceramic besel insert in but most of the $2k price increase is in the bracelet and clasp.

I know I'm splitting hairs here, but when the Sub-C first came out in late summer 2010, it retailed at $7200 USD, and was only $1200 more than the 16610LN at that time. The rest of the increase has just been the insane price hikes that have happened over the past year.

That said, I am in complete agreement with you, now that I think about it some more. It's one thing to idly fantasize about what ideal features I'd like to see on a watch. But given Breitling's already astronomical prices, I'm in no hurry to see them add even more expensive features to what are already outstanding bracelets. I'd rather see them get their watch designs straightened out first.

I agree that Breitling makes some of the best bracelets, and the clasps are in line with that level of quality. But that doesn't mean they can't be better. I would see a beefed-up OR clasp integrated into a Pilot, Navi or Speed as an improvement. I don't think it's a criticism to point out where things could be improved upon. That said, I could certainly live with the clasps as they are currently. Given Breitling's other shortcomings of late, the clasps are the least of my concerns with the brand.

I will point out, for those who cite Rolex's Glidelock clasp as proof the bar has been raised, the Glidelock is Rolex's answer to the diver extension. Only the Sub-C and DSSD have it (and the DSSD's version is not as good, imo). All other Rolexes with updated Oyster bracelets have the Easylink, which is an all-or-nothing 5mm extension. Although it can be used on the fly, in the end, it doesn't offer as much adjustability as Breitling's micro-adjustment on their current clasps.