Head-on, Hands-on: 42mm vs 40mm Christopher Ward C60 Trident Pro 600
Editor’s note: This review is part of our ‘W.R.A.T.H’ series, or ‘What’s Really Available Today Here’ watch photo reviews. It is a new series where we go hands-on with watches that can at least at the time of writing be bought! For our other reviews of the latest novelties, please head here. For our in-depth reviews, please head to our dedicated review section here. Today’s watches are brought with the grateful assistance of Christopher Ward London. Please note that none of our posts are sponsored so if you like our work, you can support us by buying us a coffee.
The Watches: We are very, very late to the party when it comes to reviewing the Christopher Ward C60 Trident Pro 600 divers. These divers have their own fan following and probably nothing that I say now has not been covered before in some format or another. So why did we decide to do the review then? Simply because these are exceptional value for money divers that enthusiasts can actually buy without waiting around for years on some list.
Since these are not new watches — though the 40mm sizing is relatively new in this third generation C60 — we won’t be showering those four to seven thousand words that we generally lavish on our hands-on reviews. Instead, this is going to be a simple, picture centric, hands-on comparison of the following two:
- 42mm ref. C60-42ADA3-S0BB0-B0: Blue dial, blue bezel on a brushed steel bracelet for $1’305 AUD or a blue hybrid strap for $1’145 AUD
- 40mm ref. C60-40ADA3-S0KW0-HK: White dial, black bezel on a black hybrid strap for $1’145 AUD or $1’305 AUD on a steel bracelet
An interesting point to note is CW’s pricing strategy with these: All three sizes the C60 Trident Pro 600s come in, are all priced the same. There is no premium for any of the sizes, and depending upon what suits your wrists, you can get it for the same price. This is something I haven’t encountered before.
Available At: Christopher Ward online shop here.
Suited For: For any dive watch collector who would also like to own a diver that can be rotated frequently in a collection. Personally after spending a fortnight with both of these sizes, I wouldn’t call these to be daily drivers. The CW C65 on the other hand were an absolute delight to wear on a daily basis. You can read about those in depth here.
The 40mm version on white was worn frequently by Jacqui and given its proportions, we definitely recommend the 38mm/40mm versions for both ladies and men, and for CW to produce divers that can also be worn by women is pretty commendable.
Our In-person Impression: I must confess here, when it comes to Christopher Ward watches, I am in love with the C1 and C65 light catcher cases architecture, and not the C60 so much.
That said, the brushed and polished surfaces did play with each other, and perhaps the most striking feature about the case was presence of the scalloped undersides of the lugs.
Another reason why I prefer the C65 architecture is that the dials change colour under sunlight whereas the lacquered dials of the Christopher Ward C60 Trident Pro 600 remain static.
Furthermore, unlike the C65, the hours/minutes/seconds hands on C60 Pro 600 look like a mix match of different styles rather than maintaining a sense of coherency.
Case finishing is good as always, but the hefty bulk of it that comes due to its intrinsic design nature neither did not sit well on my wrist nor felt as ‘luxurious’ as C65 light-catcher cases or the C1 Moonglow.
Will You Like It: Trident dive watches have in a way been Christopher Ward’s bread and butter, their main stay watch collection. After all, for a bit over $1’000 AUD — though with their frequent discount codes these can often be had for less than a grand — one gets a 600m water-resistant diver with decent lume and backed by the brand’s 60/60 policy.
Both Jacqui and I have diminutive wrists not bigger than 16.5cm, so these didn’t sit too well. But as long as you like the heft of these on your wrists, you can’t wrong with the Christopher Ward C60 Trident Pro 600 when it comes to value for money or the sheer wrist presence.
Even though there is no sun-burst pattern or any other ‘gimmick’ to the dial, the watch’s lacquered dial is fairly accentuated with brushed and polished indexes, that on a macro level really elevate the design of the timepieces.
The Grade X1 GL C1 Super-LumiNova® lume is present in decent quantities, including the zirconia ceramic bezel, and to give credit where due, the legibility under both daylight and night lighting conditions is pretty good.
Do We Like It: Out of the two, the 40mm version got more wrist time overall, particularly owing to its smaller size and the hybrid strap option. On the bracelet, the 42mm was simply a hefty monster at 194g (incl. bracelet) vs the 98g (incl. bracelet) of the 40mm version. And while I always prefer a blue dial over a white one, CW has done one exceptional job in ensuring that the white version doesn’t look vintage or dressy.
The white dial version also wore similar to the the new Tudor BB58 Navy Blue that we have recently purchased and it gave us a good opportunity to trial out the two together and I reckon that while the Tudor is a completely different kettle of fish, the Christopher Ward C60 Trident Pro 600 held its own ground. And that’s at 1/4th the price of the Tudor. See for me this is where CW usually scores and scores big; their offerings are premium quality without the premium price tag.
Out of the two CW timepieces, 42 and 40, the latter was more unisex, both because of the size and the colour treatment. Personally I would recommend that over the blue 42mm version simply because it was versatile for us to wear, and for all those guys who complain their partners don’t let them indulge in too many timepieces, I reckon the duality of these timepieces should be a convincing point (insert winky face).
The red text at 6’o clock under the words ‘Automatic’ is the one burst of colour on both of these versions, and again it’s more prominent and dare I say funky on the white version.
In terms of dial balance though, the blue version scores better, because one can see some information — as much as people hate the logo and text font and placement — at all four cardinal points. The dial is nicely balanced with the date at 3, the text at 6, the name at 9 and the logo at 12.
On the white dial this embossed logo at 12’o clock simply fades away into oblivion.
In terms of the lume shots and case backs, they are identical on both.
For anyone who hasn’t owned a CW before, the screw-down deep-stamped 3D backplate is pretty impressive.
I also reckon that the tone on tone blue dial and bezel didn’t make my heart skip a beat on the 42mm version. The differentiation on the white version was duly noted and my one piece of recommendation would be for CW to slightly change the colours on the blue version, perhaps make the bezel a bit darker and the dial a bit lighter.
I didn’t know that I was capable of saying these words, but there is such a thing as ‘too much blue’ when it comes to the 42mm version we are reviewing.
Where does it score: A Swiss made timepiece at the low price point, 600m water-resistance and beater of a trusty movement.
The Movement: The movement used in nothing new for the brand, and as such is a good workhorse movement. In fact, it is the same movement as in their C65 Trident Automatic, the one I love.
The movement used is the Sellita SW200-1 that is a 25.6mm diameter and 4.6mm thick movement comprising of 26 jewels, beating at the frequency of 4Hz (28’800 vph) and offering a (rather low) 38-hour power reserve. It’s a pretty common movement, being used in watches by brands such as Baume & Mercier, Oris, Eterna and Bell & Ross to name a few. So rest assured it’s meant to tick to satisfaction. This stock standard Sellita movement can come in four grades, starting from a movement that’s been adjusted only in two positions to a top-grade version that’s COSC-certified. And I wish CW had used the top-grade version here, simply because then their watches at the current price point will become unbeatable.
As far as I know the timing tolerance for movement used in the Christopher Ward C60 Trident Pro 600 is +/- 20 sec p/day. Not bad for anyone wanting to buy a nice watch and who doesn’t really care that much about precise accuracy. But for chronometry pursuers, imagine what monumental difference it could make if collectors can buy a Swiss-made, handsomely finished COSC-certified timepiece for give or take $1’000 AUD?
Anything Else: This movement is encased inside the brand’s signature curvaceous ‘light-catcher’ 42mm diameter x 13.4mm thick or 40mm diameter x 12.95mm thick brushed and polished stainless steel case. This slight decrease in thickness of the 40mm version also helps the watch sit better on my wrist.
For those of you who seek further information on the case, the lug-to-lug width comes in at 49.3mm for the 42mm version and a more manageable 47.46mm for the 40mm version.
The overall weight as we have mentioned earlier is more suited for my tastes on the 40mm version, and even without the bracelets, the difference is noticeable as the 42mm version’s case weighs 95g vs the 73g of the 40mm version.
The strap width of the 42mm version is 22mm while it’s 20mm for the smaller version. I don’t really see any harm in both these sizes, but given most of my personal collection has ended up featuring 20mm straps, I again prefer the 40mm version. Though given CW provides with welcome and easy quick-release straps, this boils down to personal tastes. Even the steel bracelet option comes with a quick-release system and a micro adjuster but bear in mind that CW hasn’t provided half links.
The Verdict: Bottom line, you can’t go wrong with them. For our money, out of the two, we would go with the 40mm version. The Christopher Ward C60 Trident Pro 600 is definitely one of those divers can you can keep in your rotating collection irrespective of how high-end or entry-level your collection otherwise is.
To find out more about the Christopher Ward C60 Trident Pro 600 and other CW timepieces, please head to their website here. All images unless otherwise stated are ©WatchYaGonnaDoAboutIt.