Fuschia 28cm HAC or 32cm HAC or 30cm birkin


Which bag do you think is best for Fuschia Ostrich?

  1. 28cm HAC

  2. 32cm HAC

  3. 30cm Birkin

Multiple votes are allowed.
Results are only viewable after voting.
  1. I remember Patz has a Fuschia 32cm HAC. How do you like it? My SA said it's a tad too big for Ostrich. But I am afriad that 28cm would be too small. Someone in this forum said she couldn't even fit her hand through it and she has small hands.

    Or would you pass on the HAC and wait for a birkin instead? I would love your opinions about these options. TIA!
  2. Queenie.....can you have only one? Birkin or HAC?
  3. D, I don't think I will get both bags in the exact same colour and leather.
  4. Wait for the birkin if it is higher priority on your wish list...
  5. Queenie, what did your SA mean when she said 32cm HAC in Ostrich is too big???

    Ever since been introduced to the 32cm HAC as a good alternative to the 30cm Birkin (which I am finding a tad too small, with my pashima inside, I find some of my belongings peeking out), and having used the 30cm Birkin for a few months now, I don't think the 32cm HAC is big anymore (maybe it's got to do with visual shrinkage)

    Is the store raining ostrich ;) ?
  6. great color and leather choice first of all!!!

    It would be gorgeous in a 32 HAC or 30 birkin!

    For me to make that decision though, I would love to hear what bags you own and what you would like to own in the future????
  7. I agree with mrssparkles that if you carry many things the 30 is pretty small. I was really shocked about that when I got to handle one myself. Immediately, I thought that the 30 was not for me and I wanted a 32 HAC.
  8. doesn't someone here have a fuchsia ostrich HAC? pazt, maybe?

    off to look for pix.

    ETA: maybe i should start reading with more attention . . . :doh:

  9. Frankly, I think they would all look lovely !
    Guess you gota try them on for the size to decide :p
  10. MrsS, I read about your shrinkage 'problem' for your 30cm birkin (like diamonds). :roflmfao:

    Nah, it's not. It's just something that I ask my SA when I visited the store few days ago. He said 32cm HAC seems kinda loud for Ostrich. :s I love 32cm HAC but I realise it can be heavy after a while too. :sad: But then 28cm seems kinda small.

    Kellybag, thanks. Fuschia Ostrich is one of my dream combi. I have a 32cm HAC and 32cm Kelly. I would love to get a birkin or SB next.
  11. Queenie...do you love your 32 HAC? If yes and you have no qualms/complaints about it...I say go with a 32 again. I know a 30 would be pretty, but it is small. Unless you buy the 30 with an attitude that you will use it when you need to carry a bit less...if you can do that then my vote is a 30!

    There is a pic (I believe) on this forum...it is a magazine pic of a fuchsia HAC, but I don't think it is ostrich. Anyone remember where it is?
  12. As a 32cm Hac girl myself but also one who loves variety, I'd go for the Birkin next but perhaps the 35cm?
  13. Queenie, from a distance, I think the visual difference between the 30cm Birkin and 32cm HAC isn't too great. The weight factor ... comparing the exact same leather .... well, that's another thing. I don't find a 32cm HAC in Togo heavy at all.

    Since you already have a 32cm HAC, then for variety, wait for a 30cm Birkin? That said, can you exercise restraint when the fuschia HAC is right before you OR do you have the patience to wait for it in a Birkin? This is exactly your dilemma, isn't it?:hysteric:
  14. Oh DOH! I just looked more closely at the question.......oiy....need more coffee this morning!

    ok....no 35cm Birkin if you're looking at Fuschia Ostrich.......don't flame me but I'd go Kelly for this color/skin combo. And a 28cm. :shame:
  15. Here is a picture of Patz's 32cm HAC (Patz, hope you don't mind):