HAC vs Birkin

  1. HAC owners of 32cm or smaller:

    Are the shorter handles an inconvenience? I have thin arms but my hands are not small, so I am wondering if the smaller handles are comfortable.

    Also, since the body of the HAC is taller, is it harder to find things in your purse?

    Thank you.
     
  2. There are a lot of HAC lovers here!
    I personally do not find the shorter handles to be an inconvenience, but I normally carry *any* H bag in my hand as opposed to on my arm anyway, so that might be why.
    I definitely don't think it's harder to find things in a HAC, if anything it is slightly easier for me because there's less "floor" area in a 32cm HAC for example than in a 35cm Birkin. I am also a new convert to the Chameleon bag insert, which makes that sort of a non-issue, as well, since everything stays where I put it.
    I also like the slightly taller silhouette of a HAC in general; it's just very elegant to me and I find that it's a little easier to make it look dressier than a "regular" Birkin.
     
  3. The HAC 32 is my favorite size over the 30 and 35. I too think the N/S styling is more elegant than the other two and find the narrower width just perfect. No issue at all with finding things. I am small boned and don't even notice the shorter handle drop. My bag slips easily over my hand and can easily slip up to my elbow.
    I find the 30 a little too small and precious looking on me (even though I am only 5"3" and a size 2ish), but I do prefer large to small bags. I use the 30 more as a dressy bag for dinners and prefer that size in the dressier leather (like box). And I find the 35 alittle too bulky (too wide at the base) but it is a great everyday bag. For this size I prefer clemence although it can get heavy.
    If I could only have one bag, I'd pick the 32. But if you can, get all three sizes.
     
  4. Welcome, cowbelle!

    I never even thought of the handle until after I purchased my HAC 32. Then, someone asked me if the handle being shorter was a problem. I looked slightly:sembarrassed because it wasn't something that I even noticed. I have fairly thin arms, tho....

    I do find that the height of the HAC does not deter me in finding anything inside the bag, but, sometimes the depth does (front to back). I really don't need that much space inside a bag. But, what happens is that I end up using my HAC 'cause I like the style so much!
     
  5. Like Rockerchic, I've got 30cm and 35cm Birkins and a 32cm HAC. Each has a distinct purpose for me. The 30cm is, as Rockerchic indicates, more of a go out to dinner bag. I also use it on weekends for errands because it's so lightweight. The 35cm is great as a work/tote bag. The HAC, IMO, is a handbag that also works as a tote. It has a much narrower profile than the 35cm Birkin.

    The verdict -- if I could only have one of these three sizes, I'd go with the versatile and chic HAC.
     
  6. I've had a 32cm HAC and now a 28cm HAC and I LOVE them both. The 32cm is a bit large for me in dimension and inside. But the 28cm is PERFECT! I don't have any trouble sliding the bag up my arm but I'm small boned and my hands are small too. Otherwise it is a fantastic handbag without doubt. I have no trouble finding things inside my bag but with the 32cm I used a bagmate which solved the problem I was having with all my stuff falling on top of itself. I highly recommend a HAC.......they're GREAT!
     
  7. Here's a couple of pics.....

    First pic: 28cm Black Chevre HAC
    Second pic: 32cm Black Box HAC (now belongs to someone else)
     
    Hac287.jpg Hac1.jpg
  8. Here's a photo of my 32cm Rouge H Box Calf HAC PH, cowbelle:

    [​IMG]
     
  9. Thank you all so much for helping me! The people on the Hermes forum are so generous with their time and talents. Thank you and big hugs to each of you!
     
  10. Had to come back and add to my thank you note. You guys are all really special people and it is so kind of you to share your opinions, photos, etc, with me. It makes me feel better about the world knowing that there are still people like you in it!
     
  11. It's because everyone needs MORE COWBELLE.
    :lol:
     
  12. ^^lol!!
     
  13. CynthiaNYC, you are the only one who has gotten my reference to the Christopher Walken SNL skit! "What this song needs is more cowbell!" Thank you, I feel much better now.
     
  14. LOL!! You are so funny! That skit is just soooo hilarious.

    It's nice to find tPFers with a sense of humor. :tup:
     
  15. Omigod, I absolutely love that! "I've got a fever....and the only prescription is.....MORE COWBELL!"