To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behavior or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes.
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
teff – :
A lost flanker in the Chrome line, in terms of smell, it’s only a distant cousin. LE 2015 version is markedly less soapy/synthetic and more citrusy to start, then more green/aromatic, and in a very good way. For a summer fragrance, one of the best openings I’ve smelled, especially if you like citrus-tart-juicy-sweet blasts, then settling into a tea/fern/mate dd that really set’s this scent apart. Longevity is average, sillage is quite strong, almost piercing at first, quickly softening (or could be a bit of a smell fatigue issue). Of course subjective, this is better/more unique than many of the beloved Aromatic Aquatics out there (ie L’Eau d’Issey or the classic Chrome. Scent grade- 4.5/5.
mpa999speagoessenda – :
At first blast, my first reaction was “this is a rebottled Nautica blue” (a cheap $10 cologne). Smells identical to it. A synthetic, generic, cheap, clean basic scent.
The dry down has a bit of a Nautica voyage vibe, so it cleans up nicely after 2 hours.
The dry down I get a bit of warmth and spicy. The dry down to me almost doesn’t feel like a summer scent, but something that can be wore for spring/fall as well.
Overall, this scent is just way too familiar, and doesn’t offer anything new. It’s just too generic smelling. It Does seem to have great longevity though.
A good general office scent, that’s about it.
Mariah_fromAD – :
Unlike the 2015 Summer Edition of Azzaro Pour Homme which i really Liked, this Version of Chrome behaves quite in the Opposite way. it Begins with a rather Larger than Life, and a Very Promising Opening. it literally starts with a Big Bang of Citric Chemical Warfare as like assaulting the senses. i have to admit, the opening may be dangerously addictive, specially for those who used to sniff glue in their youth… the Problem with this though is that after that opening blast, which evaporates as surprisingly fast as it appears, what remains is more or less but noticeably watered down scent of the original Chrome. i would say the experience is rather Passive Aggressive with the latter being first. compared to other Chrome flankers, taking out the Grandiose opening, it’s sillage and Longevity are on the softer and rather shorter side.
i would conclude that it is a Nice and Interesting Summer Experiment. with very nice looking chemical blue fluid in the familiar shape Chrome Bottle with monochromatic Blue Printing on the Back. but to sum it up in it’s proper propotions, Minus the opening i feel that i am getting close to twice the longevity and Sillage from my Bottle of Chrome United which is yet another Chrome flanker.