ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

jimcameron · 1 January 2007, 06:55 AM

I have decided to keep my Sub and send it in to RSC for a makeover.....

But, I like watches. So, if anyone with experience can compare the Omega Aqua Terra Mod. 2503-50 with a Rolex Explorer I, I would greatly appreciate the insight. Retail on the Omega is about $1400 less, with discounts at an AD of at least 15% from there. I understand that price is not everything, it is just the comparison that I can do with no first hand experience with the watches.

As always, thanks for your sage wisdom and time spent with a long time owner, but novice student.

Happy New Year!
jkc

C.J. · 1 January 2007, 07:19 AM

I have no experience with the Aqua-Terra, but I do have quite a bit with Omega. They make one hell of a watch

JJ Irani · 1 January 2007, 04:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jimcameron

I have decided to keep my Sub and send it in to RSC for a makeover.....

But, I like watches. So, if anyone with experience can compare the Omega Aqua Terra Mod. 2503-50 with a Rolex Explorer I, I would greatly appreciate the insight. Retail on the Omega is about $1400 less, with discounts at an AD of at least 15% from there. I understand that price is not everything, it is just the comparison that I can do with no first hand experience with the watches.

As always, thanks for your sage wisdom and time spent with a long time owner, but novice student.

Happy New Year!
jkc

Both excellent watches....can't go wrong with either one. If you want something different from a Rolex, the Omega Aqua Terra is a very good buy. It runs the co-axial, Chronometer certified movement....very accurate and very reliable.

Considering the amount of money you're saving, the AT would be a very good addition to your watch family.

JJ

padi56 · 1 January 2007, 07:26 PM

I have a Aqua Terra chronograph and its a very very good accurate well finished watch.

Mr. K · 2 January 2007, 02:40 AM

Had an AT once, although mine was quartz. Can not say enough good things about it. The bracelet and costruction was great. If you can pick one up used, you will be way ahead of the game than the Explorer. But I would say first decide which one you want, then worry about price later.

Mark

montecristo · 2 January 2007, 02:47 AM

I like their AT railmaster.

haakon59 · 2 January 2007, 10:16 AM

The Omega Aqua Terra uses a co-axial escapement which is designed to help the watch be more consistently accurate and need fewer service visits as time goes on. The Rolex Explorer movement is well tested and people generally find the brand often will easily go well beyond 5 years between maintenance visits. Either way I think you will get a durable, reliable watch. For me, I would pick the Aqua Terra in this case just because it's so much cheaper. In "real life" terms, outside of the date function, there is really not much difference between these two models, so I would just pick whichever one of the two you like best.

Alan From New York · 2 January 2007, 11:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jimcameron

I have decided to keep my Sub and send it in to RSC for a makeover.....

Probably not necessary to send it to Rolex, but if it gives you peace of mind...

Quote:

But, I like watches. So, if anyone with experience can compare the Omega Aqua Terra Mod. 2503-50 with a Rolex Explorer I, I would greatly appreciate the insight. Retail on the Omega is about $1400 less, with discounts at an AD of at least 15% from there. I understand that price is not everything, it is just the comparison that I can do with no first hand experience with the watches.

Although I owned neither model, I have had several Omegas, one with the Co-Ax, and a couple of Rolex. The Omegas have had problems. The Rolex haven't.

Quote:

As always, thanks for your sage wisdom and time spent with a long time owner, but novice student.

No "sage wisdom." Just experience.

Quote:

Happy New Year!
jkc

Happy New Year!

Alan

ohlins · 2 January 2007, 07:45 PM

subjectively....this is prettier....

SLRdude · 2 January 2007, 08:26 PM

Click here to read JJ's review of the AT

mailman · 3 January 2007, 12:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by comatox

Click here to read JJ's review of the AT

How the heck did you find that?

SLRdude · 3 January 2007, 01:03 AM

I typed in Omega Seamaster Aqua Terra review and that's what came up.

mrbieler · 3 January 2007, 01:55 AM

I just wish either came with a white 3-6-9 dial instead of just black.

The white dial AT with blue hands and markers is nice.

roadcarver · 3 January 2007, 02:14 AM

JJ has owned many watches

Nice review as well.

3 January 2007, 02:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by comatox

Click here to read JJ's review of the AT

100/100 - now that's a pretty impressive watch (and rating). I don't think I've ever seen a Rolex rated that high.........

Welshwatchman · 3 January 2007, 03:27 AM

You should also get a 30% discount off the Omega to offset the inferior residual values.

JJ Irani · 3 January 2007, 03:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by roadcarver

JJ has owned many watches

Nice review as well.

Thanks, Vernon. Yes, that AT was a beauty....would recommend it to any prospective buyer in a heartbeat!!

finance21 · 3 January 2007, 12:40 PM

I currently own the AT and I love it. I have the 42mm version which is large but the high gloss black face with silver markers is stunning day or night. The AT has the hidden clasp too which is nice (and the date function). The watch looks great on the leather strap too which is nice to change things up….You have to love the display back as well….

JJ Irani · 3 January 2007, 05:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by finance21

I currently own the AT and I love it. I have the 42mm version which is large but the high gloss black face with silver markers is stunning day or night. The AT has the hidden clasp too which is nice (and the date function). The watch looks great on the leather strap too which is nice to change things up….You have to love the display back as well….

Yes, agreed....very nice watch. BTW, it's 41 mm. Read my review above and see what I thought about it.

JJ

miner · 3 January 2007, 08:04 PM

I've got an Explorer that I was about to sell then pulled out of the deal. I wear it as my "dress" watch now. It is discrete but has an amazing history and it is one hell of a rugged watch (size isn't everything). Looks good with a Tux but won't mind if you have to roll you sleeves up and fix the car on the way home.

Mine is now a keeper.

PS any comments about wearing dresses and I'll have to come round with my six pound sledge and have a chat !

C.J. · 3 January 2007, 11:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by miner

I've got an Explorer that I was about to sell then pulled out of the deal. I wear it as my "dress" watch now. It is discrete but has an amazing history and it is one hell of a rugged watch (size isn't everything). Looks good with a Tux but won't mind if you have to roll you sleeves up and fix the car on the way home.

Mine is now a keeper.

PS any comments about wearing dresses and I'll have to come round with my six pound sledge and have a chat !

Does it work just as well with skirts too?

4 January 2007, 01:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Avalon

100/100 - now that's a pretty impressive watch (and rating). I don't think I've ever seen a Rolex rated that high.........

I have yet to see any watch score perfect, whether it's on TZ, purists or in any respectable watch magazine.

But those guys all open up the watches and have a peak inside, don't they.

mamas · 5 January 2007, 04:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Atomic

I have yet to see any watch score perfect, whether it's on TZ, purists or in any respectable watch magazine.

But those guys all open up the watches and have a peak inside, don't they.

The AT has a display back case so you dont need to open it up lolololol

My AT is the only modern omega i own

5 January 2007, 06:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mamas

The AT has a display back case so you dont need to open it up lolololol

My AT is the only modern omega i own

Toss-head.

I meant that in the figurative... like they run amplitude tests and such.

Not a typical, JBH-type review.

1 January 2007, 06:55 AM	#1
jimcameron "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: ByDawns Earlylite Watch: 16800 Posts: 3,580	Omega Aqua Terra vs. Rolex Explorer I I have decided to keep my Sub and send it in to RSC for a makeover..... But, I like watches. So, if anyone with experience can compare the Omega Aqua Terra Mod. 2503-50 with a Rolex Explorer I, I would greatly appreciate the insight. Retail on the Omega is about $1400 less, with discounts at an AD of at least 15% from there. I understand that price is not everything, it is just the comparison that I can do with no first hand experience with the watches. As always, thanks for your sage wisdom and time spent with a long time owner, but novice student. Happy New Year! jkc

1 January 2007, 07:19 AM	#2
C.J. "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: * Posts: 10,196	I have no experience with the Aqua-Terra, but I do have quite a bit with Omega. They make one hell of a watch __________________ Me? I'm still looking for Kokomo. I just hope that damn golfer isn't there

1 January 2007, 07:26 PM	#4
padi56 "TRF" Life Patron Join Date: Jun 2005 Real Name: Peter Location: Llanfairpwllgwyng Watch: ing you. Posts: 52,994	I have a Aqua Terra chronograph and its a very very good accurate well finished watch. __________________ ICom Pro3 All posts are my own opinion and my opinion only. "The clock of life is wound but once, and no man has the power to tell just when the hands will stop. Now is the only time you actually own the time, Place no faith in time, for the clock may soon be still for ever." Good Judgement comes from experience,experience comes from Bad Judgement,.Buy quality, cry once; buy cheap, cry again and again. www.mc0yad.club Second in command CEO and left handed watch winder

2 January 2007, 07:45 PM	#9
ohlins "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Singapore Watch: Rolex Posts: 1,213	subjectively....this is prettier.... __________________ the hype is true. a crown for every achievement. visit my audio and watch blog & how to use the rolex comfort link?

2 January 2007, 08:26 PM	#10
SLRdude "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2005 Real Name: Chip Location: Dallas TX Posts: 6,194	Click here to read JJ's review of the AT __________________ Try not. Do... or do not. There is no try. Yoda, Jedi Master CHIP Member # 87

2 January 2007, 02:40 AM	#5
Mr. K "TRF" Member Join Date: May 2005 Real Name: Mark Location: Seattle-ish Posts: 6,074	Had an AT once, although mine was quartz. Can not say enough good things about it. The bracelet and costruction was great. If you can pick one up used, you will be way ahead of the game than the Explorer. But I would say first decide which one you want, then worry about price later. Mark

2 January 2007, 02:47 AM	#6
montecristo "TRF" Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Real Name: Ken Location: New York Watch: 116234 DateJust Posts: 1,769	I like their AT railmaster.

2 January 2007, 10:16 AM	#7
haakon59 "TRF" Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Seattle Posts: 1,571	The Omega Aqua Terra uses a co-axial escapement which is designed to help the watch be more consistently accurate and need fewer service visits as time goes on. The Rolex Explorer movement is well tested and people generally find the brand often will easily go well beyond 5 years between maintenance visits. Either way I think you will get a durable, reliable watch. For me, I would pick the Aqua Terra in this case just because it's so much cheaper. In "real life" terms, outside of the date function, there is really not much difference between these two models, so I would just pick whichever one of the two you like best.

3 January 2007, 01:03 AM	#12
SLRdude "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2005 Real Name: Chip Location: Dallas TX Posts: 6,194	I typed in Omega Seamaster Aqua Terra review and that's what came up. __________________ Try not. Do... or do not. There is no try. Yoda, Jedi Master CHIP Member # 87

3 January 2007, 01:55 AM	#13
mrbieler "TRF" Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Real Name: Jeff Location: Lost Angeles Watch: all about acrylic Posts: 683	I just wish either came with a white 3-6-9 dial instead of just black. The white dial AT with blue hands and markers is nice. __________________ - Jeff Cursimus Cum Forfex

3 January 2007, 02:14 AM	#14
roadcarver "TRF" Member Join Date: Aug 2006 Real Name: Vernon Location: C-a-n-a-d-a Watch: 16600 Posts: 5,641	JJ has owned many watches Nice review as well. __________________ I'm just a cook...

3 January 2007, 03:27 AM	#16
Welshwatchman "TRF" Member Join Date: Apr 2006 Real Name: Paul Location: Wales, UK Posts: 14,578	You should also get a 30% discount off the Omega to offset the inferior residual values. __________________ ..33

3 January 2007, 12:40 PM	#18
finance21 2024 Pledge Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: U.S.A Posts: 363	I currently own the AT and I love it. I have the 42mm version which is large but the high gloss black face with silver markers is stunning day or night. The AT has the hidden clasp too which is nice (and the date function). The watch looks great on the leather strap too which is nice to change things up….You have to love the display back as well….

3 January 2007, 08:04 PM	#20
miner "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Perth, Australia Posts: 1,294	I've got an Explorer that I was about to sell then pulled out of the deal. I wear it as my "dress" watch now. It is discrete but has an amazing history and it is one hell of a rugged watch (size isn't everything). Looks good with a Tux but won't mind if you have to roll you sleeves up and fix the car on the way home. Mine is now a keeper. PS any comments about wearing dresses and I'll have to come round with my six pound sledge and have a chat !

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)