Omega vs IWC

[tfduff723]

Which would you buy? Omega Seamaster Aqua Terra or IWC Pilot Mark XVII?

Both comparable in price, performance & style albeit "technically" one is a diver and the other a pilot's watch.

[Bangel]

Based purely on looks, the Aqua Terra. I like the simple classic design.

Not really a fan of the large cut out date window on the IWC.

[Grumpy Badger]

Originally Posted by Bangel

Based purely on looks, the Aqua Terra. I like the simple classic design.

Not really a fan of the large cut out date window on the IWC.

Agreed, having yesterdays and tomorrows dates displayed as well as todays would make my teeth itch!

I prefer the 39mm AT, though.... And no, not because James Bond wears one!

[subtona]

Originally Posted by Grumpy Badger

...make my teeth itch!

Omega

[bayerische]

I chose the IWC, but in reality if it was my choice to make it would be "neither".

[Survivor]

Originally Posted by bayerische

I chose the IWC, but in reality if it was my choice to make it would be "neither".

I'm with you..........there are so many better choices in both Omega and IWC that choosing between these two, I'd rather wear a Seiko. Check out these lines a little more..............they have far more appealing offerings.

[Art 1]

I have handled both and really like the AT. I have tried so hard to like IWC but I just don't care for their offerings.

[nick c]

IWC

[AIKO]

i typically prefer iwc over Omega but in this case i will take the AT

[East Bay Rider]

Originally Posted by AIKO

i typically prefer iwc over Omega but in this case i will take the AT

Yes, this. I'm sure it's limited to that specific IWC. If I looked at their offerings I'm sure I'd find one I prefer over the Omega.

[capote]

At

[The GMT Master]

I found the IWC a little underwhelming in the flesh, far prefer the design of the AT

[Widows Son]

IWC, but only because the Omega looks too much like my 6424 Oyster. PS, GO WINGS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Cru Jones]

If I had to choose one, the AT, mostly because I really don't like the triple-day cut-out on the IWC.

[Hooper]

AT all the way

[Psmith]

IWC for me (despite the extended date window)

[warrior]

AT without a doubt.

Don't like the Triple Date of the IWC. The general design of the IWC Pilot reminds me of a wall clock in grade school class but only in black. Not too exciting.

[benlee]

My problem with the Aqua Terra is the fangs like hour markers. Look like the mouth of a shark. So for this case, I will choose the IWC though I like the Omega's PO and Speedmaster range.

[RanHong]

The blue Aqua terra 8500 will be released in the larger 41.5mm size. I'd have that.

[khoalety]

Even though AT is considered a Seamaster watch but to me, it is more a dress-up watch than diver watch. With leather wristband on an AT, I think my case is very good. :P The look of the IWC in the picture doesn't do anything for me.

Good luck in choosing the watch you like, TFDuff723! :)

[Cuts33]

I'd go with the AT. The Omega stock pics are aweful. They are much nicer in person.

I've always liked the look of IWC but when trying on their base models like the Mark, pilot chrono and Portuguese chrono I was left very underwhelmed. Some of their higher priced items are great but for the money you could get 2-3 Omegas.

[joe100]

Pitting the AT with any other modern watch of a similar type is stacking the deck.

[Anon]

AT for me. Its very elegant but also fits many dress codes. The IWC has a distinguishable yet not so versatile design. It's triple date reading ranges from useless to stupid. Well, at least on this planet, nr 25 is followed by nr 26 and so on. What were they thinking?

[JP Chestnut]

In general? IWC by a mile. In this particular case? The Omega by a mile. This is IMO the worst design offered by IWC in a looooong time. I can't stand the triple date window, and the "improved" 41mm size is laughably too-large for the tiny ETA movement housed in this watch.

I'm a huge IWC fan and I would never buy the Mark 17 (despite the awesome bracelet/clasp that puts anything Omega offers to shame).

[JP Chestnut]

Originally Posted by Anon

AT for me. Its very elegant but also fits many dress codes. The IWC has a distinguishable yet not so versatile design. It's triple date reading ranges from useless to stupid. Well, at least on this planet, nr 25 is followed by nr 26 and so on. What were they thinking?

It's supposed to evoke an altimeter... get it? Because it's a Pilot's Watch! Stupid and tacky doesn't seem an adequate description. It looks as if it was designed by a pre-pubescent boy.

[warrior]

I don't really understand the IWC love beyond its name. I think most get caught up in the name and exclusivity...and then, as a result, "fall in love" with the looks. The Big Pilot? Pretty cool with the eight day and crown...but still too enormous for most unless you're Paul Bunyan. And still a bit boring IMO. The Portuguese? Probably the most beloved line and pretty nice.

Other than that, I find IWC designs either pretty boring or ugly. I've yet to see an Aquatimer that looks better than a Planet Ocean or Submariner. The Ingenieurs, in their many interations ( many of them oversized ), are just ugly IMO. The Portofinos are just non-descript. Why spend thousands on a non-descript watch?????

If you're going to spend thousands on a watch, it better look REALLY good beyond the name. There just aren't that many IWC models that qualify in my opinion. And the one mentioned in the thread is a prime example.

[JP Chestnut]

Originally Posted by warrior

I don't really understand the IWC love beyond its name. I think most get caught up in the name and exclusivity...and then, as a result, "fall in love" with the looks. The Big Pilot? Pretty cool with the eight day and crown...but still too enormous for most unless you're Paul Bunyan. And still a bit boring IMO. The Portuguese? Probably the most beloved line and pretty nice.

Other than that, I find IWC designs either pretty boring or ugly. I've yet to see an Aquatimer that looks better than a Planet Ocean or Submariner. The Ingenieurs, in their many interations ( many of them oversized ), are just ugly IMO. The Portofinos are just non-descript. Why spend thousands on a non-descript watch?????

If you're going to spend thousands on a watch, it better look REALLY good beyond the name. There just aren't that many IWC models that qualify. And the one mentioned in the thread is a prime example.

Looks are subjective, however I find my Aquatimer Ref 3536 to be better looking than anything Rolex or Omega sells. However, if the teutonic styling isn't to your taste, you're not going to like IWC.

[warrior]

Hi JP, I had a TI 3536 and I'll tell you, it was absolutely the best looking IWC diver I've seen. It's a very nice watch.

I agree that looks are subjective. But, IMO, Omegas have more style and flair across their lines.

There's no debate regarding IWC quality. Personally, I don't think the aesthetics match the quality when you're talking many of their models.

Originally Posted by JP Chestnut

Looks are subjective, however I find my Aquatimer Ref 3536 to be better looking than anything Rolex or Omega sells. However, if the teutonic styling isn't to your taste, you're not going to like IWC.

[JP Chestnut]

Originally Posted by warrior

Hi JP, I had a TI 3536 and I'll tell you, it was absolutely the best looking IWC diver I've seen. It's a very nice watch.

I agree that looks are subjective. But, IMO, Omegas have more style and flair across their lines.

There's no debate regarding IWC quality. Personally, I don't think the aesthetics match the quality when you're talking many of their models.

I agree with you regarding the Omega style. I really like the complex shape of the lugs on the Speedy, SMP, and PO. They make Rolex lugs look cheap by comparison.

IWC bracelets are the thing that really appeals to me - I just love the quality! Regarding the IWC ATs: I think it's worth mentioning that IWC has had a 2000m dive watch for over 20 years. Pre-Richemont IWC was a company of superior engineering skills. Unfortunately, it seems they're more worried about marketing than engineering these days. That's why I bought my first ever Omega after a long line of IWCs.

[DCgator]

AT hands down, esp. if it has the 8500 movt.