Conflicted: 114060 Vs. Seamaster 300 coax (AKA the new Bond watch)...

[Evo6]

So I've been toying with the idea of flipping my Pelagos (or not) for an 114060 no-date sub and putting it on a Rubber B for summer...

This combo looks super sleek and sporty and should wear cool in the SoCal heat, but then I noticed this today...




Bond (Daniel Craig) is sporting the Omega Seamaster 300 Coaxial on a slick Omega OEM NATO strap in the upcoming "Spectre" film. This combo combines two of my favorite things in watches, milsub looks and now Bond!

Which should look like this on the Omega OEM NATO strap...


I already have a BLNR so it's not like I don't have a nice ceramic Rolex to wear, the Pelagos is my beater watch (and boy does it take it well) but I really want a simple time only diver. I'll have to pop into the Omega Boutique this weekend and check out the SM300 in the metal but it's definitely giving me pause.

[997.2]

The SMP is cool. Very cool. I love the details of it like the recessed and 'aged' lume. I love the bezel and the font. If it didn't have Arabic at the four corners I would be all over it, but for some reason I can dig the numbers. Personally I wouldn't do the trade but omega is doing a lot of things right with this watch.

[Ruud Van Driver]

You have to go with what sings to you, but the dial of the Omega looks to me like a biscuit tin lid. I much prefer Sub.

Good luck whatever you choose.

[damoore]

Checked out the 300 last week when picking up my new SD4000. Nice watch. Very cool vintage vibes. Also own a Bond Seamaster and owned a PO 8500. Also own the 114060.

I'd go 114060 over the 300. Iconic, no PCL's, the ceramic bezel on the Rolex is amazing and love the Glidelock.

Try them both on and whichever sings to you will be the one. I'll bet it will be the Rolex.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[bde]

I thought the SM300 was underwhelming in person. It was much smaller than I thought it would be. Go with the 114060, you won't regret it!

[NoVaSubowner]

It's a beautiful watch and as nice if not nicer then the 114060. Tons of technology packed into the movement. I had one, wanted to love it, but could not get beyond the faux patina.

If Omega had made the dial with white markers It would still be on my wrist.

[Ravager135]

The Omega is trying too hard. I mean if you really think about it, it's a great watch trying to work off the legacy of another. Just not for me.

[ww12345]

Originally Posted by Ravager135

The Omega is trying too hard. I mean if you really think about it, it's a great watch trying to work off the legacy of another. Just not for me.

To play devils advocate, what is the Sub trying to do? :)

[Ravager135]

Originally Posted by ww12345

To play devils advocate, what is the Sub trying to do? :)

See above. It's not about a dislike of vintage inspired updates within a brand. Am I the only one who sees Omega using pretty distinctive Rolex iconography to sell Omegas?

The watch is fine. It's a cool looking watch. NATOs have been used on many brands. I just think it's a weird they are using a vintage Omega on "that" particular NATO in a Bond movie. That's all.

[Hi-roller]

114060 every time. If Bond had to wear an Omega IMHO he chose the wrong watch - should have been a Speedy. Also, I think the Nato with the suit looks seriously uncool.

[Ed Rooney]

Originally Posted by ww12345

To play devils advocate, what is the Sub trying to do? :)

Well, the Sub is certainly not trying to be a Rolex.

Omega didn't even get the Goldfinger nato strap right. They should have waited for the bluray.

[JJL]

Originally Posted by Ravager135

The Omega is trying too hard. I mean if you really think about it, it's a great watch trying to work off the legacy of another. Just not for me.

I kind of agree. Then again I also don't love the fonts / lines and overall aesthetics of that Omega either.

[Rashid.bk]

Originally Posted by Ravager135

The Omega is trying too hard. I mean if you really think about it, it's a great watch trying to work off the legacy of another. Just not for me.

I find this hard to understand, hasn't Rolex pretty much exclusively done this with 90% of it's models, Exp 2 quickly comes to mind.....

In the case of this watch, I think everything about it is a homerun and believe it is the better watch also in terms of engineering and features. Looks are subjective but I find it very appealing with "fake" patina and all. Panerai seems to do this just as well with no complaints.

In the OP's case who already owns a BLNR I would choose the Omega. As an either or choice I would go with the Rolex because it has magic Rolex sauce that's hard to refuse.
Where Omega is trying too hard and gets it wrong imo is the thirty versions of the DSOTM or the endless "Limited Edition" Speedmasters, but this Seamaster is a win, especially the sedna rose gold version.

[alanc]

Tough choice. For me, I don't care for faux patina; I also think the arabics on the Omega detract from the dial. Add to this, the fact that if you get the sub and change your mind, you can flip without losing much if anything. Can't do that with the Omega.

So, for my money, I'd get the sub, unless the Omega just sings to you from the get go.

[Ravager135]

Originally Posted by Rashid.bk

I find this hard to understand, hasn't Rolex pretty much exclusively done this with 90% of it's models, Exp 2 quickly comes to mind.....

In the case of this watch, I think everything about it is a homerun and believe it is the better watch also in terms of engineering and features. Looks are subjective but I find it very appealing with "fake" patina and all. Panerai seems to do this just as well with no complaints.

In the OP's case who already owns a BLNR I would choose the Omega. As an either or choice I would go with the Rolex because it has magic Rolex sauce that's hard to refuse.
Where Omega is trying too hard and gets it wrong imo is the thirty versions of the DSOTM or the endless "Limited Edition" Speedmasters, but this Seamaster is a win, especially the sedna rose gold version.

Perhaps my point wasn't clear. I get that Omega watches have a military heritage. I get that some people probably put them on NATOs in the past. I get that putting a Rolex Submariner on a NATO strap in Dr. No was not the first time this was ever done.

Now getting all of that, it's still obvious that Omega is using this "vintage inspired" Seamaster on a NATO strap that is very similar to the one used in Dr. No and is marketing it with a Bond film. Again, smart move but it is a little bit of a bait and switch. That's my only point.

[Evo6]

I really like the patina color, but I need to see it in person.

[Al1969]

How bout get the sub and put it on the Nato?

[Evo6]

Originally Posted by Al1969

How bout get the sub and put it on the Nato?

I actually wear my BLNR on a blueish grey NATO quite a bit, and that would certainly be an option for the 114060 but I like the look of the Rubber B better on that watch, at least for the moment. The thing that kept me from really liking the Seamaster 300 at first was the shiny bracelet, on the OEM NATO it looks much more professional and harkens back to the Omega SM300 Milsub as well as to the original Bond Submariner.

[rollee1]

Originally Posted by Al1969

How bout get the sub and put it on the Nato?

114060 with NATO looks hot
The only classic Omega SM300 is the original vintage one, the co-axial movement is fussy and expensive to service.

On another post earlier.
It's ok to choose Omega.
It's never ok to choose Omega over Rolex.
Golden!

[busytimmy]

Originally Posted by rollee1

114060 with NATO looks hot
The only classic Omega SM300 is the original vintage one, the co-axial movement is fussy and expensive to service.

Not true at all. You may want to check your facts.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[cervantes]

Yes, a sub on bond nato is perfect and would look better than the 300m which would clash the grey and yellow I think. I wear my sub on a black nato and it's just the perfect warm weather watch. Stealthy and sleek and the wide lugs work great on the nato.

[Wesley Crusher]

Tough choice. I had a 114060 and have handled the SM300 in person. Both have their pros and cons.

I think the Sub is a more iconic watch, but the SM300 is hard not to love.

[Fleetlord]

It's ok to choose Omega...

It's never ok to choose Omega over ROLEX

[johneh]

Originally Posted by Fleetlord

It's ok to choose Omega...

It's never ok to choose Omega over ROLEX

Woke up early and tossed the blinders on I see...

Go with the Omega, like you said you already have a BLNR so this would mix it up a bit. The Omega 8400 Calibre is pretty fantastic...antimagnetic without the use of a cage, COSC, twin barrel, and a coaxial escapement. Plus you get a 4 year warranty to boot. My only suggestion would be to get the PCLs brushed, it looks much better that way.

[eric198324]

Originally Posted by Fleetlord

It's ok to choose Omega...

It's never ok to choose Omega over ROLEX

I would take a Speedmaster over a daytona, everyday of the week and twice on Sunday.

[peitron]

Originally Posted by eric198324

I would take a Speedmaster over a daytona, everyday of the week and twice on Sunday.

True that.

[Joearch]

114060 is such a classic. Pairs very well with the BLNR. I have both and am very happy. Plenty of diversity.

[AK797]

Originally Posted by Joearch

114060 is such a classic. Pairs very well with the BLNR. I have both and am very happy. Plenty of diversity.

[Joe.King]

I owned the Omega SM 300 Master Co-Ax. You will take a huge hit if you decide you don't like it and want to flip it. I would take the 114060 over the SM anyday and twice on Sunday.

[redsubby]

Seen that Omega in person...I would get the Sub.