Omega SeaMaster vs Rolex SUB

[leopardprey]

In many ways the Omega is better (better lum, comfortable bracelet, nonreflective coating on the crysta). Movements are about the same quality. Recentely it seems Omega does a much better job at QC than Rolex has also. It really all comes down to personal preference and what you think looks best on your wrist.

But, you do have to admit, is the Rolex Sub really worth more than twice the amount of the Omega? I think for that extra amount you are really paying just for the name "Rolex".

I like them both.!

[Jeelan]

Originally Posted by roadcarver

I have both (SD and SMP 2531.80 no coaxial). Nothing wrong with either or else I'll only have the Rolex in my collection.

Omega's bracelet is one of the most comfortable out there, however the only thing lacking is the micro adjustment. I'm one of the lucky ones that don't need it. Rolex bracelets are simple, and the clasp almost feels "cheap" to a point, but its usage of screws is a great bonus.

interesting you should say that Roadcarver - i've got the 2531.80 and i was considering replacing that original bracelet with one of the speedy style bracelet on the 2254 models to give me a fresh look OR selling the 2531 alltogether to fund a Sub/SD purchase.

i feel the bracelet on the 2531 detracts from the watch itself and is a little overpowering and i prefer one that tapers a little towards the clasp.

As is stands, i bought the SD last week without havign to sell any of my other watches so i'm very happy.

i'm not worried about the whole debate between "inhouse movt vs ETA" but just looking at the tech specs - i do feel the 3135 is a more robust movement when you look at things like Breguet overcoil, Microstella balance etc. That said, there are millions of ETA 2892 movements out there being used by several watch houses so it's proved itself just as much in terms of longevity.

It'll be interesting to see how the SD compares in accuracy with my Planet Ocean which has been spot on since i bought it in May.

Either way, it's a tough choice for me. The SD made it easier because i really like the history behind that particular model and its "tool watch" background.

just my 2c worth

cheers
Jeelan

[fear]

Hey Everybody,

I had the Bond, purchased it over 10 years ago. I admit I was influenced by the Brosnan Bond. Great watch. Then I bought a Submariner. It "felt" different from the Seamaster. Though a Z series watch, it oozed history.

[erasuretim]

In 10 years time the Omega will look dated, they respond too much to the vagaries of fashion thereby installing an inbuilt 'style obsolescence' into their watches. How would a current Omega be regarded in say 30 years time??

The Sub does not date because it transcends fashion and style. Rolex design is for the long term thus it evolves. The wisdom of this strategy is seen in the consistent demand for pre-owned Rolex Subs - a 30 year old example will look as good as a new one.

For me there is nothing to beat strapping a Rolex sub to my wrist - instantly recognisable [and therefore reassuring to me].
I do have an Omega seamaster, but it is from 1964 and looks nothing like the latest trendy versions.....

I am sure the latest versions are lovely, quality watches, I just prefer my Omega's when they are vintage [also have a nice gold one from 1944 with 30t2 movt] Their modern ones just don't 'float my boat'.

Regards

Tim

[JJ Irani]

Originally Posted by C.J.

If we're not including the Brand name in the tally and just comparing them on form and function, I'd say Omega by a mile

Running for cover

:justkidd i

Well, in actual fact, value for money, the OMEGA is a much better buy. You can pick one up for vitually half the price of the Rolex......both superb watches......but, at the end of the day, it would just have to be ROLEX!!