Okay--this Omega thing is bugging me. What do you guys think?

[Rashid.bk]

I think the problem is really your opinion/perception of the "pedestrian" or "inferior" ETA 2500 movement. It is neither and I quite frankly find them not very far apart.

For all intents and purpose an ETA is an in-house Omega movement. Rolex did the same thing and bought a movement maker in it's early history. Omega watches are very well made and the 2500 co-axial is a fine movement. The Seamaster is the Submariner's arch nemesis and have and will continue to be compared, as such, as proven even in your case, it can hold it's own against the Sub, but it isn't a Rolex.
My advise, accept the watches for what they are and enjoy them. Stop counting seconds, that's something I did when I discovered what a chronometer meant.
Would you then dismiss your Sub if you bought an AP.

[padi56]

Originally Posted by DWF

Last June I bought a new Datejust and have loved it. Prior to that my daily watch had been a Omega Seamaster Pro 300m. Since getting the Datejust the SMP has seen very little wrist time. Edited. I have a new SubC on the way and it will arrive this Tuesday. Okay this is what is bugging me-- so I have gotten the Omega out and have been wearing it during the past week and a half and it seems to be accurate to about -1 sec per day. My Datejust is at about +3.5 sec per day. Obviously, the incoming SubC is unknown at this point. So the Omega with what has been routinely reported as the inferior 2500 ETA movement compared to the Rolex 3135 keeps more accurate time than the the Rolex. I know in the greater scheme of things this is nothing in terms of time keeping but it none the less bothers me that I have and continue to spend a premium on Rolex and it is not as accurate as an Omega that is less than half the price. Just asking what you guys think and how to correctly think about this. Thank you.

No matter the brand or the movement its only as good as what its been regulated too.I have a $60 Seagull Chinese made Chinese ST19 movement that after regulation performed well inside todays COSC spec consistant +2 seconds.And ETA movements are not inferior especially the two top grade chronometer spec ones as they can be regulated to perform and match any mechanical movement made today.And does it really matter that one movement is a second or so different out of 86400 in a day. Life Is to short to worry over a second or so just enjoy wearing your watches in good health that's far more important..

[HL65]

Originally Posted by kilyung

You're spending more time worrying about it than -1s or +3.5s.

X2

[dysondiver]

wearing an omega as a daily work watch at the moment , back from a major service about a month ago , love it , but if it gains or looses a wee bit , a few mins a month or two , i dont mind , i re set the time every month there is less than 31 days in it ... thats good enough for me.

[bayerische]

Oh, no...

Most mechanical movements can be ADJUSTED very close to +/-0sec/day.

Value/cost of the watch has not a whole lot on accuracy.

As mantioned a 100 euro Casio will keep it's time more accurately than any mechanical watch.

[Degas]

Originally Posted by DWF

Last June I bought a new Datejust and have loved it. Prior to that my daily watch had been a Omega Seamaster Pro 300m. Since getting the Datejust the SMP has seen very little wrist time. Edited. I have a new SubC on the way and it will arrive this Tuesday. Okay this is what is bugging me-- so I have gotten the Omega out and have been wearing it during the past week and a half and it seems to be accurate to about -1 sec per day. My Datejust is at about +3.5 sec per day. Obviously, the incoming SubC is unknown at this point. So the Omega with what has been routinely reported as the inferior 2500 ETA movement compared to the Rolex 3135 keeps more accurate time than the the Rolex. I know in the greater scheme of things this is nothing in terms of time keeping but it none the less bothers me that I have and continue to spend a premium on Rolex and it is not as accurate as an Omega that is less than half the price. Just asking what you guys think and how to correctly think about this. Thank you.

Accuracy is not important!
If you want an accurate mechanical watch you can get the swatch system 51 for 200$. Is it a Rolex? Nope.

[polarinda]

Isnt inaccuracy part of the fun of a mechanical watch?

[anilzat]

It is what it is, and Rolex is what it is.

[dpkong]

Originally Posted by DWF

Last June I bought a new Datejust and have loved it. Prior to that my daily watch had been a Omega Seamaster Pro 300m. Since getting the Datejust the SMP has seen very little wrist time. Edited. I have a new SubC on the way and it will arrive this Tuesday. Okay this is what is bugging me-- so I have gotten the Omega out and have been wearing it during the past week and a half and it seems to be accurate to about -1 sec per day. My Datejust is at about +3.5 sec per day. Obviously, the incoming SubC is unknown at this point. So the Omega with what has been routinely reported as the inferior 2500 ETA movement compared to the Rolex 3135 keeps more accurate time than the the Rolex. I know in the greater scheme of things this is nothing in terms of time keeping but it none the less bothers me that I have and continue to spend a premium on Rolex and it is not as accurate as an Omega that is less than half the price. Just asking what you guys think and how to correctly think about this. Thank you.

I had a Daytona that was losing quite a few seconds daily and since it was under warranty, I dropped into a Rolex Service Centre when I was near one and they regulated it for free. Now it's very good and gains/loses so little, I don't need to make adjustments weekly anymore.

[Speedbird-1]

If you have any doubt, then there is no doubt.

[AK797]

Originally Posted by superdog

You don't "have" to spend the money on Rolex. you are choosing to.

personally, i have never timed a watch. never will. just don't care.

I didn't really care either Seth, but then one free day I thought I would see how accurate it was just for fun and when my subc was only 1 second out the next day I was pretty impressed, esp when another watch I timed was five seconds out, gave me a nice little buzz.

[datejusting]

Originally Posted by DWF

Last June I bought a new Datejust and have loved it. Prior to that my daily watch had been a Omega Seamaster Pro 300m. Since getting the Datejust the SMP has seen very little wrist time. Edited. I have a new SubC on the way and it will arrive this Tuesday. Okay this is what is bugging me-- so I have gotten the Omega out and have been wearing it during the past week and a half and it seems to be accurate to about -1 sec per day. My Datejust is at about +3.5 sec per day. Obviously, the incoming SubC is unknown at this point. So the Omega with what has been routinely reported as the inferior 2500 ETA movement compared to thnninge Rolex 3135 keeps more accurate time than the the Rolex. I know in the greater scheme of things this is nothing in terms of time keeping but it none the less bothers me that I have and continue to spend a premium on Rolex and it is not as accurate as an Omega that is less than half the price. Just asking what you guys think and how to correctly think about this. Thank you.

I had same problem with a Daytona; it ran at -3 sec day. I called RSC in NY and complained, in a polite way, and they said they would regulate it under the warranty. Had my AD return the watch, and I got it back in 2 weeks running at + 1 sec.

[~JJ]

Either piece can be regulated to be closer to +\- 0, but consistency over time marks a superior movement, which both of your pieces are known for!

[77T]

Originally Posted by kilyung

You're spending more time worrying about it than -1s or +3.5s.

This!

How to think about the accuracy thing?

It's within specs...

[Steve748]

Take it off at night leave it face up and it might gain a second.