ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

yogibird · 6 February 2009, 11:13 PM

A question for JJ , pad56 , and Tools.

Having read the form frequently , you guys are very knowledgeable , as others not able to mention all.
Why is Rolex watches more expensive than Omega , and in many cases the Omega brand has improvements in clasps and other technologies that Rolex doesn't have at a higher price?

Thank you ,
Yogibird

landroverking · 7 February 2009, 12:56 AM

I have never had a Omega that DID NOT need service early on in ownership. That has not been the case with Rolex. That said I still like Omega's and collect The "Moon Watch"

carbon6 · 7 February 2009, 01:06 AM

I have a Speedmaster Pro on a bracelet that's never given me problems. It gets wrist time several times a month. I rank it between my Sub and GMT-IIc. Very light, very comfortable, and much less than Rolex. I think it has to do with branding.

Tools · 7 February 2009, 02:17 AM

Omega and Rolex are different companies...

Omega is a subsidiary of Swatch, and Rolex is, well, Rolex..

You simply cannot compare the two. Rolex uses the more expensive 904L, they use 18Kgole, the hands and indices are gold...their movements are over engineered. Rolex has been using the free sprung balance for over a decade in all movements, Omega just started putting this in their Co-Axials to make them work. Rolex entire line has a full balance bridge, Omega has used a half bridge...

Omega clasps are nice looking... but they use a wire clamp for closure... it is prone to stretch and can be pulled open.. the Flip Lock cannot be opened at all until the flip lock is undone.. Rolex latest glide lock clasp is an engineering miracle that puts all other clasps out to pasture.. The pins that hold a Rolex Bracelet together are twice the diameter of those on an Omega..

You can buy an Omega for 30% off all day long...and they will still be worth less the minute you walk out the door. Rolex holds value much better

You simply cannot compare one brand to another..

But let me tell you, Omega is almost doubling the prices of their Co-Axial models, and they are going that way through the entire line... Unless Rolex raises their prices, by 2010 you are going to be asking, "Why should I spend that much on an Omega when I can get a Rolex for the same price ?"

ocwatching · 7 February 2009, 02:39 AM

I dont' know..growning up...I have always thought the giants of watch making were Rolex and Omega..and back in the 60-70's...Omega was up there (still a notch below) with Rolex..somehow...Omegas slipped further in quality...but I guess now the Co-Axials are creating more interest...My 78 year uncle still sports an Omega hand wound..never had an issue...

f16570 · 7 February 2009, 03:58 AM

Kinda hard to argue with Tools onthis one. Well said Sir!

chenx15 · 7 February 2009, 04:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tools

Omega and Rolex are different companies...

Omega is a subsidiary of Swatch, and Rolex is, well, Rolex..

You simply cannot compare the two. Rolex uses the more expensive 904L, they use 18Kgole, the hands and indices are gold...their movements are over engineered. Rolex has been using the free sprung balance for over a decade in all movements, Omega just started putting this in their Co-Axials to make them work. Rolex entire line has a full balance bridge, Omega has used a half bridge...

Omega clasps are nice looking... but they use a wire clamp for closure... it is prone to stretch and can be pulled open.. the Flip Lock cannot be opened at all until the flip lock is undone.. Rolex latest glide lock clasp is an engineering miracle that puts all other clasps out to pasture.. The pins that hold a Rolex Bracelet together are twice the diameter of those on an Omega..

You can buy an Omega for 30% off all day long...and they will still be worth less the minute you walk out the door. Rolex holds value much better

You simply cannot compare one brand to another..

But let me tell you, Omega is almost doubling the prices of their Co-Axial models, and they are going that way through the entire line... Unless Rolex raises their prices, by 2010 you are going to be asking, "Why should I spend that much on an Omega when I can get a Rolex for the same price ?"

that's why you are the MOD!!! come on rolex more price increase!!!

RolexCat · 7 February 2009, 04:20 AM

I also started with Omega, i really like the Sea Master Pro as well as the Planet Ocean. But i wanted a watch that was all in house, and also a desire to own a Rolex. Also due to the fact the Omega in house 8500 movement watches are getting up there in price. I bought my first Rolex last year, and i have been very happy with it. Im not sure how Omega will do with price range of 5000-6000? Ron

DSJ · 7 February 2009, 04:35 AM

Of course, we cannot "discount" (pun intended), the successful marketing Rolex has done to make them an aspriational brand and many folks' willingness to pay for a Rolex because it is a Rolex. Omega is a fine watch in its own right.

Whiskey · 7 February 2009, 04:49 AM

I gave Omega a shot before I purchased a Rolex.

I went to a jeweller and took a look at a few models. I didn't like any of their watches. Even the design/colour of the models is guady!

I found the bracelets to be rather flimsy in both their look, feel, and weight.

They use a metal common to a cheaper Swatch wheras Rolex uses the 904L.

I ended up buying a Rolex SD. The Omega equivalent to that would be the Planet Ocean. The SD has a depth rating of 4000ft. The Planet Ocean is 1000 ft? No comparison.

I wouldn't buy an Omega if you gave me a 50% discount!

DSJ · 7 February 2009, 04:52 AM

I like and own them both!

moby33 · 7 February 2009, 04:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yogibird

A question for JJ , pad56 , and Tools.

Having read the form frequently , you guys are very knowledgeable , as others not able to mention all.
Why is Rolex watches more expensive than Omega , and in many cases the Omega brand has improvements in clasps and other technologies that Rolex doesn't have at a higher price?

Thank you ,
Yogibird

I was going to give my thoughts, but then I realized my name was not JJ, pad56 or Tools. Dang!

moby33 · 7 February 2009, 05:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Whiskey

I found the bracelets to be rather flimsy in both their look, feel, and weight.

What models were you trying???? I love Subs, but there is no question in my mind that the feel & weight of my SMP Chrono's bracelet is much more substantial than that of a Sub and anything BUT flimsy. Look? Well that is too subjective IMO and impossible to quantify.

jimbo1mcm · 7 February 2009, 08:25 PM

I had one. Not a bad watch, but the pins in the band would wear out and have to be replaced.

padi56 · 7 February 2009, 09:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Whiskey

I gave Omega a shot before I purchased a Rolex.

I went to a jeweller and took a look at a few models. I didn't like any of their watches. Even the design/colour of the models is guady!

I found the bracelets to be rather flimsy in both their look, feel, and weight.

They use a metal common to a cheaper Swatch wheras Rolex uses the 904L.

I ended up buying a Rolex SD. The Omega equivalent to that would be the Planet Ocean. The SD has a depth rating of 4000ft. The Planet Ocean is 1000 ft? No comparison.

I wouldn't buy an Omega if you gave me a 50% discount!

Well wonder what you would say regarding say watches from Patek Philippe and the other 99% of the Swiss and world watch making industry who use 316L.There is nothing magical about 904L S.Steel,except the fact it cost more.904L S.Steel was developed for use in sulphuric acid plants,acetic acid condiment pickling factories etc.And shows little bit more resistance to high corrosive acid type substances.So if you do not put your watch into these highly corrosive substances it show no benefit whatsoever over the normal 316L.

And regarding the depth rating true the SD has the greater,but how many average Rolex or Omega wearers would ever use it.I would doubt if 15% of all diving type sports watches bought are used for what they were intended for.Omega make some very good watches so do Rolex and many others as well.But like Larry pointed out Rolex sure hold there price well if you should ever want to sell.Myself don't like to compare one brand against another they all have there place in this horological world today.The fact that there is little difference proportionality between price and quality, with most watches today.The value of a commodity like a watch truly is only today in the price the market will bare.

oztimelord · 7 February 2009, 09:03 PM

Only one can wear the crown and for me it is Rolex. Omega has made some great advances and has a great history. It just lacks soul

in my view.

Buy whatever make you tic

jdc · 7 February 2009, 09:33 PM

Within the brands of Rolex and Omega there are watches on both sides I like more than others. I think most watch lovers would not rule out a Omega Seamaster 2254 50 or a Speedmaster from their collections.

6 February 2009, 11:13 PM	#1
yogibird "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2008 Real Name: Peter Location: Flagler Beach,Fl Watch: Submariner , DJ Posts: 2	Price differential / Rolex vs Omega A question for JJ , pad56 , and Tools. Having read the form frequently , you guys are very knowledgeable , as others not able to mention all. Why is Rolex watches more expensive than Omega , and in many cases the Omega brand has improvements in clasps and other technologies that Rolex doesn't have at a higher price? Thank you , Yogibird

7 February 2009, 02:17 AM	#4
Tools TRF Moderator & 2024 SubLV41 Patron Join Date: May 2007 Real Name: Larry Location: Mojave Desert Watch: GMT's Posts: 43,490	Omega and Rolex are different companies... Omega is a subsidiary of Swatch, and Rolex is, well, Rolex.. You simply cannot compare the two. Rolex uses the more expensive 904L, they use 18Kgole, the hands and indices are gold...their movements are over engineered. Rolex has been using the free sprung balance for over a decade in all movements, Omega just started putting this in their Co-Axials to make them work. Rolex entire line has a full balance bridge, Omega has used a half bridge... Omega clasps are nice looking... but they use a wire clamp for closure... it is prone to stretch and can be pulled open.. the Flip Lock cannot be opened at all until the flip lock is undone.. Rolex latest glide lock clasp is an engineering miracle that puts all other clasps out to pasture.. The pins that hold a Rolex Bracelet together are twice the diameter of those on an Omega.. You can buy an Omega for 30% off all day long...and they will still be worth less the minute you walk out the door. Rolex holds value much better You simply cannot compare one brand to another.. But let me tell you, Omega is almost doubling the prices of their Co-Axial models, and they are going that way through the entire line... Unless Rolex raises their prices, by 2010 you are going to be asking, "Why should I spend that much on an Omega when I can get a Rolex for the same price ?" __________________ (Chill ... It's just a watch Forum.....) NAWCC Member

7 February 2009, 02:39 AM	#5
ocwatching "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Real Name: Phil Location: CA Posts: 5,374	I dont' know..growning up...I have always thought the giants of watch making were Rolex and Omega..and back in the 60-70's...Omega was up there (still a notch below) with Rolex..somehow...Omegas slipped further in quality...but I guess now the Co-Axials are creating more interest...My 78 year uncle still sports an Omega hand wound..never had an issue... __________________ too much into watches...

7 February 2009, 03:58 AM	#6
f16570 "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Real Name: F Location: Scotland Watch: Exp II White Face Posts: 4,272	Kinda hard to argue with Tools onthis one. Well said Sir! __________________ Why have what's new when you have what's best. f

7 February 2009, 04:35 AM	#9
DSJ "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Real Name: David Location: USA Watch: your step! Posts: 7,882	Of course, we cannot "discount" (pun intended), the successful marketing Rolex has done to make them an aspriational brand and many folks' willingness to pay for a Rolex because it is a Rolex. Omega is a fine watch in its own right. __________________ Rolex. The Rolex of watches. 16570 Expy2 Noir, 116710 GMT Master II, 2552.80 SMP

7 February 2009, 12:56 AM	#2
landroverking "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2008 Real Name: Jay Location: TEXAS Watch: Daytona Posts: 7,648	I have never had a Omega that DID NOT need service early on in ownership. That has not been the case with Rolex. That said I still like Omega's and collect The "Moon Watch"

7 February 2009, 01:06 AM	#3
carbon6 Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: SoCal Posts: 135	I have a Speedmaster Pro on a bracelet that's never given me problems. It gets wrist time several times a month. I rank it between my Sub and GMT-IIc. Very light, very comfortable, and much less than Rolex. I think it has to do with branding.

7 February 2009, 04:20 AM	#8
RolexCat Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Real Name: Ron Location: Michigan Watch: SD Posts: 318	I also started with Omega, i really like the Sea Master Pro as well as the Planet Ocean. But i wanted a watch that was all in house, and also a desire to own a Rolex. Also due to the fact the Omega in house 8500 movement watches are getting up there in price. I bought my first Rolex last year, and i have been very happy with it. Im not sure how Omega will do with price range of 5000-6000? Ron

7 February 2009, 04:49 AM	#10
Whiskey Banned Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Toronto, Canada Watch: Deepsea Posts: 521	I gave Omega a shot before I purchased a Rolex. I went to a jeweller and took a look at a few models. I didn't like any of their watches. Even the design/colour of the models is guady! I found the bracelets to be rather flimsy in both their look, feel, and weight. They use a metal common to a cheaper Swatch wheras Rolex uses the 904L. I ended up buying a Rolex SD. The Omega equivalent to that would be the Planet Ocean. The SD has a depth rating of 4000ft. The Planet Ocean is 1000 ft? No comparison. I wouldn't buy an Omega if you gave me a 50% discount!

7 February 2009, 08:25 PM	#14
jimbo1mcm Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: connecticut, usa Watch: New GMT2C Posts: 320	Seamaster Pro I had one. Not a bad watch, but the pins in the band would wear out and have to be replaced.

7 February 2009, 09:03 PM	#16
oztimelord "TRF" Member Join Date: May 2008 Real Name: Rene Location: Australia Watch: PN 6241 Daytona Posts: 466	Only one can wear the crown and for me it is Rolex. Omega has made some great advances and has a great history. It just lacks soul in my view. Buy whatever make you tic __________________ Regards Rene PN 6241, 6239, 6263, 16520, 116509, 116520

7 February 2009, 09:33 PM	#17
jdc "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Real Name: Martin Location: UK Posts: 7,023	Within the brands of Rolex and Omega there are watches on both sides I like more than others. I think most watch lovers would not rule out a Omega Seamaster 2254 50 or a Speedmaster from their collections.

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